On 1/11/19 4:44 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 11:42:31AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 1/10/19 12:19 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
>>> bb-reorder is quite seriously broken if get_attr_min_length should
>>> return INT_MAX, which it does for hppa on branches with r267666.
>> Presumably you're referring to the overflows and such?
> 
> Yes.  Even get_uncond_jump_length would have been INT_MAX.  All of
> the predicates deciding on whether to copy or reorder blocks were
> therefore broken.
> 
> The following is fairly obvious and would stop some of the silliness,
> but I guess now is not the time to propose this sort of patch.
> 
>       * bb-reorder.c (copy_bb_p): Don't overflow size calculation.
>       (get_uncond_jump_length): Assert length less than INT_MAX and
>       non-negative.
Now seems like a good time to revisit.  I ran this through the usual
bootstrap and regression text on x86_64.  It's also built and tested on
a good variety of the embedded targets.

Can't really test the PA right now due to what I believe is a qemu bug.
 David is still doing bootstraps on real hardware through, so if it
causes a problem on the PA I'm sure he'll chime in at some point.

I'm going to go ahead and install this on the trunk.

jeff



Reply via email to