Patchwork [vta,graphite?] propagate degenerate phi nodes into debug stmts

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Alexandre Oliva
Date June 3, 2011, 2:33 p.m.
Message ID <ory61jkmr0.fsf@livre.localdomain>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/98591/
State New
Headers show

Comments

Alexandre Oliva - June 3, 2011, 2:33 p.m.
According to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg00999.html
on Nov 19, 2009, Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 4:05 AM, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 17, 2009, Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>>> This looks odd.  SSA DEF operand iteration should walk the PHI defs
>>>>> as well, so the change should not be necessary.
>> 
>>>> I thought so, too, but by the time we get there, the operands of the PHI
>>>> stmt have already been disconnected.
>> 
>>> It shouldn't be.  Please try to figure out why instead.
>> 
>> Gotta use a different FOR_EACH macro to handle PHI nodes.
>> 
>> s/FOR_EACH_SSA_DEF_OPERAND/FOR_EACH_PHI_OR_STMT_DEF/ fixed it.
>> 
>> In order to make sure no other such mistakes had been made in GCC, I
>> added an assertion check in the iterator initializer and adjusted the
>> uses of GIMPLE_PHI nodes that triggered the assertion, but that would
>> have done nothing whatsoever in its absence.  I haven't looked into
>> whether doing nothing is correct.
>> 
>> Should I check this in?

> I think we should rather let num_ssa_operands and delink_stmt_imm_use
> ICE on PHIs, but I'd rather do this in stage1 - can you queue this
> patch until then?

You meant 4.6 stage1, but I missed it.  How's it for 4.7 stage1?
Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu and i686-linux-gnu.
Richard Guenther - June 6, 2011, 9:37 a.m.
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> wrote:
> According to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg00999.html
> on Nov 19, 2009, Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 4:05 AM, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> On Nov 17, 2009, Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> This looks odd.  SSA DEF operand iteration should walk the PHI defs
>>>>>> as well, so the change should not be necessary.
>>>
>>>>> I thought so, too, but by the time we get there, the operands of the PHI
>>>>> stmt have already been disconnected.
>>>
>>>> It shouldn't be.  Please try to figure out why instead.
>>>
>>> Gotta use a different FOR_EACH macro to handle PHI nodes.
>>>
>>> s/FOR_EACH_SSA_DEF_OPERAND/FOR_EACH_PHI_OR_STMT_DEF/ fixed it.
>>>
>>> In order to make sure no other such mistakes had been made in GCC, I
>>> added an assertion check in the iterator initializer and adjusted the
>>> uses of GIMPLE_PHI nodes that triggered the assertion, but that would
>>> have done nothing whatsoever in its absence.  I haven't looked into
>>> whether doing nothing is correct.
>>>
>>> Should I check this in?
>
>> I think we should rather let num_ssa_operands and delink_stmt_imm_use
>> ICE on PHIs, but I'd rather do this in stage1 - can you queue this
>> patch until then?
>
> You meant 4.6 stage1, but I missed it.  How's it for 4.7 stage1?
> Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu and i686-linux-gnu.

Isn't exactly ICEing for num_ssa_operands/delink_stmt_imm_use.

So, the op_iter_init change is ok, the other two not - they should
either ICE or work for PHIs (by using FOR_EACH_PHI_OR_STMT_USE
in them).

Thanks,
Richard.

>
>
>
> --
> Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter    http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/
> You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi
> Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/   FSF Latin America board member
> Free Software Evangelist      Red Hat Brazil Compiler Engineer
>
>

Patch

for  gcc/ChangeLog
from  Alexandre Oliva  <aoliva@redhat.com>

	* tree-flow-inline.h (op_iter_init): Reject GIMPLE_PHI stmts.
	(num_ssa_operands): Skip GIMPLE_PHI.
	(delink_stmt_imm_use): Likewise.

Index: gcc/tree-flow-inline.h
===================================================================
--- gcc/tree-flow-inline.h.orig	2010-06-10 07:20:02.000000000 -0300
+++ gcc/tree-flow-inline.h	2010-06-10 15:17:51.000000000 -0300
@@ -716,9 +716,11 @@  clear_and_done_ssa_iter (ssa_op_iter *pt
 static inline void
 op_iter_init (ssa_op_iter *ptr, gimple stmt, int flags)
 {
-  /* We do not support iterating over virtual defs or uses without
+  /* PHI nodes require a different iterator initialization path.  We
+     do not support iterating over virtual defs or uses without
      iterating over defs or uses at the same time.  */
-  gcc_checking_assert ((!(flags & SSA_OP_VDEF) || (flags & SSA_OP_DEF))
+  gcc_checking_assert (gimple_code (stmt) != GIMPLE_PHI
+		       && (!(flags & SSA_OP_VDEF) || (flags & SSA_OP_DEF))
 		       && (!(flags & SSA_OP_VUSE) || (flags & SSA_OP_USE)));
   ptr->defs = (flags & (SSA_OP_DEF|SSA_OP_VDEF)) ? gimple_def_ops (stmt) : NULL;
   if (!(flags & SSA_OP_VDEF)
@@ -847,8 +849,9 @@  num_ssa_operands (gimple stmt, int flags
   tree t;
   int num = 0;
 
-  FOR_EACH_SSA_TREE_OPERAND (t, stmt, iter, flags)
-    num++;
+  if (gimple_code (stmt) != GIMPLE_PHI)
+    FOR_EACH_SSA_TREE_OPERAND (t, stmt, iter, flags)
+      num++;
   return num;
 }
 
@@ -860,7 +863,8 @@  delink_stmt_imm_use (gimple stmt)
    ssa_op_iter iter;
    use_operand_p use_p;
 
-   if (ssa_operands_active ())
+   if (ssa_operands_active ()
+       && gimple_code (stmt) != GIMPLE_PHI)
      FOR_EACH_SSA_USE_OPERAND (use_p, stmt, iter, SSA_OP_ALL_USES)
        delink_imm_use (use_p);
 }