On 02/17/2014 06:50 PM, Roman Gareev wrote:
Hi Tobias,
thanks for the answer!
I think that the segfault is being caused by NULL arguments being passedto
compute_deps
by loop_level_carries_dependences.*This is **causing **an* *assignment of**
NULL values to the following parameters of **compute_deps:* must_raw_no_source,
may_raw_no_source, must_war_no_source, may_war_no_source,
must_waw_no_source, may_waw_no_source. They are being passed to
subtract_commutative_associative_deps
and dereferenced in the following statements:
*must_raw_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*must_raw_no_source,
x_must_raw_no_source);
*may_raw_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*may_raw_no_source,
x_may_raw_no_source);
*must_war_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*must_war_no_source,
x_must_war_no_source);
*may_war_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*may_war_no_source,
x_may_war_no_source);
*must_waw_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*must_waw_no_source,
x_must_waw_no_source);
*may_waw_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*may_waw_no_source,
x_may_waw_no_source);
This is the reason of segfault. (All functions mentioned above are located
in gcc/graphite-dependences.c)
I think that this can be solved by the addition to
subtract_commutative_associative_deps of NULL checking of the following
variables: must_raw_no_source, may_raw_no_source, must_war_no_source,
may_war_no_source, must_waw_no_source, may_waw_no_source. I've implemented
this in the patch, which can be found below.
Tested x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applying to revisions 189156, 207802
(svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk) and 207802
(svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/ibm/gcc-4_8-branch)
Thanks for your answers and advice, Sven!
--
Roman Gareev
-- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "GCC GRAPHITE" group. To unsubscribe from this group and
stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
gcc-graphite+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit
https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
patch
diff --git a/gcc/graphite-dependences.c b/gcc/graphite-dependences.c
index b0f8680..002e3d1 100644
--- a/gcc/graphite-dependences.c
+++ b/gcc/graphite-dependences.c
@@ -424,24 +424,83 @@ subtract_commutative_associative_deps (scop_p scop,
&x_may_waw_no_source);
gcc_assert (res == 0);
- *must_raw = isl_union_map_subtract (*must_raw, x_must_raw);
- *may_raw = isl_union_map_subtract (*may_raw, x_may_raw);
- *must_raw_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*must_raw_no_source,
- x_must_raw_no_source);
- *may_raw_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*may_raw_no_source,
- x_may_raw_no_source);
- *must_war = isl_union_map_subtract (*must_war, x_must_war);
- *may_war = isl_union_map_subtract (*may_war, x_may_war);
- *must_war_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*must_war_no_source,
- x_must_war_no_source);
- *may_war_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*may_war_no_source,
- x_may_war_no_source);
- *must_waw = isl_union_map_subtract (*must_waw, x_must_waw);
- *may_waw = isl_union_map_subtract (*may_waw, x_may_waw);
- *must_waw_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*must_waw_no_source,
- x_must_waw_no_source);
- *may_waw_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*may_waw_no_source,
- x_may_waw_no_source);
+ if (must_raw)
+ *must_raw = isl_union_map_subtract (*must_raw, x_must_raw);
+ else
+ isl_union_map_free (x_must_raw);
+
+ if (may_raw)
+ *may_raw = isl_union_map_subtract (*may_raw, x_may_raw);
+ else
+ isl_union_map_free (x_may_raw);
In my understanding, it is sufficient to guard the no_source statements, no?
+
+ if (must_raw_no_source)
+ {
+ *must_raw_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*must_raw_no_source,
+ x_must_raw_no_source);
+ }
+ else
+ isl_union_map_free (x_must_raw_no_source);
Could you remove the '{' '}' around the first statement?
+
+ if (may_raw_no_source)
+ {
+ *may_raw_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*may_raw_no_source,
+ x_may_raw_no_source);
+ }
+ else
+ isl_union_map_free (x_may_raw_no_source);
Could you remove the '{' '}' around the first statement?
+ if (must_war)
+ *must_war = isl_union_map_subtract (*must_war, x_must_war);
+ else
+ isl_union_map_free (x_must_war);
+
+ if (may_war)
+ *may_war = isl_union_map_subtract (*may_war, x_may_war);
+ else
+ isl_union_map_free (x_may_war);
Those do not seem to be necessary, no?
+
+ if (must_war_no_source)
+ {
+ *must_war_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*must_war_no_source,
+ x_must_war_no_source);
+ }
+ else
+ isl_union_map_free (x_must_war_no_source);
+
+ if (may_war_no_source)
+ {
+ *may_war_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*may_war_no_source,
+ x_may_war_no_source);
+ }
+ else
+ isl_union_map_free (x_may_war_no_source);
Could you remove the '{' '}' around the first statement?
+
+ if (must_waw)
+ *must_waw = isl_union_map_subtract (*must_waw, x_must_waw);
+ else
+ isl_union_map_free (x_must_waw);
+
+ if (may_waw)
+ *may_waw = isl_union_map_subtract (*may_waw, x_may_waw);
+ else
+ isl_union_map_free (x_may_waw);
Those do not seem to be necessary, no?
+
+ if (must_waw_no_source)
+ {
+ *must_waw_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*must_waw_no_source,
+ x_must_waw_no_source);
+ }
+ else
+ isl_union_map_free (x_must_waw_no_source);
+
+ if (may_waw_no_source)
+ {
+ *may_waw_no_source = isl_union_map_subtract (*may_waw_no_source,
+ x_may_waw_no_source);
+ }
+ else
+ isl_union_map_free (x_may_waw_no_source);
Could you remove the '{' '}' around the first statement?
Otherwise, the patch looks good.
To commit this patch, could you please provide a ChangeLog entry as well
as a commit message that _briefly_ describes the findings mentioned in
you last email and submit this patch to gcc-patches?
Thanks again,
Tobias
