| Message ID | 4E5624B6.3080005@codesourcery.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Tom de Vries <vries@codesourcery.com> wrote: > Jakub, > > This patch fixes a segmentation violation, which occurs when printing a MEM_REF > or COMPONENT_REF containing a released ssa name. This can happen when we print > basic blocks upon removal, enabled by -ftree-dump-tree-*-details (see > remove_bb:tree-cfg.c). Where do we dump stmts there? > Bootstrapped and reg-tested on x86_64. > > OK for trunk? At least TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (node, 1)) != NULL_TREE is always true. The comment before the new lines is now in the wrong place and this check at least needs a comment as well. But - it's broken to dump freed stuff, why and where do we do this? Richard. > Thanks, > - Tom > > 2011-08-25 Tom de Vries <tom@codesourcery.com> > > * tree-pretty-print (dump_generic_node): Test for NULL_TREE before > accessing TREE_TYPE. >
Index: gcc/tree-pretty-print.c =================================================================== --- gcc/tree-pretty-print.c (revision 176920) +++ gcc/tree-pretty-print.c (working copy) @@ -811,6 +811,8 @@ dump_generic_node (pretty_printer *buffe && TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (node, 0)) != INTEGER_CST /* Same pointer types, but ignoring POINTER_TYPE vs. REFERENCE_TYPE. */ + && TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (node, 0)) != NULL_TREE + && TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (node, 1)) != NULL_TREE && (TREE_TYPE (TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (node, 0))) == TREE_TYPE (TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (node, 1)))) && (TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (node, 0))) @@ -1177,6 +1179,8 @@ dump_generic_node (pretty_printer *buffe && TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (op0, 0)) != INTEGER_CST /* Same pointer types, but ignoring POINTER_TYPE vs. REFERENCE_TYPE. */ + && TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (op0, 0)) != NULL_TREE + && TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (op0, 1)) != NULL_TREE && (TREE_TYPE (TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (op0, 0))) == TREE_TYPE (TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (op0, 1)))) && (TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (op0, 0)))