On the fix its own, what is your doubt? What do you think is illogical?
Regards
Gang
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Sun Chan <sun.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
> running correct means nothing to me. you are fixing the optimizer
> trace of dce and htable
>
> On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Gang Yu <yugang...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I can confirm this is the right fix. I have tested all the test cases on
>> bug897, no doubltly right.
>>
>> So, what traces do you want?
>>
>> Regards
>> Gang
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Sun Chan <sun.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I highly doubt you have the right fix. OTOH, I can't follow your
>>> explaination either. Can you further cut down the example? Also, try to use
>>> something less confusing in names because it gets mixed up with versioning
>>> of stmt, symbol etc.
>>> Once you have a minimum case, we can look at some trace first
>>> Sun
>>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 5:11 PM, Gang Yu <yugang...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Could a gatekeeper please help review the fix for bug897(
>>>> https://bugs.open64.net/show_bug.cgi?id=897)?
>>>>
>>>> when we use csmith to test the compiler stability, we find the DCE
>>>> always trapped into segment fault.
>>>>
>>>> A typical case:
>>>> int32_t g_46 = 0L;
>>>> int32_t g_71 = 0L;
>>>> int32_t *g_311 = &g_46;
>>>> int32_t * func_19(int32_t * p_20, int16_t p_21, int32_t * p_22, const
>>>> uint8_t
>>>> p_23, int32_t * p_24) {
>>>> int32_t **l_426 = &g_311;
>>>> const uint64_t l_440 = 0x2A1DFCF9L;
>>>> for (p_21 = (-24);
>>>> (p_21 < 1);
>>>> p_21 = safe_add_func_int16_t_s_s(p_21, 3)) {
>>>> int32_t ***l_428 = &l_426;
>>>> (*l_428) = &g_311;
>>>> if ((*p_20)) {
>>>> if (l_440) {
>>>> }
>>>> else {
>>>> uint32_t l_445 = 4U;
>>>> if ((*g_311)) {
>>>> if ((safe_rshift_func_uint16_t_u_s(func_124((&p_22 !=
>>>> &p_24)), 10))) {
>>>> (*g_311) |= l_445;
>>>> (**l_426) |= (*p_24);
>>>> g_311 = &g_71;
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> Analysis:
>>>>
>>>> the segment fault always occurs at the dead_store_elim phase of DCE,
>>>> i.e, after the Unreachable_code_elim, and the backtrace shows the DCE tries
>>>> to mark call statement func_124 live, this is a wrong operation. the
>>>> branch
>>>> else {
>>>> uint32_t l_445 = 4U;
>>>> if ((*g_311)) {
>>>> if ((safe_rshift_func_uint16_t_u_s(func_124((&p_22 !=
>>>> &p_24)), 10))) {
>>>> (*g_311) |= l_445;
>>>> (**l_426) |= (*p_24);
>>>> g_311 = &g_71;
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> has already been deleted by DCE at this point, more investigation
>>>> shows, when mark safe_add_func_int16_t_s_s(p_21, 3) live, DCE will also
>>>> mark the mu node g_311 live, which then marks the sym10v0(g_311) version
>>>> live. The sym10v0 is resurrected chi to (*g311) |= l_445, so (*g_311) |=
>>>> l_445 should be marked live(at this case it should already been marked live
>>>> although removed[in deleted block]). However it is not the case, DCE tries
>>>> to mark that statement live...
>>>>
>>>> the problem is we do unexpected at Remove_stmtrep:
>>>> 720// remove the given statement from this block
>>>> 721void
>>>> 722BB_NODE::Remove_stmtrep( STMTREP *stmt )
>>>> 723{
>>>> ...
>>>> 735 _stmtlist.Remove(stmt);
>>>> 736 stmt->Reset_live_stmt(); // WHIRL SSA: mark stmt dead
>>>> 737}
>>>>
>>>> 736 is the cause of this fault.
>>>>
>>>> Suggested fix:
>>>> --- a/osprey/be/opt/opt_bb.cxx
>>>> +++ b/osprey/be/opt/opt_bb.cxx
>>>> @@ -733,7 +733,6 @@ BB_NODE::Remove_stmtrep( STMTREP *stmt )
>>>> }
>>>> _stmtlist.Remove(stmt);
>>>> - stmt->Reset_live_stmt(); // WHIRL SSA: mark stmt dead
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Gang
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
