On Sep 24, 2013, at 8:51 PM, Richard Henderson <r...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 09/03/2013 07:08 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The field state->ehp_region wasn't updated before lowering constructs in the
>> eh
>> path of EH_ELSE. As a consequence, __builtin_eh_pointer is lowered to 0 (or
>> possibly to a wrong region number) in this path.
>>
>> The only user of EH_ELSE looks to be trans-mem.c:lower_transaction, and the
>> consequence of that is a memory leak.
>>
>> Furthermore, according to calls.c:flags_from_decl_or_type, the
>> "transaction_pure"
>> attribute must be set on the function type, not on the function declaration.
>> Hence the change to declare __builtin_eh_pointer.
>> (I don't understand the guard condition to set the attribute for it in
>> tree.c.
>> Why is 'builtin_decl_explicit_p (BUILT_IN_TM_LOAD_1)' needed in addition to
>> flag_tm ?)
>
> Clearly these are totally unrelated and should not be in the same patch.
This wasn't clear to me, as I got 'unsafe function call __builtin_eh_pointer in
atomic transaction' before fixing the transaction_pure.
So here is the 'transaction_pure' part.
No check-host regressions on x86_64-linux-gnu.
Ok for trunk ?
Tristan.
2013-09-03 Tristan Gingold <ging...@adacore.com>
* tree.c (set_call_expr_flags): Reject ECF_TM_PURE.
(build_common_builtin_nodes): Set "transaction_pure"
attribute on __builtin_eh_pointer function type (and not on
its declaration).
diff --git a/gcc/tree.c b/gcc/tree.c
index f0ee309..e4be24d 100644
--- a/gcc/tree.c
+++ b/gcc/tree.c
@@ -9817,9 +9817,11 @@ set_call_expr_flags (tree decl, int flags)
if (flags & ECF_LEAF)
DECL_ATTRIBUTES (decl) = tree_cons (get_identifier ("leaf"),
NULL, DECL_ATTRIBUTES (decl));
- if ((flags & ECF_TM_PURE) && flag_tm)
- DECL_ATTRIBUTES (decl) = tree_cons (get_identifier ("transaction_pure"),
- NULL, DECL_ATTRIBUTES (decl));
+
+ /* The "transaction_pure" attribute must be set on the function type, not
+ on the declaration. */
+ gcc_assert (!(flags & ECF_TM_PURE));
+
/* Looping const or pure is implied by noreturn.
There is currently no way to declare looping const or looping pure alone.
*/
gcc_assert (!(flags & ECF_LOOPING_CONST_OR_PURE)
@@ -10018,8 +10020,9 @@ build_common_builtin_nodes (void)
integer_type_node, NULL_TREE);
ecf_flags = ECF_PURE | ECF_NOTHROW | ECF_LEAF;
/* Only use TM_PURE if we we have TM language support. */
- if (builtin_decl_explicit_p (BUILT_IN_TM_LOAD_1))
- ecf_flags |= ECF_TM_PURE;
+ if (flag_tm && builtin_decl_explicit_p (BUILT_IN_TM_LOAD_1))
+ TYPE_ATTRIBUTES (ftype) = tree_cons (get_identifier ("transaction_pure"),
+ NULL, TYPE_ATTRIBUTES (ftype));
local_define_builtin ("__builtin_eh_pointer", ftype, BUILT_IN_EH_POINTER,
"__builtin_eh_pointer", ecf_flags);
