From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-415288-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 43801 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2015 10:44:28 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 43788 invoked by uid 89); 25 Nov 2015 10:44:27 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO: fencepost.gnu.org
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (HELO fencepost.gnu.org) (208.118.235.10) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:44:26 +0000
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54972)	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256)	(Exim 4.82)	(envelope-from <rguenther@suse.de>)	id 1a1XYm-00071f-F8	for gcc-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2015 05:44:24 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)	(envelope-from <rguenther@suse.de>)	id 1a1XYi-0006I5-5O	for gcc-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2015 05:44:24 -0500
Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:38260)	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)	(envelope-from <rguenther@suse.de>)	id 1a1XYh-0006I1-V9	for gcc-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2015 05:44:20 -0500
Received: from relay1.suse.de (charybdis-ext.suse.de [195.135.220.254])	by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9E90ACBD;	Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:42:39 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:44:00 -0000
From: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
To: Tom de Vries <Tom_deVries@mentor.com>
cc: "gcc-patches@gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gnu.org>,     Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve verification of loop->latch in verify_loop_structure
In-Reply-To: <56547D49.5040609@mentor.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1511251144120.4884@t29.fhfr.qr>
References: <56524E0D.7000203@mentor.com> <alpine.LSU.2.11.1511231122000.4884@t29.fhfr.qr> <56547D49.5040609@mentor.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (LSU 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x (no timestamps) [generic]
X-Received-From: 195.135.220.15
X-SW-Source: 2015-11/txt/msg03004.txt.bz2

On Tue, 24 Nov 2015, Tom de Vries wrote:

> [ was: Re: [PATCH] Check NULL loop->latch in verify_loop_structure ]
> 
> On 23/11/15 11:28, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Mon, 23 Nov 2015, Tom de Vries wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > In verify_loop_structure, we stop checking the latch once we find that
> > > it's
> > > NULL.
> > > 
> > > This patch tries a bit harder:
> > > - if !LOOPS_MAY_HAVE_MULTIPLE_LATCHES, we don't allow a NULL latch
> > > - if LOOPS_MAY_HAVE_MULTIPLE_LATCHES, we check that indeed there's no
> > >    single loop latch.
> > > 
> > > As a consequence of adding this check, I needed to fix
> > > expand_omp_for_generic,
> > > which missed an initialization of a loop latch.
> > > 
> > > Bootstrapped and reg-tested on x86_64.
> > > 
> > > OK for stage3 trunk?
> > 
> > You miss to catch the case where loop->latch is non-NULL but there
> > are multiple latches, so I think the patch can be improved.
> > That case is more important for correctness (passes
> > seeing ->latch non-NULL assume a single latch).
> > 
> 
> Updated according to comment.
> 
> Bootstrapped and reg-tested on x86_64.
> 
> OK for stage3 trunk?

Ok.

Thanks,
Richard.