From patchwork Sat Aug 10 09:54:27 2013 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Jan Hubicka X-Patchwork-Id: 266190 Return-Path: X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@bilbo.ozlabs.org Received: from sourceware.org (server1.sourceware.org [209.132.180.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "localhost", Issuer "www.qmailtoaster.com" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 822BC2C00D0 for ; Sat, 10 Aug 2013 19:54:42 +1000 (EST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gcc.gnu.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-archive:list-post:list-help:sender:date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=default; b=dxwu/ea6L8k7UcIty w8XZI0NSsCKjDm+3X4+Wte1ncTQY2j9XkLhfKpN57mTFNm5T9a1nWNJcsNLsHD/f z6iKdToqpk3mFCZTgMEQ6QoHY2K96BqBQItPsoFx3/UBrch8WdNzUT+QjE0CyvhA a6X6UUbVXn2hmIlBx+mZ5i6PTU= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-archive:list-post:list-help:sender:date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=default; bh=b8CgyNnMu0dd+VrTNDo9GEM Gr5U=; b=gZyLtyPqDwxUlANmYKZ7qEcC6OPlOXGb0DJlaxvGNeV6RzIHLThK3yW UaNjK8qqfQjnSg7BNe5IuWSYG84gqxj8FAOOCl7lHvZ8almUC4wd7WMax4pH7VVr jqrshKtL1VKpLQ7+6JVlGA6dRzw+HeL+Q0Q8/Anyv2U05ge/DKAA= Received: (qmail 20573 invoked by alias); 10 Aug 2013 09:54:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 20564 invoked by uid 89); 10 Aug 2013 09:54:36 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00, KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO, RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W, RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL, RDNS_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.1 Received: from Unknown (HELO nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz) (195.113.20.16) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Sat, 10 Aug 2013 09:54:35 +0000 Received: by nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix, from userid 16202) id 48C02543939; Sat, 10 Aug 2013 11:54:27 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2013 11:54:27 +0200 From: Jan Hubicka To: Jan Hubicka Cc: Andi Kleen , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, marxin.liska@gmail.com, mjambor@suse.cz, davidxl@google.com Subject: Re: Speculative call support in the callgraph Message-ID: <20130810095427.GA613@kam.mff.cuni.cz> References: <20130809121840.GA28721@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <87pptmo6n3.fsf@tassilo.jf.intel.com> <20130809231511.GC12350@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <20130810002521.GH19750@two.firstfloor.org> <20130810041914.GI19750@two.firstfloor.org> <20130810093710.GA9171@kam.mff.cuni.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130810093710.GA9171@kam.mff.cuni.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) > This is really strange. The speculative edges should not be created here at all. > So perhaps some uninitialized memory access crept in :( > It would help if you try to track how the ->speculative bit appears for you > in the loop in cgraph_rebuild_references. I will try to reproduce your setup now. OK, it reproduced for me on one of the testers. I think the bug is that cgraph edges are not cleared upon allocation and I did not set the newly introduced flag: I will commit this as obvious shortly. > > Honza > > > > -Andi Index: cgraph.c =================================================================== --- cgraph.c (revision 201640) +++ cgraph.c (working copy) @@ -873,6 +873,7 @@ cgraph_create_edge_1 (struct cgraph_node edge->indirect_info = NULL; edge->indirect_inlining_edge = 0; + edge->speculative = false; return edge; }