https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44563
--- Comment #27 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> --- On Tue, 10 Mar 2015, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44563 > > Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: > > What |Removed |Added > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org > > --- Comment #25 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- > Or perhaps add split_block variant that uses the old bb for the second part > rather than the first one, and use it in the inliner? Seems like Index: gcc/tree-inline.c =================================================================== --- gcc/tree-inline.c (revision 221317) +++ gcc/tree-inline.c (working copy) @@ -4777,18 +4781,19 @@ static bool gimple_expand_calls_inline (basic_block bb, copy_body_data *id) { gimple_stmt_iterator gsi; + bool inlined = false; - for (gsi = gsi_start_bb (bb); !gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next (&gsi)) + for (gsi = gsi_last_bb (bb); !gsi_end_p (gsi);) { gimple stmt = gsi_stmt (gsi); + gsi_prev (&gsi); if (is_gimple_call (stmt) - && !gimple_call_internal_p (stmt) - && expand_call_inline (bb, stmt, id)) - return true; + && !gimple_call_internal_p (stmt)) + inlined |= expand_call_inline (bb, stmt, id); } - return false; + return inlined; } fixes the issue as well as gsi stays valid over inline expansion if we advance it before that.
