| Message ID | 20130601125521.GZ1493@tucnak.redhat.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
> I'd guess you don't want to flush on DEBUG_INSN_Ps, because then you'd flush > differently between -g and -g0. So perhaps something like: yes, If I skipped to flush all DEBUG_INSN_Ps, then dependence lists are the same under -g0 and -g. I bootstrapped Jakub's change on x86_64-linux with no errors. thanks, Dinar. On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 10:11:24AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 08:39:58AM +0400, Dinar Temirbulatov wrote: >> > I am investigating the problem. >> >> I'd guess you don't want to flush on DEBUG_INSN_Ps, because then you'd flush >> differently between -g and -g0. So perhaps something like: > > Now bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux. I see you've > already reverted in the mean time, so ok for trunk this way? > > 2013-06-01 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> > > PR rtl-optimization/57268 > * sched-deps.c (sched_analyze_2): Don't flush_pedning_lists > if DEBUG_INSN_P (insn). > > Reapply > 2013-05-31 Dinar Temirbulatov <dinar@kugelworks.com> > > PR rtl-optimization/57268 > * sched-deps.c (sched_analyze_2): Flush dependence lists if > the sum of the read and write lists exceeds MAX_PENDING_LIST_LENGTH. > > --- gcc/sched-deps.c (revision 199576) > +++ gcc/sched-deps.c (revision 199575) > @@ -2690,8 +2690,15 @@ > > /* Always add these dependencies to pending_reads, since > this insn may be followed by a write. */ > - if (!deps->readonly) > - add_insn_mem_dependence (deps, true, insn, x); > + if (!deps->readonly) > + { > + if ((deps->pending_read_list_length > + + deps->pending_write_list_length) > + > MAX_PENDING_LIST_LENGTH > + && !DEBUG_INSN_P (insn)) > + flush_pending_lists (deps, insn, true, true); > + add_insn_mem_dependence (deps, true, insn, x); > + } > > sched_analyze_2 (deps, XEXP (x, 0), insn); > > > Jakub
On 06/01/2013 06:55 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 10:11:24AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 08:39:58AM +0400, Dinar Temirbulatov wrote: >>> I am investigating the problem. >> >> I'd guess you don't want to flush on DEBUG_INSN_Ps, because then you'd flush >> differently between -g and -g0. So perhaps something like: > > Now bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux. I see you've > already reverted in the mean time, so ok for trunk this way? > > 2013-06-01 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> > > PR rtl-optimization/57268 > * sched-deps.c (sched_analyze_2): Don't flush_pedning_lists > if DEBUG_INSN_P (insn). > > Reapply > 2013-05-31 Dinar Temirbulatov <dinar@kugelworks.com> > > PR rtl-optimization/57268 > * sched-deps.c (sched_analyze_2): Flush dependence lists if > the sum of the read and write lists exceeds MAX_PENDING_LIST_LENGTH. Yes, this way is fine. jeff
--- gcc/sched-deps.c (revision 199576) +++ gcc/sched-deps.c (revision 199575) @@ -2690,8 +2690,15 @@ /* Always add these dependencies to pending_reads, since this insn may be followed by a write. */ - if (!deps->readonly) - add_insn_mem_dependence (deps, true, insn, x); + if (!deps->readonly) + { + if ((deps->pending_read_list_length + + deps->pending_write_list_length) + > MAX_PENDING_LIST_LENGTH + && !DEBUG_INSN_P (insn)) + flush_pending_lists (deps, insn, true, true); + add_insn_mem_dependence (deps, true, insn, x); + } sched_analyze_2 (deps, XEXP (x, 0), insn);