Here is a fix:
The problem is that the code below does not anticipate the situation that a
condition-expression is a constant, or in general, has no kids.
Index: be/opt/opt_proactive.cxx
===================================================================
--- be/opt/opt_proactive.cxx (revision 3851)
+++ be/opt/opt_proactive.cxx (working copy)
@@ -3210,7 +3210,7 @@
if (!no_alias) {
if (!do_query && (_action == DO_IFFLIP)) {
- WN * wn_tmp = WN_kid0(expr1);
+ WN * wn_tmp = (WN_kid_count(expr1) > 0) ? WN_kid0(expr1) : NULL;
if (wn_tmp) {
BOOL result1 = FALSE;
BOOL result2 = FALSE;
From: Sun Chan [mailto:sun.c...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 3:29 AM
To: Gang Yu
Cc: open64-devel
Subject: Re: [Open64-devel] Review request for bug934(regression fix for
r3843)[WOPT]
how about fix proactive_opt (or whatever the name is)? It is something added
not too long ago
Sun
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Gang Yu
<yugang...@gmail.com<mailto:yugang...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi, Sun
Would you please kindly furthur input to this issue? If we could not find
alternative better fix, can we check in the patch firstly? the regression bugs
are marked major priority, we should get it fixed quickly.
Thanks
Regards
Gang
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Gang Yu
<yugang...@gmail.com<mailto:yugang...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Thanks for your comments.
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Sun Chan
<sun.c...@gmail.com<mailto:sun.c...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I don't understand the rationale for this fix. You are saying that the dead
branch is not dce'd, and lno does not like it. So, why not fix dce? A dead
branch is dead branch, why this workaround?
Sun
This segmentation is in the preopt, but intermediate optimized result as:
IF {line: 1/131}
U4INTCONST 1 (0x1)
THEN
...
ELSE
BLOCK
END_BLOCK
END_IF
is acceptable, not 100% optimized but still in its own right and later mainopt
can still eliminate the dead branch.
for a long term, we should fix proactive_loop_transform, since we should not
always assume the intermediate input in perfect form.
Coding style in open64.net<http://open64.net/> pointing this out:
no assumption across
* No assumption across different phases
As a temporary workaround, we assume the previously code work quite well except
for cases like bug912, so, we make more effort on limit the changes, i.e, more
constraint on the change. if we add the MAINOPT condition, the branch get
eliminted by later DCE in preopt, then proactive_loop_transform happy. we get
things done.
Regards
Gang
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Gang Yu
<yugang...@gmail.com<mailto:yugang...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi,
Would a gatekeeper please help review the fix for bug934 , regression caused
by r3843?
segment-fault function snippet of bug case:
void LibRaw:: tiff_set (ushort *ntag,
ushort tag, ushort type, int count, int val)
{
struct tiff_tag *tt;
int c;
if (type < 3 && count <= 4)
for (c=0; c < 4; c++) tt->val.c[c] = val >> (c << 3);
}
void LibRaw:: tiff_head (struct tiff_hdr *th, int full)
{
if (full) {
tiff_set (&th->ngps, 3, 2, 2, (imgdata.other.gpsdata)[30]);
tiff_set (&th->ngps, 4, 5, 3, ((char *)(&(th->gps[6])) - (char *)th));
tiff_set (&th->ngps, 5, 1, 1, (imgdata.other.gpsdata)[31]);
}
int c, row, col, soff, rstep, cstep;
for (row=0; row < (imgdata.sizes.height); row++, soff += rstep) {
}
}
at O3 , tiff_set is inlined into tiff_set, at PREOPT_LNO_PHASE, expression
if (type <3 && count <=4), i.e, whirl expression
U4U2LDID 0 <st 89> T<7,.predef_U2,2>
U4INTCONST 2 (0x2)
U4U4LE
I4I4LDID 0 <st 90> T<4,.predef_I4,4>
I4INTCONST 4 (0x4)
U4I4LE
I4CAND
U4I4CVT
after codemap, is transfered to
> LDC U4 1 <u=2 cr19> flags:0x0 b=-1
> U4I4CVT <u=2 cr33> isop_flags:0xc0000 flags:0x1 b=-1
>OPR_FALSEBR 6914 b=-1 flags:0x2 pj2 Sid-1
DCE does not delete the unreachable branch under this condition, which then
emits back to H whirl
as
IF {line: 1/131}
U4INTCONST 1 (0x1)
THEN
...
ELSE
BLOCK
END_BLOCK
END_IF
this will make proactive transformation phase in PREOPT_LNO1_PHASE uncomfort,
then it asserts.
Suggested patch, keep the orginal handling of U4I4CVT const , only change under
the MAINOPT_phase.
osprey/be/opt/opt_htable.cxx -- 148c4e2..6499b99 100644
--- a/osprey/be/opt/opt_htable.cxx
+++ b/osprey/be/opt/opt_htable.cxx
@@ -2273,7 +2273,9 @@ CODEMAP::Canon_cvt(WN *wn,
Get_mtype_class(OPCODE_desc(op))) != 0 &&
MTYPE_size_min(OPCODE_rtype(op)) == MTYPE_size_min(OPCODE_desc(op)) &&
// bug912 open64.net<http://open64.net/>. Do not delete U4I4CVT if his
kid is a constant
- (!(OPCODE_rtype(op) == MTYPE_U4 &&
+ // bug934 open64.net<http://open64.net/>. Only do this at MAINOPT_PHASE.
+ (!(_phase == MAINOPT_PHASE &&
+ OPCODE_rtype(op) == MTYPE_U4 &&
OPCODE_desc(op) == MTYPE_I4 &&
ccr->Tree() == NULL)))
return propagated;
Would a gatekeeper help a review?
BTW, thanks for Xiaojing for report the bug.
Regards
Gang
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cloud Computing - Latest Buzzword or a Glimpse of the Future?
This paper surveys cloud computing today: What are the benefits?
Why are businesses embracing it? What are its payoffs and pitfalls?
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sdnl/114/51425149/
_______________________________________________
Open64-devel mailing list
Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel
Index: be/opt/opt_proactive.cxx
===================================================================
--- be/opt/opt_proactive.cxx (revision 3851)
+++ be/opt/opt_proactive.cxx (working copy)
@@ -3210,7 +3210,7 @@
if (!no_alias) {
if (!do_query && (_action == DO_IFFLIP)) {
- WN * wn_tmp = WN_kid0(expr1);
+ WN * wn_tmp = (WN_kid_count(expr1) > 0) ? WN_kid0(expr1) : NULL;
if (wn_tmp) {
BOOL result1 = FALSE;
BOOL result2 = FALSE;
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn Windows Azure Live! Tuesday, Dec 13, 2011
Microsoft is holding a special Learn Windows Azure training event for
developers. It will provide a great way to learn Windows Azure and what it
provides. You can attend the event by watching it streamed LIVE online.
Learn more at http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-windowsazure
_______________________________________________
Open64-devel mailing list
Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel
