http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56108
Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-02-19
02:15:12 UTC ---
The first statement of this relaxed transaction is an inline asm:
__transaction_relaxed { __asm__(""); }
The problem here is we don't insert a BUILT_IN_TM_IRREVOCABLE call at the
beginning of the transaction because we bypass doing so here:
for (region = d->all_tm_regions; region; region = region->next)
{
/* If we're sure to go irrevocable, don't transform anything. */
if (d->irrevocable_blocks_normal
&& bitmap_bit_p (d->irrevocable_blocks_normal,
region->entry_block->index))
{
transaction_subcode_ior (region, GTMA_DOES_GO_IRREVOCABLE);
transaction_subcode_ior (region, GTMA_MAY_ENTER_IRREVOCABLE);
continue;
}
need_ssa_rename |=
ipa_tm_transform_calls (node, region, region->entry_block,
d->irrevocable_blocks_normal);
}
I don't understand why we explicitly bypass here. I mean, if this bypass was
for TM clones, we're already handling them up-stack in the call to
ipa_tm_transform_clone.
Perhaps we want something like this:
if (d->irrevocable_blocks_normal
&& bitmap_bit_p (d->irrevocable_blocks_normal,
region->entry_block->index))
- {
- transaction_subcode_ior (region, GTMA_DOES_GO_IRREVOCABLE);
- transaction_subcode_ior (region, GTMA_MAY_ENTER_IRREVOCABLE);
- continue;
- }
+ transaction_subcode_ior (region, GTMA_DOES_GO_IRREVOCABLE);
need_ssa_rename |=
But it's causing: FAIL: gcc.dg/tm/memopt-1.c, which I'm investigating.
