| Message ID | CAAe5K+V2-qGQBbHmNXmzfDePk96xni5tgUMw2G0fRKa8EE01pA@mail.gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 08/19/2013 11:21 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote: > On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson@google.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> wrote: >>> On 08/19/2013 12:34 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote: >>>> >>>> Ping. >>>> Thanks, >>>> Teresa >>>> >>>> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 9:35 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson@google.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> This patch fixes PR rtl-optimizations/57451 by preventing scopes and >>>>> therefore lexical blocks from crossing split section boundaries. >>>>> This will prevent debug info generation from using DW_AT_low_pc/high_pc >>>>> pairs across the section boundary. >>>>> >>>>> Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. With this patch, >>>>> a profilebootstrap with -freorder-blocks-and-partition force-enabled >>>>> also passes. Ok for trunk? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Teresa >>>>> >>>>> 2013-08-11 Teresa Johnson <tejohnson@google.com> >>>>> >>>>> PR rtl-optimizations/57451 >>>>> * final.c (reemit_insn_block_notes): Prevent lexical blocks >>>>> from crossing split section boundaries. >>> >>> This is fine. Is there any way you can turn the steps mentioned in 57451 >>> into a dejagnu testcase? Clearly it would only work in a native >>> configuration due to the need to run the instrumented program. >> >> Since this was a compile-time failure (link-time actually), I could >> just take the existing test case mentioned there and turn it into a >> "-g -freorder-blocks-and-partition" test (probably by cloning as a new >> test case the g++.dg/tree-prof testsuite directory). Does that seem >> reasonable? > > Here is the new patch with that test added. Passes bootstrap and > regression tests on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk? > Thanks, > Teresa > > 2013-08-19 Teresa Johnson <tejohnson@google.com> > > PR rtl-optimizations/57451 > * final.c (reemit_insn_block_notes): Prevent lexical blocks > from crossing split section boundaries. > > * testsuite/g++.dg/tree-prof/pr57451.C: New test. Yea, that's great. Thanks for pulling together the testcase. Please install. Thanks, Jeff
On Mon, 2013-08-19 at 22:21 -0700, Teresa Johnson wrote: > 2013-08-19 Teresa Johnson <tejohnson@google.com> > > PR rtl-optimizations/57451 > * final.c (reemit_insn_block_notes): Prevent lexical blocks > from crossing split section boundaries. > > * testsuite/g++.dg/tree-prof/pr57451.C: New test. Teresa, This patch is causing a problem in my mips compiler. I am creating a cross-toolchain running on x86 targeting mips-mti-linux-gnu and if I compile glibc using a GCC that has this patch all of the programs I compile go into an infinite loop when run under the qemu simulator. I think it is the dynamic linker that is getting miscompiled, but I haven't tracked down the exact nature of the miscompilation yet. Has anyone else reported any problems with it? I am adding Richard Sandiford to the email list since he is a mips expert and also might have some insight to using next_active_insn vs. next_real_insn vs. next_insn, though it doesn't look like you have changed what is used here. Steve Ellcey sellcey@mips.com
Steve Ellcey <sellcey@mips.com> wrote: > On Mon, 2013-08-19 at 22:21 -0700, Teresa Johnson wrote: > >> 2013-08-19 Teresa Johnson <tejohnson@google.com> >> >> PR rtl-optimizations/57451 >> * final.c (reemit_insn_block_notes): Prevent lexical blocks >> from crossing split section boundaries. >> >> * testsuite/g++.dg/tree-prof/pr57451.C: New test. > > Teresa, > > This patch is causing a problem in my mips compiler. I am creating a > cross-toolchain running on x86 targeting mips-mti-linux-gnu and if I > compile glibc using a GCC that has this patch all of the programs I > compile go into an infinite loop when run under the qemu simulator. I > think it is the dynamic linker that is getting miscompiled, but I > haven't tracked down the exact nature of the miscompilation yet. Has > anyone else reported any problems with it? I am adding Richard > Sandiford to the email list since he is a mips expert and also might > have some insight to using next_active_insn vs. next_real_insn vs. > next_insn, though it doesn't look like you have changed what is used > here. Similar on SH. I've just filed rtl-optimization/58220. Regards, kaz
Index: final.c =================================================================== --- final.c (revision 201644) +++ final.c (working copy) @@ -1650,12 +1650,26 @@ reemit_insn_block_notes (void) rtx insn, note; insn = get_insns (); - if (!active_insn_p (insn)) - insn = next_active_insn (insn); - for (; insn; insn = next_active_insn (insn)) + for (; insn; insn = next_insn (insn)) { tree this_block; + /* Prevent lexical blocks from straddling section boundaries. */ + if (NOTE_P (insn) && NOTE_KIND (insn) == NOTE_INSN_SWITCH_TEXT_SECTIONS) + { + for (tree s = cur_block; s != DECL_INITIAL (cfun->decl); + s = BLOCK_SUPERCONTEXT (s)) + { + rtx note = emit_note_before (NOTE_INSN_BLOCK_END, insn); + NOTE_BLOCK (note) = s; + note = emit_note_after (NOTE_INSN_BLOCK_BEG, insn); + NOTE_BLOCK (note) = s; + } + } + + if (!active_insn_p (insn)) + continue; + /* Avoid putting scope notes between jump table and its label. */ if (JUMP_TABLE_DATA_P (insn)) continue; Index: testsuite/g++.dg/tree-prof/pr57451.C =================================================================== --- testsuite/g++.dg/tree-prof/pr57451.C (revision 0) +++ testsuite/g++.dg/tree-prof/pr57451.C (revision 0) @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +// { dg-do run } +// { dg-require-effective-target freorder } +// { dg-options "-O2 -freorder-blocks-and-partition -g" } + +extern "C" void abort (void); +struct MyException {}; +struct Data { + int nr; + Data() : nr(66) {} +}; +Data __attribute__((noinline,noclone)) getData(int i) +{ + if (i) throw MyException(); + Data data; + data.nr = i; + return data; +} +int main(int, char **) +{ + Data data; + try { + data = getData(1); + } catch (MyException& e) { + if (data.nr != 66) + abort (); + } +}