[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function [Regression 6/7]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #28 from Xi Ruoyao --- Created attachment 41028 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41028=edit testcase

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function [Regression 6/7]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #27 from Xi Ruoyao --- Created attachment 41027 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41027=edit patch proposal Now I've prepared a patch. It reverted r227423 (but preserved its testcase) and used a more conforming

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function [Regression 6/7]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #26 from Xi Ruoyao --- Reverting r227423 makes both Florent's and NumericMonoid code work. But it reintroduced pr60586. Trying to solve it.

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function [Regression 6/7]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #25 from Xi Ruoyao --- I confirmed that r227423 broke NumericMonoid.

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function [Regression 6/7]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #24 from Xi Ruoyao --- The cilkplus spec described an "unsymmetrical" construct/destruct of temp variables. It seems difficult to implement in GCC. I'm trying to find a solution.

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function [Regression 6/7]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #23 from Xi Ruoyao --- Sorry. I was too tired so I misunderstood r227423. Now I am not sure whether it introduced the bug. I'll test it with NumericMonoid code.

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function [Regression 6/7]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #22 from Xi Ruoyao --- PR 60586 is a false PR to an expected behaviour... Unfortunately nobody noticed that and someone "fixed" it. But without r227423 GCC just ICE on the testcase.

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function [Regression 6/7]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #21 from Xi Ruoyao --- Start from r227423. Fix spawned function with lambda function Make sure that the spawned function's arguments will not be pushed into lambda function. gcc/c-family/ 2015-09-02 Balaji V. Iyer

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function [Regression 6/7]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #20 from Xi Ruoyao --- On 2017-03-16 12:31 +, cont...@edgar-fournival.fr wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 > > --- Comment #19 from Edgar Fournival --- > Thanks for your

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function [Regression 6/7]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #19 from Edgar Fournival --- Thanks for your explanations. I will investigate on my side and check the generated assembly of our project. Please keep us posted with the results of your bisection.

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function [Regression 6/7]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #18 from Xi Ruoyao --- > Compile with '-fcilkplus -S'. According to cilkplus spec, x() should be > evaluated in the child (for the asm produced by GCC, in _cilk_spn_0). > If you find "call x" in the asm of "z" instead of

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function [Regression 6/7]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #17 from Xi Ruoyao --- A simple test case for bisecting: extern "C" { int x(); int y(int); int z(); } int z() { int ret = _Cilk_spawn y(x()); return ret; } Compile with '-fcilkplus -S'. According to cilkplus spec, x() should

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function [Regression 6/7]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #16 from Xi Ruoyao --- On 2017-03-16 10:16 +, cont...@edgar-fournival.fr wrote: > Bisection? I am bisecting now.

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function [Regression 6/7]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #15 from Edgar Fournival --- (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #14) > Although I don't understand all the code in the Github repo, but GCC 6 indeed > moved the temporary construction (initialization) and

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function [Regression 6/7]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #14 from Xi Ruoyao --- (In reply to Florent Hivert from comment #13) > I've not yet been able to find a small example that shows the regression due > to GCC5 ICE. In particular, I'm not sure the problem mentioned by Fournival > is

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function [Regression 6/7]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #13 from Florent Hivert --- I've not yet been able to find a small example that shows the regression due to GCC5 ICE. In particular, I'm not sure the problem mentioned by Fournival is not due to a bug in my code (See my question of

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #12 from Xi Ruoyao --- (In reply to Edgar Fournival from comment #11) > It is also interesting to note that GCC 5.x is not impacted. > > Even if the given example code will not compile on GCC 5 (ICE in lower_stmt, > at

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #11 from Edgar Fournival --- It is also interesting to note that GCC 5.x is not impacted. Even if the given example code will not compile on GCC 5 (ICE in lower_stmt, at gimple-low.c:397 for the line

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #10 from Xi Ruoyao --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > which means the spawned copies use a shared vnew and a single destructor > is run "afterwards". If there's no synchronization then all threads will > call the

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 Xi Ruoyao changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ryxi at stu dot xidian.edu.cn --- Comment

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law --- It's unfortunate and directly related to the maintenance effort involved. The deprecation plan for Cilk+ would have code in gcc-7, but the code would be removed prior to the gcc-8 release. Unless someone

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #7 from Florent Hivert --- (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #6) > Also note it is likely Cilk+ will be deprecated in gcc-7 That's a huge pity from my point of view. For recursive exploration like the code I put here, I don't

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at redhat dot com

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #5 from Florent Hivert --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > Don't know Cilk+ but yes, try > >for (int i=0; i<8; i++) { > std::vector vnew(v); > vnew.push_back(i); > cilk_spawn walk(vnew, size); >

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- It might be that GCC is in error and that the ctor/dtor need to be arranged to run per thread. Who knows... You might want to check a competing Cilk+ implementation for this (I think the Intel compiler

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Don't know Cilk+ but yes, try for (int i=0; i<8; i++) { std::vector vnew(v); vnew.push_back(i); cilk_spawn walk(vnew, size); cilk_sync; } with appropriate syntax. We expand

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 --- Comment #2 from Florent Hivert --- Thanks for your quick answer ! I'm not sure to understand what you mean by "Thus insert a blocking primitive?" Do you suggest to add a cilk_sync somewhere ?

[Bug c++/80038] Random segfault using local vectors in Cilk function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|