| Message ID | CACgzC7Cqb-ZuL4WDJJRZ9SaN27Gy0p8gfH=-4ZbKe9AEh+LrGQ@mail.gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 05/20/14 01:11, Zhenqiang Chen wrote: > Hi, > > The patch fix ICE issue triggered by shrink-wrapping enhancement. > > Bootstrap and no make check regression on X86-64. > > OK for trunk? > > Thanks! > -Zhenqiang > > > 2014-05-20 Zhenqiang Chen <zhenqiang.chen@linaro.org> > > PR rtl-optimization/61220 > Part of PR rtl-optimization/61225 > * shrink-wrap.c (move_insn_for_shrink_wrap): Skip SP and FP adjustment > insn; skip split_edge for a block without only on successor. > > testsuite/ChangeLog: > 2014-05-20 Zhenqiang Chen <zhenqiang.chen@linaro.org> > > * gcc.dg/pr61220.c: New test. > * gcc.dg/shrink-wrap-loop.c: Disable for x86_64 -m32 mode. > [ ... ] > /* Make sure that the source register isn't defined later in BB. */ > @@ -204,6 +209,10 @@ move_insn_for_shrink_wrap (basic_block bb, rtx insn, > /* Create a new basic block on the edge. */ > if (EDGE_COUNT (next_block->preds) == 2) > { > + /* split_edge for a block with only one successor is meaningless. */ > + if (EDGE_COUNT (bb->succs) == 1) > + return false; > + > next_block = split_edge (live_edge); So don't you just want to use: if (EDGE_CRITICAL_P (live_edge)) to replace the two explicit checks of EDGE_COUNT on the preds & succs? jeff
On 21 May 2014 00:54, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> wrote: > On 05/20/14 01:11, Zhenqiang Chen wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> The patch fix ICE issue triggered by shrink-wrapping enhancement. >> >> Bootstrap and no make check regression on X86-64. >> >> OK for trunk? >> >> Thanks! >> -Zhenqiang >> >> >> 2014-05-20 Zhenqiang Chen <zhenqiang.chen@linaro.org> >> >> PR rtl-optimization/61220 >> Part of PR rtl-optimization/61225 >> * shrink-wrap.c (move_insn_for_shrink_wrap): Skip SP and FP >> adjustment >> insn; skip split_edge for a block without only on successor. >> >> testsuite/ChangeLog: >> 2014-05-20 Zhenqiang Chen <zhenqiang.chen@linaro.org> >> >> * gcc.dg/pr61220.c: New test. >> * gcc.dg/shrink-wrap-loop.c: Disable for x86_64 -m32 mode. >> > [ ... ] > > > > >> /* Make sure that the source register isn't defined later in BB. */ >> @@ -204,6 +209,10 @@ move_insn_for_shrink_wrap (basic_block bb, rtx insn, >> /* Create a new basic block on the edge. */ >> if (EDGE_COUNT (next_block->preds) == 2) >> { >> + /* split_edge for a block with only one successor is meaningless. >> */ >> + if (EDGE_COUNT (bb->succs) == 1) >> + return false; >> + >> next_block = split_edge (live_edge); > > So don't you just want to use: > > if (EDGE_CRITICAL_P (live_edge)) > > to replace the two explicit checks of EDGE_COUNT on the preds & succs? Thanks for the comment. In the code, there are 4 combinations of EDGE_COUNT: <1, 1>, <1, 2>, <2, 1> and <2, 2>. <2, 1> is "illegal". <2, 2> is legal, but need split_edge. <1, *> can bypass the second check. EDGE_CRITICAL_P can only distinguish <2, 2> from others. So I think two explicit checks is more efficient than EDGE_CRITICAL_P. Thanks! -Zhenqiang
On 05/20/14 20:12, Zhenqiang Chen wrote: > In the code, there are 4 combinations of EDGE_COUNT: <1, 1>, <1, 2>, > <2, 1> and <2, 2>. <2, 1> is "illegal". <2, 2> is legal, but need > split_edge. <1, *> can bypass the second check. EDGE_CRITICAL_P can > only distinguish <2, 2> from others. > > So I think two explicit checks is more efficient than EDGE_CRITICAL_P. OK. It was more a question of clarity than efficiency. Your patch is fine as-is. jeff
diff --git a/gcc/shrink-wrap.c b/gcc/shrink-wrap.c index f09cfe7..6f1ddc7 100644 --- a/gcc/shrink-wrap.c +++ b/gcc/shrink-wrap.c @@ -179,7 +179,12 @@ move_insn_for_shrink_wrap (basic_block bb, rtx insn, return false; src = SET_SRC (set); dest = SET_DEST (set); - if (!REG_P (dest) || !REG_P (src)) + if (!REG_P (dest) || !REG_P (src) + /* STACK or FRAME related adjustment might be part of prologue. + So keep them in the entry block. */ + || dest == stack_pointer_rtx + || dest == frame_pointer_rtx + || dest == hard_frame_pointer_rtx) return false; /* Make sure that the source register isn't defined later in BB. */ @@ -204,6 +209,10 @@ move_insn_for_shrink_wrap (basic_block bb, rtx insn, /* Create a new basic block on the edge. */ if (EDGE_COUNT (next_block->preds) == 2) { + /* split_edge for a block with only one successor is meaningless. */ + if (EDGE_COUNT (bb->succs) == 1) + return false; + next_block = split_edge (live_edge); bitmap_copy (df_get_live_in (next_block), df_get_live_out (bb)); diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr61220.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr61220.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c503ff1 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr61220.c @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +/* { dg-do compile } */ +/* { dg-options "-O2 -g" } */ + +int a, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k; + +struct S0 +{ + int f0; + int f1; + int f2; +}; + +struct S1 +{ + int f0; + int f1; + struct S0 f2; +} b; + +void +fn1 (struct S1 p) +{ + for (; k; k++) + h = j ? a : a - 1; + d &= i; +} + +int +main () +{ + int l[5] = { 0 }; + fn1 (b); + for (c = 0; c < 3; c++) + for (g = 0; g < 3; g++) + l[c * 2] = e = l[c]; + if (f) + fn1 (b); + return 0; +} diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/shrink-wrap-loop.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/shrink-wrap-loop.c index 17dca4e..e72edfa 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/shrink-wrap-loop.c +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/shrink-wrap-loop.c @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -/* { dg-do compile { target { { x86_64-*-* } || { arm_thumb2 } } } } */ +/* { dg-do compile { target { { x86_64-*-* && lp64 } || { arm_thumb2 } } } } */ /* { dg-options "-O2 -fdump-rtl-pro_and_epilogue" } */ int foo (int *p1, int *p2);
Hi, The patch fix ICE issue triggered by shrink-wrapping enhancement. Bootstrap and no make check regression on X86-64. OK for trunk? Thanks! -Zhenqiang 2014-05-20 Zhenqiang Chen <zhenqiang.chen@linaro.org> PR rtl-optimization/61220 Part of PR rtl-optimization/61225 * shrink-wrap.c (move_insn_for_shrink_wrap): Skip SP and FP adjustment insn; skip split_edge for a block without only on successor. testsuite/ChangeLog: 2014-05-20 Zhenqiang Chen <zhenqiang.chen@linaro.org> * gcc.dg/pr61220.c: New test. * gcc.dg/shrink-wrap-loop.c: Disable for x86_64 -m32 mode.