[Bug tree-optimization/103603] [11 Regression] stack overflow on ranger for huge program, but OK for legacy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103603 Andrew Macleod changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW |RESOLVED --- Comment #8 from Andrew Macleod --- fixed
[Bug tree-optimization/103603] [11 Regression] stack overflow on ranger for huge program, but OK for legacy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103603 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3760d9d7b5410f16236ed15d02ec1d8a7d16fddb commit r11-9452-g3760d9d7b5410f16236ed15d02ec1d8a7d16fddb Author: Andrew MacLeod Date: Tue Dec 7 12:09:33 2021 -0500 Directly resolve range_of_stmt dependencies. (Port of PR 103231/103464) All ranger API entries eventually call range_of_stmt to ensure there is an initial global value to work with. This can cause very deep call chains when satisfied via the normal API. Instead, push any dependencies onto a stack and evaluate them in a depth first manner, mirroring what would have happened via the normal API calls. PR tree-optimization/103603 gcc/ * gimple-range.cc (gimple_ranger::gimple_ranger): Create stmt stack. (gimple_ranger::~gimple_ranger): New. (gimple_ranger::range_of_stmt): Process dependencies if they have no global cache entry. (gimple_ranger::prefill_name): New. (gimple_ranger::prefill_stmt_dependencies): New. * gimple-range.h (class gimple_ranger): Add prototypes.
[Bug tree-optimization/103603] [11 Regression] stack overflow on ranger for huge program, but OK for legacy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103603 --- Comment #6 from Kito Cheng --- Reported testcase is OK and I test that patch on riscv64-elf and riscv64-linux with full gcc testsuite run, both are no regression.
[Bug tree-optimization/103603] [11 Regression] stack overflow on ranger for huge program, but OK for legacy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103603 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.3 Known to work||10.3.0, 12.0 Known to fail||11.1.0, 11.2.0
[Bug tree-optimization/103603] [11 Regression] stack overflow on ranger for huge program, but OK for legacy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103603 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Macleod --- Yes, there is an updated patch that bootstraps posted here for approval: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-December/586351.html Give it a go.
[Bug tree-optimization/103603] [11 Regression] stack overflow on ranger for huge program, but OK for legacy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103603
--- Comment #4 from Kito Cheng ---
Hi Andrew:
Thanks for your quick response! the patch is work to me for the testcase,
but...I got seg fault when I built x86 GCC.
Here is a reduced case from gcov, and this testcase also take longer
compilation time than expect (>15s to compile and ICE, but ~0.01s w/o patch):
```
struct gcov_ctr_info {
int values;
};
struct gcov_fn_info {
struct gcov_ctr_info ctrs[1];
};
struct gcov_info {
struct gcov_fn_info **functions;
};
void __gcov_dump_one() {
{
struct gcov_info gi_ptr;
int gi_ptr_1;
struct gcov_info gi_ptr_0;
int run_max ;
for (; ; )
for (unsigned f_ix ; gi_ptr_1; f_ix) {
struct gcov_ctr_info *cinfo = gi_ptr.functions[0];
int cinfo_0;
for (unsigned i ; cinfo_0; i) {
run_max <
run_max = cinfo->values;
}
}
for (; _ptr; )
;
}
}
```
Backtrace:
during GIMPLE pass: evrp
gcov.c:28:1: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
28 | }
| ^
0xba283f crash_signal
../../../riscv-gnu-toolchain/riscv-gcc/gcc/toplev.c:327
0x1488666 vec::quick_push(tree_node* const&)
../../../riscv-gnu-toolchain/riscv-gcc/gcc/vec.h:1023
0x1488666 vec::quick_push(tree_node* const&)
../../../riscv-gnu-toolchain/riscv-gcc/gcc/vec.h:1875
0x1488666 vec::safe_push(tree_node* const&)
../../../riscv-gnu-toolchain/riscv-gcc/gcc/vec.h:1888
0x1488666 gimple_ranger::prefill_stmt_dependencies(tree_node*)
../../../riscv-gnu-toolchain/riscv-gcc/gcc/gimple-range.cc:1177
0x14892de gimple_ranger::range_of_stmt(irange&, gimple*, tree_node*)
../../../riscv-gnu-toolchain/riscv-gcc/gcc/gimple-range.cc:1089
0x1482b45 gimple_ranger::range_of_expr(irange&, tree_node*, gimple*)
../../../riscv-gnu-toolchain/riscv-gcc/gcc/gimple-range.cc:982
0xe46670 range_query::value_of_expr(tree_node*, gimple*)
../../../riscv-gnu-toolchain/riscv-gcc/gcc/value-query.cc:86
0x14960e0 hybrid_folder::value_of_expr(tree_node*, gimple*)
../../../riscv-gnu-toolchain/riscv-gcc/gcc/gimple-ssa-evrp.c:235
0xd1575b substitute_and_fold_dom_walker::before_dom_children(basic_block_def*)
../../../riscv-gnu-toolchain/riscv-gcc/gcc/tree-ssa-propagate.c:1072
0x145cb34 dom_walker::walk(basic_block_def*)
../../../riscv-gnu-toolchain/riscv-gcc/gcc/domwalk.c:309
0xd14d85 substitute_and_fold_engine::substitute_and_fold(basic_block_def*)
../../../riscv-gnu-toolchain/riscv-gcc/gcc/tree-ssa-propagate.c:1283
0x1495c34 execute_early_vrp
../../../riscv-gnu-toolchain/riscv-gcc/gcc/gimple-ssa-evrp.c:349
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See
[Bug tree-optimization/103603] [11 Regression] stack overflow on ranger for huge program, but OK for legacy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103603 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Macleod --- Created attachment 51944 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51944=edit Ported patch See if this works. I'll run it through testing, but this should be a port of the patches from PR 103231 and the followup PR 103464 There are some minor differences, but nothing too major.
[Bug tree-optimization/103603] [11 Regression] stack overflow on ranger for huge program, but OK for legacy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103603 --- Comment #2 from Kito Cheng --- Oh, apologize for misleading, it should fixed via pr103231 rather than pr103254. it work after g:5deacf6058d1bc7261a75c9fd1f116c4442e9e60, no new file, but it's not trivial backport-able.
[Bug tree-optimization/103603] [11 Regression] stack overflow on ranger for huge program, but OK for legacy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103603 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-12-07 CC||amacleod at redhat dot com, ||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
[Bug tree-optimization/103603] [11 Regression] stack overflow on ranger for huge program, but OK for legacy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103603 Aldy Hernandez changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|11.3|--- --- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez --- The changes by Andrew in pr103254 should fix this without any need for the gimple range path changes. Are these changes portable to GCC11?
[Bug tree-optimization/103603] [11 Regression] stack overflow on ranger for huge program, but OK for legacy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103603 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.3
