From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <amonakov@ispras.ru>
Received: from mail.ispras.ru (mail.ispras.ru [83.149.199.84])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4F623858C27
 for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Mon,  3 Jan 2022 16:35:26 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org D4F623858C27
Received: from [10.10.3.121] (unknown [10.10.3.121])
 by mail.ispras.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CFC6940D403E;
 Mon,  3 Jan 2022 16:35:17 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2022 19:35:17 +0300 (MSK)
From: Alexander Monakov <amonakov@ispras.ru>
To: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
cc: =?KOI8-R?B?4czFy9PFyiDu1dLN1cjBzcXUz9c=?= <nurmukhametov@ispras.ru>, 
 GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] tree-ssa-sink: do not sink to in front of setjmp
In-Reply-To: <CAFiYyc1M_ncHfrgucaCLT=LSijwk+K46CgqGdg01ig-3Jdu3tw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e18421b-ca21-54d5-ccc-2e9df0950b6@ispras.ru>
References: <d6ba28f2-3d88-ed2c-e81-ba16e84f31ca@ispras.ru>
 <4493B84A-DB6D-468B-86BF-DA5383D8CFE4@gmail.com>
 <794111d4-a64c-17e5-a4fe-f96e5182ee1@ispras.ru>
 <9252c923-c86a-7c98-ec5f-97410fbca8ed@ispras.ru>
 <CAFiYyc1M_ncHfrgucaCLT=LSijwk+K46CgqGdg01ig-3Jdu3tw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS,
 SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-patches>,
 <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-patches>,
 <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2022 16:35:28 -0000

On Mon, 3 Jan 2022, Richard Biener wrote:

> > @@ -5674,6 +5675,14 @@ gimple_verify_flow_info (void)
> >                err = 1;
> >              }
> >
> > +         if (prev_stmt && stmt_starts_bb_p (stmt, prev_stmt))
> 
> stmt_starts_bb_p is really a helper used during CFG build, I'd rather
> test explicitely for a GIMPLE call with ECF_RETURNS_TWICE, or maybe,
> verify that iff a block has abnormal predecessors it starts with such
> a call (because IIRC we in some cases elide abnormal edges and then
> it's OK to move "down" the calls).  So yes, if a block has abnormal preds
> it should start with a ECF_RETURNS_TWICE call, I think we cannot
> verify the reverse reliably - abnormal edges cannot easily be re-built
> in late stages (it's a bug that we do so during RTL expansion).

Thanks, I could rewrite the patch along those lines, but I'm not sure where
this is going: the ~100 extra FAILs will still be there. What would the next
steps be for this patch and the initial tree-ssa-sink patch?

Alexander