Message ID | 000001d0cb72$ea66f2b0$bf34d810$@arm.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
On 07/31/2015 03:25 AM, Thomas Preud'homme wrote: > Hi, > > Since commit r223113, loop-invariant pass rely on luids to determine if an invariant can be hoisted out of a loop without introducing temporaries. However, nothing is made to ensure luids are up-to-date. This patch adds a DF_LIVE problem and mark all blocks as dirty before using luids to ensure these will be recomputed. > > ChangeLog entries are as follows: > > > 2015-07-31 Thomas Preud'homme <thomas.preudhomme@arm.com> > > PR tree-optimization/67043 > * loop-invariant.c (find_defs): Force recomputation of all luids. > > > 2015-07-29 Thomas Preud'homme <thomas.preudhomme@arm.com> > > PR tree-optimization/67043 > * gcc.dg/pr67043.c: New test. > > Note: the testcase was heavily reduced from the Linux kernel sources by Markus Trippelsdorf and formatted to follow GNU code style. > > > diff --git a/gcc/loop-invariant.c b/gcc/loop-invariant.c > index 1fdb84d..fc53e09 100644 > --- a/gcc/loop-invariant.c > +++ b/gcc/loop-invariant.c > @@ -676,6 +676,8 @@ find_defs (struct loop *loop) > df_remove_problem (df_chain); > df_process_deferred_rescans (); > df_chain_add_problem (DF_UD_CHAIN); > + df_live_add_problem (); > + df_live_set_all_dirty (); > df_set_flags (DF_RD_PRUNE_DEAD_DEFS); > df_analyze_loop (loop); > check_invariant_table_size (); > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr67043.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr67043.c > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..36aa686 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr67043.c > @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > +/* { dg-options "-O3 -fcompare-debug -w" } */ > + > +extern void rt_mutex_owner (void); > +extern void rt_mutex_deadlock_account_lock (int); > +extern void signal_pending (void); > +__typeof__ (int *) a; > +int b; > + > +int > +try_to_take_rt_mutex (int p1) { > + rt_mutex_owner (); > + if (b) > + return 0; > + rt_mutex_deadlock_account_lock (p1); > + return 1; > +} > + > +void > +__rt_mutex_slowlock (int p1) { > + int c; > + for (;;) { > + c = ({ > + asm ("" : "=r"(a)); > + a; > + }); > + if (try_to_take_rt_mutex (c)) > + break; > + if (__builtin_expect (p1 == 0, 0)) > + signal_pending (); > + } > +} > > > Patch was tested by running the testsuite against a bootstrapped native x86_64-linux-gnu GCC and against an arm-none-eabi GCC cross-compiler without any regression. > > Is this ok for trunk? So if we're relying on LUIDs, don't they get out-of-date each time we move an invariant? Or is there some call back into the DF routines after we move an invariant to fix the LUIDs? jeff
diff --git a/gcc/loop-invariant.c b/gcc/loop-invariant.c index 1fdb84d..fc53e09 100644 --- a/gcc/loop-invariant.c +++ b/gcc/loop-invariant.c @@ -676,6 +676,8 @@ find_defs (struct loop *loop) df_remove_problem (df_chain); df_process_deferred_rescans (); df_chain_add_problem (DF_UD_CHAIN); + df_live_add_problem (); + df_live_set_all_dirty (); df_set_flags (DF_RD_PRUNE_DEAD_DEFS); df_analyze_loop (loop); check_invariant_table_size (); diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr67043.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr67043.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000..36aa686 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr67043.c @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ +/* { dg-do compile } */ +/* { dg-options "-O3 -fcompare-debug -w" } */ + +extern void rt_mutex_owner (void); +extern void rt_mutex_deadlock_account_lock (int); +extern void signal_pending (void); +__typeof__ (int *) a; +int b; + +int +try_to_take_rt_mutex (int p1) { + rt_mutex_owner (); + if (b) + return 0; + rt_mutex_deadlock_account_lock (p1); + return 1; +} + +void +__rt_mutex_slowlock (int p1) { + int c; + for (;;) { + c = ({ + asm ("" : "=r"(a)); + a; + }); + if (try_to_take_rt_mutex (c)) + break; + if (__builtin_expect (p1 == 0, 0)) + signal_pending (); + } +}