Message ID | 20191210204045.GE10088@tucnak |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | Fix ICE in regstat_bb_compute_calls_crossed (PR rtl-optimization/92882) | expand |
On Tue, 2019-12-10 at 21:40 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > The following testcase ICEs on the newly added asserts. > Some comments hint that maybe it is fine if CODE_LABEL additions > don't > trigger df recomputations, but even if it is not ok, > regstat_bb_compute_calls_crossed doesn't look like an IL verification > routine and for !NONDEBUG_INSN_P it really doesn't need > DF_INSN_INFO_GET > for anything, so I think it is best not to get it. > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk? > > 2019-12-10 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> > > PR rtl-optimization/92882 > * regstat.c (regstat_bb_compute_calls_crossed): Don't check > INSN_UID against DF_INSN_SIZE or use DF_INSN_INFO_GET unless > NONDEBUG_INSN_P. > > * gfortran.dg/pr92882.f: New test. OK jeff >
--- gcc/regstat.c.jj 2019-12-09 15:02:30.112287863 +0100 +++ gcc/regstat.c 2019-12-10 13:36:23.231327649 +0100 @@ -324,13 +324,13 @@ regstat_bb_compute_calls_crossed (unsign FOR_BB_INSNS_REVERSE (bb, insn) { + if (!NONDEBUG_INSN_P (insn)) + continue; + gcc_assert (INSN_UID (insn) < (int) DF_INSN_SIZE ()); struct df_insn_info *insn_info = DF_INSN_INFO_GET (insn); unsigned int regno; - if (!NONDEBUG_INSN_P (insn)) - continue; - /* Process the defs. */ if (CALL_P (insn)) { --- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr92882.f.jj 2019-12-10 13:38:17.737571868 +0100 +++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr92882.f 2019-12-10 13:38:07.453729553 +0100 @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ +C PR rtl-optimization/92882 +C { dg-do compile } +C { dg-options "-O2 -fno-inline" } + INCLUDE 'secnds.f'