[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602 Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Fixed thus.
[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602 --- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 30616 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30616action=edit Proposed fix Patch I am testing. The problem was that ltrans passes got overzelaous on clearing local flags. I think this bug was there for a while, I wonder why it did not hit us before. The patch fixes the testcase seen in one of dups of this PR, does it fix all of SPEC?
[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602 --- Comment #12 from Yuri Rumyantsev ysrumyan at gmail dot com --- Jan, I tried to test your fix and got the following error message while building trunk compiler (with your fix): ../../../../../trunk/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/fstream-inst.cc:48:1: error: node is alias but not definition } // namespace ^ _ZNSt9basic_iosIwSt11char_traitsIwEED1Ev/764 (std::basic_ios_CharT, _Traits::~basic_ios() [with _CharT = wchar_t; _Traits = std::char_traitswchar_t]) @0x7f1375b1be40 Type: function alias cpp_implicit_alias Visibility: external public visibility_specified Address is taken. References: Referring: Availability: not_available Function flags: Called by: Calls: ../../../../../trunk/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/fstream-inst.cc:48:1: internal compiler error: verify_cgraph_node failed 0x7dc6b1 verify_cgraph_node(cgraph_node*) ../../trunk/gcc/cgraph.c:2621 0x7d6567 verify_symtab_node(symtab_node_def*) ../../trunk/gcc/symtab.c:763 0x7d65a7 verify_symtab() ../../trunk/gcc/symtab.c:780 0x98118b symtab_remove_unreachable_nodes(bool, _IO_FILE*) ../../trunk/gcc/ipa.c:477 0xf33f20 ipa_inline ../../trunk/gcc/ipa-inline.c:1800 Please submit a full bug report, Please, let me know if more info is needed. 2013/8/5 hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602 --- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 30616 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30616action=edit Proposed fix Patch I am testing. The problem was that ltrans passes got overzelaous on clearing local flags. I think this bug was there for a while, I wonder why it did not hit us before. The patch fixes the testcase seen in one of dups of this PR, does it fix all of SPEC? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602
--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
Please, let me know if more info is needed.
Actually I got the same ICE in meantime. Here is improved patch (it is still
testing for me)
Index: cgraph.c
===
*** cgraph.c(revision 201483)
--- cgraph.c(working copy)
*** verify_cgraph_node (struct cgraph_node *
*** 2363,2369
error (inline clone in same comdat group list);
error_found = true;
}
! if (!node-symbol.definition node-local.local)
{
error (local symbols must be defined);
error_found = true;
--- 2363,2369
error (inline clone in same comdat group list);
error_found = true;
}
! if (!node-symbol.definition !node-symbol.in_other_partition
node-local.local)
{
error (local symbols must be defined);
error_found = true;
Index: ipa.c
===
*** ipa.c(revision 201483)
--- ipa.c(working copy)
*** symtab_remove_unreachable_nodes (bool be
*** 376,382
{
if (file)
fprintf (file, %s, cgraph_node_name (node));
! cgraph_reset_node (node);
changed = true;
}
}
--- 376,390
{
if (file)
fprintf (file, %s, cgraph_node_name (node));
! node-symbol.analyzed = false;
! node-symbol.definition = false;
! node-symbol.cpp_implicit_alias = false;
! node-symbol.alias = false;
! node-symbol.weakref = false;
! if (!node-symbol.in_other_partition)
! node-local.local = false;
! cgraph_node_remove_callees (node);
! ipa_remove_all_references (node-symbol.ref_list);
changed = true;
}
}
*** function_and_variable_visibility (bool w
*** 888,894
}
FOR_EACH_DEFINED_FUNCTION (node)
{
! node-local.local = cgraph_local_node_p (node);
/* If we know that function can not be overwritten by a different
semantics
and moreover its section can not be discarded, replace all direct calls
--- 896,902
}
FOR_EACH_DEFINED_FUNCTION (node)
{
! node-local.local |= cgraph_local_node_p (node);
/* If we know that function can not be overwritten by a different
semantics
and moreover its section can not be discarded, replace all direct calls
[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602
--- Comment #14 from Yuri Rumyantsev ysrumyan at gmail dot com ---
Hi Jan,
I checked that all benches from spec2000 are run successfully with
-flto options and eembc_2_0 suite was also run sucessfully with lto
(for 32-bit mode).
So go ahead and commit your fix.
Best regards.
Yuri.
2013/8/5 hubicka at ucw dot cz gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602
--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
Please, let me know if more info is needed.
Actually I got the same ICE in meantime. Here is improved patch (it is still
testing for me)
Index: cgraph.c
===
*** cgraph.c(revision 201483)
--- cgraph.c(working copy)
*** verify_cgraph_node (struct cgraph_node *
*** 2363,2369
error (inline clone in same comdat group list);
error_found = true;
}
! if (!node-symbol.definition node-local.local)
{
error (local symbols must be defined);
error_found = true;
--- 2363,2369
error (inline clone in same comdat group list);
error_found = true;
}
! if (!node-symbol.definition !node-symbol.in_other_partition
node-local.local)
{
error (local symbols must be defined);
error_found = true;
Index: ipa.c
===
*** ipa.c(revision 201483)
--- ipa.c(working copy)
*** symtab_remove_unreachable_nodes (bool be
*** 376,382
{
if (file)
fprintf (file, %s, cgraph_node_name (node));
! cgraph_reset_node (node);
changed = true;
}
}
--- 376,390
{
if (file)
fprintf (file, %s, cgraph_node_name (node));
! node-symbol.analyzed = false;
! node-symbol.definition = false;
! node-symbol.cpp_implicit_alias = false;
! node-symbol.alias = false;
! node-symbol.weakref = false;
! if (!node-symbol.in_other_partition)
! node-local.local = false;
! cgraph_node_remove_callees (node);
! ipa_remove_all_references (node-symbol.ref_list);
changed = true;
}
}
*** function_and_variable_visibility (bool w
*** 888,894
}
FOR_EACH_DEFINED_FUNCTION (node)
{
! node-local.local = cgraph_local_node_p (node);
/* If we know that function can not be overwritten by a different
semantics
and moreover its section can not be discarded, replace all direct calls
--- 896,902
}
FOR_EACH_DEFINED_FUNCTION (node)
{
! node-local.local |= cgraph_local_node_p (node);
/* If we know that function can not be overwritten by a different
semantics
and moreover its section can not be discarded, replace all direct calls
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602 Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #10 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org --- Mine...
[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602 Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2013-07-22 Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0 Summary|Runfails for several C/C++ |[4.9 Regression] Runfails |benchmarks from spec2000|for several C/C++ |for i686 with -flto after |benchmarks from spec2000 |r199422 |for i686 with -flto after ||r199422 Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com --- Confirmed, a 4.9 regression.
[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602 --- Comment #8 from Dmitry Gorbachev d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com --- And a testcase from PR57879 fails with -O2 / -O1 and -flto, it happens when building GCC itself.
[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602 Dmitry Gorbachev d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com --- Comment #9 from Dmitry Gorbachev d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com --- *** Bug 57879 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
