Re: Fix PR middle-end/57370
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 8:47 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 12:05 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:35 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
I have a new patch that supersedes this. The new patch also fixes PR
tree-optimization/57393 and PR tree-optimization/58011. Bootstraps and
no test regression on x86_64/linux. Ok for trunk?
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Fix UID assignment and reset
of debug statements that cause inconsistent IR.
Missing ChangeLog entry for the insert_stmt_after hunk which I do not like
at all. The other hunks are ok, but we need to work harder to preserve
debug stmts - simply removing all is not going to fly.
Richard.
I looked into the problem related to the debug stmts in this failing
test case in detail. Initially, the code sequence looks
s$n_13 = MEM[(struct S *)s];
# DEBUG s$n = s$n_13
_2 = (double) s$n_13;
_4 = _2 * a_3(D);
_6 = (double) i_5(D);
_7 = _4 * _6;
_9 = (double) j_8(D);
_10 = _7 * _9;
bar (_10);
# DEBUG D#2 = (double) k_12(D)
# DEBUG D#1 = _7 * D#2
# DEBUG t$n = (int) D#1
After reassociation
s$n_13 = MEM[(struct S *)s];
# DEBUG s$n = s$n_13
_2 = (double) s$n_13;
_6 = (double) i_5(D);
# DEBUG D#3 = _4 * _6
_9 = (double) j_8(D);
_4 = _9 * _2;
_7 = _4 * a_3(D);
_10 = _7 * _6;
bar (_10);
# DEBUG D#2 = (double) k_12(D)
# DEBUG D#1 = D#3 * D#2
# DEBUG t$n = (int) D#1
In the above, # DEBUG D#3 = _4 * _6 appears above the statement that
defines _4. But even if I move the def of D#3 below the statement
defining _4, it is not sufficient. Before reassociation, t$n refers to
the expression (s$n_13 * a_3(D) * i_5(D) * k_12(D)), but after
reassociation it would refer to ( j_8(D) * s$n_13 * i_5(D) *
k_12(D)). It seems the correct fix is to discard the debug temps whose
RHS contains a variable that is involved in reassociation and then
reconstruct it. Is that the expected fix here?
The value of the DEBUG expression changes because the value
that _4 computes changes - that is a no-no that may not happen.
We cannot re-use _4 (without previously releasing it and allocating
it newly) with a new value. releasing _4 should have fixed up the
debug stmts.
So - can you verify whether we are indeed just replacing the
RHS of _4 = _2 * a_3(D) to _9 * _2 without changing the SSA name of
that expression?
I have confirmed that the SSA name of the LHS remains the same. The
reassociation code simply calls gimple_assign_set_rhs2 to modify RHS2
and then calls update_stmt.
That's definitely not allowed (though ISTR I remember that reassoc does
this kind of things :/) - it will result in wrong debug info.
Richard.
- Easwaran
Another reason why re-using the same LHS for another value is
wrong is that annotated information like points-to sets, alignment
and soon value-range information will be wrong.
Thanks,
Richard.
- Easwaran
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
PR tree-optimization/57393
PR tree-optimization/58011
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Ping.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
wrote:
A newly generated statement in build_and_add_sum function of
tree-ssa-reassoc.c has to be assigned the UID of its adjacent
statement. In one instance, it was assigned the wrong uid (of an
earlier phi statement) which messed up the IR and caused the test
program to hang. Bootstraps and no test regressions on x86_64/linux.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Do not use the UID of
a phi
node for a non-phi gimple statement.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-options -O2 -ffast-math }
+! PR middle-end/57370
+
+ SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc(e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ grad_deriv,npoints, sx)
+IMPLICIT REAL*8 (t)
+INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
+REAL(kind=dp), DIMENSION(1:npoints) :: e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+
Re: Fix PR middle-end/57370
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:35 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
I have a new patch that supersedes this. The new patch also fixes PR
tree-optimization/57393 and PR tree-optimization/58011. Bootstraps and
no test regression on x86_64/linux. Ok for trunk?
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Fix UID assignment and reset
of debug statements that cause inconsistent IR.
Missing ChangeLog entry for the insert_stmt_after hunk which I do not like
at all. The other hunks are ok, but we need to work harder to preserve
debug stmts - simply removing all is not going to fly.
Richard.
I looked into the problem related to the debug stmts in this failing
test case in detail. Initially, the code sequence looks
s$n_13 = MEM[(struct S *)s];
# DEBUG s$n = s$n_13
_2 = (double) s$n_13;
_4 = _2 * a_3(D);
_6 = (double) i_5(D);
_7 = _4 * _6;
_9 = (double) j_8(D);
_10 = _7 * _9;
bar (_10);
# DEBUG D#2 = (double) k_12(D)
# DEBUG D#1 = _7 * D#2
# DEBUG t$n = (int) D#1
After reassociation
s$n_13 = MEM[(struct S *)s];
# DEBUG s$n = s$n_13
_2 = (double) s$n_13;
_6 = (double) i_5(D);
# DEBUG D#3 = _4 * _6
_9 = (double) j_8(D);
_4 = _9 * _2;
_7 = _4 * a_3(D);
_10 = _7 * _6;
bar (_10);
# DEBUG D#2 = (double) k_12(D)
# DEBUG D#1 = D#3 * D#2
# DEBUG t$n = (int) D#1
In the above, # DEBUG D#3 = _4 * _6 appears above the statement that
defines _4. But even if I move the def of D#3 below the statement
defining _4, it is not sufficient. Before reassociation, t$n refers to
the expression (s$n_13 * a_3(D) * i_5(D) * k_12(D)), but after
reassociation it would refer to ( j_8(D) * s$n_13 * i_5(D) *
k_12(D)). It seems the correct fix is to discard the debug temps whose
RHS contains a variable that is involved in reassociation and then
reconstruct it. Is that the expected fix here?
The value of the DEBUG expression changes because the value
that _4 computes changes - that is a no-no that may not happen.
We cannot re-use _4 (without previously releasing it and allocating
it newly) with a new value. releasing _4 should have fixed up the
debug stmts.
So - can you verify whether we are indeed just replacing the
RHS of _4 = _2 * a_3(D) to _9 * _2 without changing the SSA name of
that expression?
Another reason why re-using the same LHS for another value is
wrong is that annotated information like points-to sets, alignment
and soon value-range information will be wrong.
Thanks,
Richard.
- Easwaran
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
PR tree-optimization/57393
PR tree-optimization/58011
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Ping.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
A newly generated statement in build_and_add_sum function of
tree-ssa-reassoc.c has to be assigned the UID of its adjacent
statement. In one instance, it was assigned the wrong uid (of an
earlier phi statement) which messed up the IR and caused the test
program to hang. Bootstraps and no test regressions on x86_64/linux.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Do not use the UID of a
phi
node for a non-phi gimple statement.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-options -O2 -ffast-math }
+! PR middle-end/57370
+
+ SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc(e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ grad_deriv,npoints, sx)
+IMPLICIT REAL*8 (t)
+INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
+REAL(kind=dp), DIMENSION(1:npoints) :: e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ e_ndrho_ndrho_rho
+ DO ii=1,npoints
+ IF( grad_deriv = 2 .OR. grad_deriv == -2 ) THEN
+t1425 = t233 * t557
+t1429 = beta * t225
+t1622 = t327 * t1621
+t1626 = t327 * t1625
+t1632 = t327 * t1631
+t1685 = t105 * t1684
+t2057 = t1636 + t8 * (t2635 + t3288)
+ END IF
+ IF( grad_deriv = 3 .OR. grad_deriv == -3 ) THEN
+t5469 =
Re: Fix PR middle-end/57370
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 12:05 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:35 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
I have a new patch that supersedes this. The new patch also fixes PR
tree-optimization/57393 and PR tree-optimization/58011. Bootstraps and
no test regression on x86_64/linux. Ok for trunk?
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Fix UID assignment and reset
of debug statements that cause inconsistent IR.
Missing ChangeLog entry for the insert_stmt_after hunk which I do not like
at all. The other hunks are ok, but we need to work harder to preserve
debug stmts - simply removing all is not going to fly.
Richard.
I looked into the problem related to the debug stmts in this failing
test case in detail. Initially, the code sequence looks
s$n_13 = MEM[(struct S *)s];
# DEBUG s$n = s$n_13
_2 = (double) s$n_13;
_4 = _2 * a_3(D);
_6 = (double) i_5(D);
_7 = _4 * _6;
_9 = (double) j_8(D);
_10 = _7 * _9;
bar (_10);
# DEBUG D#2 = (double) k_12(D)
# DEBUG D#1 = _7 * D#2
# DEBUG t$n = (int) D#1
After reassociation
s$n_13 = MEM[(struct S *)s];
# DEBUG s$n = s$n_13
_2 = (double) s$n_13;
_6 = (double) i_5(D);
# DEBUG D#3 = _4 * _6
_9 = (double) j_8(D);
_4 = _9 * _2;
_7 = _4 * a_3(D);
_10 = _7 * _6;
bar (_10);
# DEBUG D#2 = (double) k_12(D)
# DEBUG D#1 = D#3 * D#2
# DEBUG t$n = (int) D#1
In the above, # DEBUG D#3 = _4 * _6 appears above the statement that
defines _4. But even if I move the def of D#3 below the statement
defining _4, it is not sufficient. Before reassociation, t$n refers to
the expression (s$n_13 * a_3(D) * i_5(D) * k_12(D)), but after
reassociation it would refer to ( j_8(D) * s$n_13 * i_5(D) *
k_12(D)). It seems the correct fix is to discard the debug temps whose
RHS contains a variable that is involved in reassociation and then
reconstruct it. Is that the expected fix here?
The value of the DEBUG expression changes because the value
that _4 computes changes - that is a no-no that may not happen.
We cannot re-use _4 (without previously releasing it and allocating
it newly) with a new value. releasing _4 should have fixed up the
debug stmts.
So - can you verify whether we are indeed just replacing the
RHS of _4 = _2 * a_3(D) to _9 * _2 without changing the SSA name of
that expression?
I have confirmed that the SSA name of the LHS remains the same. The
reassociation code simply calls gimple_assign_set_rhs2 to modify RHS2
and then calls update_stmt.
- Easwaran
Another reason why re-using the same LHS for another value is
wrong is that annotated information like points-to sets, alignment
and soon value-range information will be wrong.
Thanks,
Richard.
- Easwaran
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
PR tree-optimization/57393
PR tree-optimization/58011
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Ping.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
wrote:
A newly generated statement in build_and_add_sum function of
tree-ssa-reassoc.c has to be assigned the UID of its adjacent
statement. In one instance, it was assigned the wrong uid (of an
earlier phi statement) which messed up the IR and caused the test
program to hang. Bootstraps and no test regressions on x86_64/linux.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Do not use the UID of
a phi
node for a non-phi gimple statement.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-options -O2 -ffast-math }
+! PR middle-end/57370
+
+ SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc(e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ grad_deriv,npoints, sx)
+IMPLICIT REAL*8 (t)
+INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
+REAL(kind=dp), DIMENSION(1:npoints) :: e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ e_ndrho_ndrho_rho
+ DO ii=1,npoints
+ IF( grad_deriv = 2 .OR. grad_deriv == -2 ) THEN
+t1425 = t233 * t557
+t1429 = beta * t225
+
Re: Fix PR middle-end/57370
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:35 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
I have a new patch that supersedes this. The new patch also fixes PR
tree-optimization/57393 and PR tree-optimization/58011. Bootstraps and
no test regression on x86_64/linux. Ok for trunk?
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Fix UID assignment and reset
of debug statements that cause inconsistent IR.
Missing ChangeLog entry for the insert_stmt_after hunk which I do not like
at all. The other hunks are ok, but we need to work harder to preserve
debug stmts - simply removing all is not going to fly.
Richard.
I looked into the problem related to the debug stmts in this failing
test case in detail. Initially, the code sequence looks
s$n_13 = MEM[(struct S *)s];
# DEBUG s$n = s$n_13
_2 = (double) s$n_13;
_4 = _2 * a_3(D);
_6 = (double) i_5(D);
_7 = _4 * _6;
_9 = (double) j_8(D);
_10 = _7 * _9;
bar (_10);
# DEBUG D#2 = (double) k_12(D)
# DEBUG D#1 = _7 * D#2
# DEBUG t$n = (int) D#1
After reassociation
s$n_13 = MEM[(struct S *)s];
# DEBUG s$n = s$n_13
_2 = (double) s$n_13;
_6 = (double) i_5(D);
# DEBUG D#3 = _4 * _6
_9 = (double) j_8(D);
_4 = _9 * _2;
_7 = _4 * a_3(D);
_10 = _7 * _6;
bar (_10);
# DEBUG D#2 = (double) k_12(D)
# DEBUG D#1 = D#3 * D#2
# DEBUG t$n = (int) D#1
In the above, # DEBUG D#3 = _4 * _6 appears above the statement that
defines _4. But even if I move the def of D#3 below the statement
defining _4, it is not sufficient. Before reassociation, t$n refers to
the expression (s$n_13 * a_3(D) * i_5(D) * k_12(D)), but after
reassociation it would refer to ( j_8(D) * s$n_13 * i_5(D) *
k_12(D)). It seems the correct fix is to discard the debug temps whose
RHS contains a variable that is involved in reassociation and then
reconstruct it. Is that the expected fix here?
- Easwaran
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
PR tree-optimization/57393
PR tree-optimization/58011
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Ping.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
A newly generated statement in build_and_add_sum function of
tree-ssa-reassoc.c has to be assigned the UID of its adjacent
statement. In one instance, it was assigned the wrong uid (of an
earlier phi statement) which messed up the IR and caused the test
program to hang. Bootstraps and no test regressions on x86_64/linux.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Do not use the UID of a
phi
node for a non-phi gimple statement.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-options -O2 -ffast-math }
+! PR middle-end/57370
+
+ SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc(e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ grad_deriv,npoints, sx)
+IMPLICIT REAL*8 (t)
+INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
+REAL(kind=dp), DIMENSION(1:npoints) :: e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ e_ndrho_ndrho_rho
+ DO ii=1,npoints
+ IF( grad_deriv = 2 .OR. grad_deriv == -2 ) THEN
+t1425 = t233 * t557
+t1429 = beta * t225
+t1622 = t327 * t1621
+t1626 = t327 * t1625
+t1632 = t327 * t1631
+t1685 = t105 * t1684
+t2057 = t1636 + t8 * (t2635 + t3288)
+ END IF
+ IF( grad_deriv = 3 .OR. grad_deriv == -3 ) THEN
+t5469 = t5440 - t5443 - t5446 - t5449 -
+t5451 - t5454 - t5456 + t5459 -
+t5462 + t5466 - t5468
+t5478 = 0.240e2_dp * t1616 * t973 * t645 * t1425
+t5489 = 0.16e2_dp * t1429 * t1658
+t5531 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1626
+t5533 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1632
+t5537 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1622
+t5541 = t5472 - t5478 - t5523 + t5525 +
+t5531 + t5533 + t5535 + t5537 +
+t5540
+t5565 = t112 * t1685
+t5575 = t5545 - t5548 + t5551 + t5553 -
+t5558 + t5560 - t5562 + t5564 -
+0.80e1_dp * t5565 + t5568 +
Re: Fix PR middle-end/57370
Submitted the patch (r202262) without the insert_stmt_after hunk. Also
fixed nits pointed out by Jakub.
- Easwaran
On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 2:31 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:25 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 2:30 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Richard,
Do you want me to commit everything but the insert_stmt_after hunk
now?
Yes.
There are more similar failures reported in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393 and I have attached
the updated patch there. Shall I send that for review? Apart from the
debug statement issue, almost all the bugs are due to dependence
violation because certain newly inserted statements do not have the
right UID. Instead of trying to catch all of them, will it be better
if I check if the stmt has a proper uid (non-zero if it is not the
first stmt) and assign a sensible value at the point where it is used
(find_insert_point and appears_later_in_bb) instead of where the stmt
is created? I think that would be less brittle.
In the end all this placement stuff should be reverted and done as
post-processing after reassoc is finished. You can remember the
inserted stmts that are candidates for moving (just set a pass-local
flag on them) and assign UIDs for the whole function after all stmts
are inserted.
The problem is we need sane UID values as reassoc is happening - not
after it is finished. As it process each stmt in reassoc_bb, it might
generate new stmts which might have to be compared in
find_insert_point or appears_later_in_bb.
But if you no longer find_insert_point during reassoc but instead do
a scheduling pass after it finished you won't need sane UIDs during
reassoc.
Richard.
- Easwaran
Richard.
- Easwaran
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:35 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
I have a new patch that supersedes this. The new patch also fixes PR
tree-optimization/57393 and PR tree-optimization/58011. Bootstraps and
no test regression on x86_64/linux. Ok for trunk?
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Fix UID assignment and
reset
of debug statements that cause inconsistent IR.
Missing ChangeLog entry for the insert_stmt_after hunk which I do not like
at all. The other hunks are ok, but we need to work harder to preserve
debug stmts - simply removing all is not going to fly.
Richard.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
PR tree-optimization/57393
PR tree-optimization/58011
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
wrote:
Ping.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
wrote:
A newly generated statement in build_and_add_sum function of
tree-ssa-reassoc.c has to be assigned the UID of its adjacent
statement. In one instance, it was assigned the wrong uid (of an
earlier phi statement) which messed up the IR and caused the test
program to hang. Bootstraps and no test regressions on x86_64/linux.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Do not use the UID
of a phi
node for a non-phi gimple statement.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-options -O2 -ffast-math }
+! PR middle-end/57370
+
+ SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc(e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ grad_deriv,npoints, sx)
+IMPLICIT REAL*8 (t)
+INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
+REAL(kind=dp), DIMENSION(1:npoints) :: e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ e_ndrho_ndrho_rho
+ DO ii=1,npoints
+ IF( grad_deriv = 2 .OR. grad_deriv == -2 ) THEN
+t1425 = t233 * t557
+t1429 = beta * t225
+t1622 = t327 * t1621
+t1626 = t327 * t1625
+t1632 = t327 * t1631
+t1685 = t105 * t1684
+t2057 = t1636 + t8 * (t2635 + t3288)
+ END IF
+ IF( grad_deriv = 3 .OR. grad_deriv == -3 ) THEN
+t5469 = t5440 - t5443 - t5446
Re: Fix PR middle-end/57370
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:25 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 2:30 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Richard,
Do you want me to commit everything but the insert_stmt_after hunk
now?
Yes.
There are more similar failures reported in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393 and I have attached
the updated patch there. Shall I send that for review? Apart from the
debug statement issue, almost all the bugs are due to dependence
violation because certain newly inserted statements do not have the
right UID. Instead of trying to catch all of them, will it be better
if I check if the stmt has a proper uid (non-zero if it is not the
first stmt) and assign a sensible value at the point where it is used
(find_insert_point and appears_later_in_bb) instead of where the stmt
is created? I think that would be less brittle.
In the end all this placement stuff should be reverted and done as
post-processing after reassoc is finished. You can remember the
inserted stmts that are candidates for moving (just set a pass-local
flag on them) and assign UIDs for the whole function after all stmts
are inserted.
The problem is we need sane UID values as reassoc is happening - not
after it is finished. As it process each stmt in reassoc_bb, it might
generate new stmts which might have to be compared in
find_insert_point or appears_later_in_bb.
But if you no longer find_insert_point during reassoc but instead do
a scheduling pass after it finished you won't need sane UIDs during
reassoc.
Richard.
- Easwaran
Richard.
- Easwaran
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:35 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
I have a new patch that supersedes this. The new patch also fixes PR
tree-optimization/57393 and PR tree-optimization/58011. Bootstraps and
no test regression on x86_64/linux. Ok for trunk?
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Fix UID assignment and reset
of debug statements that cause inconsistent IR.
Missing ChangeLog entry for the insert_stmt_after hunk which I do not like
at all. The other hunks are ok, but we need to work harder to preserve
debug stmts - simply removing all is not going to fly.
Richard.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
PR tree-optimization/57393
PR tree-optimization/58011
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Ping.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
wrote:
A newly generated statement in build_and_add_sum function of
tree-ssa-reassoc.c has to be assigned the UID of its adjacent
statement. In one instance, it was assigned the wrong uid (of an
earlier phi statement) which messed up the IR and caused the test
program to hang. Bootstraps and no test regressions on x86_64/linux.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Do not use the UID of
a phi
node for a non-phi gimple statement.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-options -O2 -ffast-math }
+! PR middle-end/57370
+
+ SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc(e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ grad_deriv,npoints, sx)
+IMPLICIT REAL*8 (t)
+INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
+REAL(kind=dp), DIMENSION(1:npoints) :: e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ e_ndrho_ndrho_rho
+ DO ii=1,npoints
+ IF( grad_deriv = 2 .OR. grad_deriv == -2 ) THEN
+t1425 = t233 * t557
+t1429 = beta * t225
+t1622 = t327 * t1621
+t1626 = t327 * t1625
+t1632 = t327 * t1631
+t1685 = t105 * t1684
+t2057 = t1636 + t8 * (t2635 + t3288)
+ END IF
+ IF( grad_deriv = 3 .OR. grad_deriv == -3 ) THEN
+t5469 = t5440 - t5443 - t5446 - t5449 -
+t5451 - t5454 - t5456 + t5459 -
+t5462 + t5466 - t5468
+t5478 = 0.240e2_dp * t1616 * t973 * t645 * t1425
+t5489 =
Re: Fix PR middle-end/57370
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 2:30 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Richard,
Do you want me to commit everything but the insert_stmt_after hunk
now?
Yes.
There are more similar failures reported in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393 and I have attached
the updated patch there. Shall I send that for review? Apart from the
debug statement issue, almost all the bugs are due to dependence
violation because certain newly inserted statements do not have the
right UID. Instead of trying to catch all of them, will it be better
if I check if the stmt has a proper uid (non-zero if it is not the
first stmt) and assign a sensible value at the point where it is used
(find_insert_point and appears_later_in_bb) instead of where the stmt
is created? I think that would be less brittle.
In the end all this placement stuff should be reverted and done as
post-processing after reassoc is finished. You can remember the
inserted stmts that are candidates for moving (just set a pass-local
flag on them) and assign UIDs for the whole function after all stmts
are inserted.
Richard.
- Easwaran
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:35 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
I have a new patch that supersedes this. The new patch also fixes PR
tree-optimization/57393 and PR tree-optimization/58011. Bootstraps and
no test regression on x86_64/linux. Ok for trunk?
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Fix UID assignment and reset
of debug statements that cause inconsistent IR.
Missing ChangeLog entry for the insert_stmt_after hunk which I do not like
at all. The other hunks are ok, but we need to work harder to preserve
debug stmts - simply removing all is not going to fly.
Richard.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
PR tree-optimization/57393
PR tree-optimization/58011
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Ping.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
A newly generated statement in build_and_add_sum function of
tree-ssa-reassoc.c has to be assigned the UID of its adjacent
statement. In one instance, it was assigned the wrong uid (of an
earlier phi statement) which messed up the IR and caused the test
program to hang. Bootstraps and no test regressions on x86_64/linux.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Do not use the UID of a
phi
node for a non-phi gimple statement.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-options -O2 -ffast-math }
+! PR middle-end/57370
+
+ SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc(e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ grad_deriv,npoints, sx)
+IMPLICIT REAL*8 (t)
+INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
+REAL(kind=dp), DIMENSION(1:npoints) :: e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ e_ndrho_ndrho_rho
+ DO ii=1,npoints
+ IF( grad_deriv = 2 .OR. grad_deriv == -2 ) THEN
+t1425 = t233 * t557
+t1429 = beta * t225
+t1622 = t327 * t1621
+t1626 = t327 * t1625
+t1632 = t327 * t1631
+t1685 = t105 * t1684
+t2057 = t1636 + t8 * (t2635 + t3288)
+ END IF
+ IF( grad_deriv = 3 .OR. grad_deriv == -3 ) THEN
+t5469 = t5440 - t5443 - t5446 - t5449 -
+t5451 - t5454 - t5456 + t5459 -
+t5462 + t5466 - t5468
+t5478 = 0.240e2_dp * t1616 * t973 * t645 * t1425
+t5489 = 0.16e2_dp * t1429 * t1658
+t5531 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1626
+t5533 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1632
+t5537 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1622
+t5541 = t5472 - t5478 - t5523 + t5525 +
+t5531 + t5533 + t5535 + t5537 +
+t5540
+t5565 = t112 * t1685
+t5575 = t5545 - t5548 + t5551 + t5553 -
+t5558 + t5560 - t5562 + t5564 -
+0.80e1_dp * t5565 + t5568 + t5572 +
+t5574
+t5611 = t5579 - t5585 +
Re: Fix PR middle-end/57370
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:25 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 2:30 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Richard,
Do you want me to commit everything but the insert_stmt_after hunk
now?
Yes.
There are more similar failures reported in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393 and I have attached
the updated patch there. Shall I send that for review? Apart from the
debug statement issue, almost all the bugs are due to dependence
violation because certain newly inserted statements do not have the
right UID. Instead of trying to catch all of them, will it be better
if I check if the stmt has a proper uid (non-zero if it is not the
first stmt) and assign a sensible value at the point where it is used
(find_insert_point and appears_later_in_bb) instead of where the stmt
is created? I think that would be less brittle.
In the end all this placement stuff should be reverted and done as
post-processing after reassoc is finished. You can remember the
inserted stmts that are candidates for moving (just set a pass-local
flag on them) and assign UIDs for the whole function after all stmts
are inserted.
The problem is we need sane UID values as reassoc is happening - not
after it is finished. As it process each stmt in reassoc_bb, it might
generate new stmts which might have to be compared in
find_insert_point or appears_later_in_bb.
- Easwaran
Richard.
- Easwaran
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:35 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
I have a new patch that supersedes this. The new patch also fixes PR
tree-optimization/57393 and PR tree-optimization/58011. Bootstraps and
no test regression on x86_64/linux. Ok for trunk?
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Fix UID assignment and reset
of debug statements that cause inconsistent IR.
Missing ChangeLog entry for the insert_stmt_after hunk which I do not like
at all. The other hunks are ok, but we need to work harder to preserve
debug stmts - simply removing all is not going to fly.
Richard.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
PR tree-optimization/57393
PR tree-optimization/58011
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Ping.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
wrote:
A newly generated statement in build_and_add_sum function of
tree-ssa-reassoc.c has to be assigned the UID of its adjacent
statement. In one instance, it was assigned the wrong uid (of an
earlier phi statement) which messed up the IR and caused the test
program to hang. Bootstraps and no test regressions on x86_64/linux.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Do not use the UID of
a phi
node for a non-phi gimple statement.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-options -O2 -ffast-math }
+! PR middle-end/57370
+
+ SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc(e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ grad_deriv,npoints, sx)
+IMPLICIT REAL*8 (t)
+INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
+REAL(kind=dp), DIMENSION(1:npoints) :: e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ e_ndrho_ndrho_rho
+ DO ii=1,npoints
+ IF( grad_deriv = 2 .OR. grad_deriv == -2 ) THEN
+t1425 = t233 * t557
+t1429 = beta * t225
+t1622 = t327 * t1621
+t1626 = t327 * t1625
+t1632 = t327 * t1631
+t1685 = t105 * t1684
+t2057 = t1636 + t8 * (t2635 + t3288)
+ END IF
+ IF( grad_deriv = 3 .OR. grad_deriv == -3 ) THEN
+t5469 = t5440 - t5443 - t5446 - t5449 -
+t5451 - t5454 - t5456 + t5459 -
+t5462 + t5466 - t5468
+t5478 = 0.240e2_dp * t1616 * t973 * t645 * t1425
+t5489 = 0.16e2_dp * t1429 * t1658
+t5531 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1626
+t5533 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1632
+t5537 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1622
+t5541 = t5472 - t5478 - t5523 + t5525 +
+
Re: Fix PR middle-end/57370
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 09:13:34AM -0700, Easwaran Raman wrote: There are more similar failures reported in http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393 and I have attached the updated patch there. Shall I send that for review? Apart from the debug statement issue, almost all the bugs are due to dependence violation because certain newly inserted statements do not have the right UID. Instead of trying to catch all of them, will it be better if I check if the stmt has a proper uid (non-zero if it is not the first stmt) and assign a sensible value at the point where it is used (find_insert_point and appears_later_in_bb) instead of where the stmt is created? I think that would be less brittle. In the end all this placement stuff should be reverted and done as post-processing after reassoc is finished. You can remember the inserted stmts that are candidates for moving (just set a pass-local flag on them) and assign UIDs for the whole function after all stmts are inserted. The problem is we need sane UID values as reassoc is happening - not after it is finished. As it process each stmt in reassoc_bb, it might generate new stmts which might have to be compared in find_insert_point or appears_later_in_bb. A new stmt will be created with UID 0 and in case there is stmt movement, you could zero the UID during movement. Then, you can just special case UID zero when you are looking at UIDs. As on trunk/4.8 gsi_for_stmt is O(1), you can easily walk a couple of previous and/or later stmts and look for the first non-zero UID around it, and treat it as if the UID was previous non-zero UID + 0.5 or next non-zero UID - 0.5. And, if you see too many consecutive statements with UID 0 (more than some constant, 32?), just reassign UIDs to the whole bb. Or you could initially assign UIDs with some gaps, then keep filling those gaps and once you fill them, renumber again with new gaps. Jakub
Re: Fix PR middle-end/57370
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 09:49:59AM -0700, Easwaran Raman wrote:
Yes, this is pretty much what I was proposing. The current
implementation doesn't rely on UIDs being unique - they only have to
be monotonically non-decreasing. So, when a UID of 0 is encountered,
go up till a non-zero UID is found and then go down and assign this
non-zero UID. This effectively implies that each UID-0 stmt is visited
at most twice. I don't think we need to check if I see more than
certain number of UID-0 stmts and redo the entire BB.
Sure, renumbering the entire BB would be only for compile time reasons;
if you end up with a huge bb where 90% of stmts will have the same UID,
it is as if you weren't using UIDs at all and always walked the entire BB
to find out what stmt precedes what. You could spend a lot of time in
appears_later_in_bb.
Looking at the code, couple of nits:
return ((bb_a == bb_b gimple_uid (a) gimple_uid (b))
extra space before .
gsi_next (gsi);
if (gsi_end_p (gsi))
return stmt1;
for (; !gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next (gsi))
{
...
}
return stmt1;
Why not just for (gsi_next (gsi); !gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next (gsi)) ?
The extra if (gsi_end_p (gsi)) return stmt1; doesn't make any sense
when the loop does exactly that too.
And for the debug stmts, are you sure you are resetting only those debug
stmts which you have to reset? I mean, if there are say debug stmts using
the SSA_NAME in other bb, it doesn't need to be reset (unless you reuse
the same SSA_NAME for something else), and the compiler even has code
to reconstruct SSA_NAMEs that have been removed, but were still referenced
in debug stmts, using expressions in debug stmts and debug temporaries.
Jakub
Re: Fix PR middle-end/57370
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote: On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 09:13:34AM -0700, Easwaran Raman wrote: There are more similar failures reported in http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393 and I have attached the updated patch there. Shall I send that for review? Apart from the debug statement issue, almost all the bugs are due to dependence violation because certain newly inserted statements do not have the right UID. Instead of trying to catch all of them, will it be better if I check if the stmt has a proper uid (non-zero if it is not the first stmt) and assign a sensible value at the point where it is used (find_insert_point and appears_later_in_bb) instead of where the stmt is created? I think that would be less brittle. In the end all this placement stuff should be reverted and done as post-processing after reassoc is finished. You can remember the inserted stmts that are candidates for moving (just set a pass-local flag on them) and assign UIDs for the whole function after all stmts are inserted. The problem is we need sane UID values as reassoc is happening - not after it is finished. As it process each stmt in reassoc_bb, it might generate new stmts which might have to be compared in find_insert_point or appears_later_in_bb. A new stmt will be created with UID 0 and in case there is stmt movement, you could zero the UID during movement. Then, you can just special case UID zero when you are looking at UIDs. As on trunk/4.8 gsi_for_stmt is O(1), you can easily walk a couple of previous and/or later stmts and look for the first non-zero UID around it, and treat it as if the UID was previous non-zero UID + 0.5 or next non-zero UID - 0.5. And, if you see too many consecutive statements with UID 0 (more than some constant, 32?), just reassign UIDs to the whole bb. Or you could initially assign UIDs with some gaps, then keep filling those gaps and once you fill them, renumber again with new gaps. Jakub Yes, this is pretty much what I was proposing. The current implementation doesn't rely on UIDs being unique - they only have to be monotonically non-decreasing. So, when a UID of 0 is encountered, go up till a non-zero UID is found and then go down and assign this non-zero UID. This effectively implies that each UID-0 stmt is visited at most twice. I don't think we need to check if I see more than certain number of UID-0 stmts and redo the entire BB. - Easwaran
Re: Fix PR middle-end/57370
Richard,
Do you want me to commit everything but the insert_stmt_after hunk
now? There are more similar failures reported in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393 and I have attached
the updated patch there. Shall I send that for review? Apart from the
debug statement issue, almost all the bugs are due to dependence
violation because certain newly inserted statements do not have the
right UID. Instead of trying to catch all of them, will it be better
if I check if the stmt has a proper uid (non-zero if it is not the
first stmt) and assign a sensible value at the point where it is used
(find_insert_point and appears_later_in_bb) instead of where the stmt
is created? I think that would be less brittle.
- Easwaran
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:35 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
I have a new patch that supersedes this. The new patch also fixes PR
tree-optimization/57393 and PR tree-optimization/58011. Bootstraps and
no test regression on x86_64/linux. Ok for trunk?
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Fix UID assignment and reset
of debug statements that cause inconsistent IR.
Missing ChangeLog entry for the insert_stmt_after hunk which I do not like
at all. The other hunks are ok, but we need to work harder to preserve
debug stmts - simply removing all is not going to fly.
Richard.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
PR tree-optimization/57393
PR tree-optimization/58011
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Ping.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
A newly generated statement in build_and_add_sum function of
tree-ssa-reassoc.c has to be assigned the UID of its adjacent
statement. In one instance, it was assigned the wrong uid (of an
earlier phi statement) which messed up the IR and caused the test
program to hang. Bootstraps and no test regressions on x86_64/linux.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Do not use the UID of a
phi
node for a non-phi gimple statement.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-options -O2 -ffast-math }
+! PR middle-end/57370
+
+ SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc(e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ grad_deriv,npoints, sx)
+IMPLICIT REAL*8 (t)
+INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
+REAL(kind=dp), DIMENSION(1:npoints) :: e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ e_ndrho_ndrho_rho
+ DO ii=1,npoints
+ IF( grad_deriv = 2 .OR. grad_deriv == -2 ) THEN
+t1425 = t233 * t557
+t1429 = beta * t225
+t1622 = t327 * t1621
+t1626 = t327 * t1625
+t1632 = t327 * t1631
+t1685 = t105 * t1684
+t2057 = t1636 + t8 * (t2635 + t3288)
+ END IF
+ IF( grad_deriv = 3 .OR. grad_deriv == -3 ) THEN
+t5469 = t5440 - t5443 - t5446 - t5449 -
+t5451 - t5454 - t5456 + t5459 -
+t5462 + t5466 - t5468
+t5478 = 0.240e2_dp * t1616 * t973 * t645 * t1425
+t5489 = 0.16e2_dp * t1429 * t1658
+t5531 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1626
+t5533 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1632
+t5537 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1622
+t5541 = t5472 - t5478 - t5523 + t5525 +
+t5531 + t5533 + t5535 + t5537 +
+t5540
+t5565 = t112 * t1685
+t5575 = t5545 - t5548 + t5551 + t5553 -
+t5558 + t5560 - t5562 + t5564 -
+0.80e1_dp * t5565 + t5568 + t5572 +
+t5574
+t5611 = t5579 - t5585 + t5590 - t5595 +
+t5597 - t5602 + t5604 + t5607 +
+t5610
+t5613 = t5469 + t5541 + t5575 + t5611
+t6223 = t6189 -
+0.36e0_dp * t83 * t84 * t5613 +
+t6222
+t6227 = - t8 * (t5305 + t6223)
+e_ndrho_ndrho_rho(ii) = e_ndrho_ndrho_rho(ii) +
+
Re: Fix PR middle-end/57370
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
I have a new patch that supersedes this. The new patch also fixes PR
tree-optimization/57393 and PR tree-optimization/58011. Bootstraps and
no test regression on x86_64/linux. Ok for trunk?
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Fix UID assignment and reset
of debug statements that cause inconsistent IR.
Missing ChangeLog entry for the insert_stmt_after hunk which I do not like
at all. The other hunks are ok, but we need to work harder to preserve
debug stmts - simply removing all is not going to fly.
Richard.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
PR tree-optimization/57393
PR tree-optimization/58011
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Ping.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
A newly generated statement in build_and_add_sum function of
tree-ssa-reassoc.c has to be assigned the UID of its adjacent
statement. In one instance, it was assigned the wrong uid (of an
earlier phi statement) which messed up the IR and caused the test
program to hang. Bootstraps and no test regressions on x86_64/linux.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Do not use the UID of a
phi
node for a non-phi gimple statement.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-options -O2 -ffast-math }
+! PR middle-end/57370
+
+ SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc(e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ grad_deriv,npoints, sx)
+IMPLICIT REAL*8 (t)
+INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
+REAL(kind=dp), DIMENSION(1:npoints) :: e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ e_ndrho_ndrho_rho
+ DO ii=1,npoints
+ IF( grad_deriv = 2 .OR. grad_deriv == -2 ) THEN
+t1425 = t233 * t557
+t1429 = beta * t225
+t1622 = t327 * t1621
+t1626 = t327 * t1625
+t1632 = t327 * t1631
+t1685 = t105 * t1684
+t2057 = t1636 + t8 * (t2635 + t3288)
+ END IF
+ IF( grad_deriv = 3 .OR. grad_deriv == -3 ) THEN
+t5469 = t5440 - t5443 - t5446 - t5449 -
+t5451 - t5454 - t5456 + t5459 -
+t5462 + t5466 - t5468
+t5478 = 0.240e2_dp * t1616 * t973 * t645 * t1425
+t5489 = 0.16e2_dp * t1429 * t1658
+t5531 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1626
+t5533 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1632
+t5537 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1622
+t5541 = t5472 - t5478 - t5523 + t5525 +
+t5531 + t5533 + t5535 + t5537 +
+t5540
+t5565 = t112 * t1685
+t5575 = t5545 - t5548 + t5551 + t5553 -
+t5558 + t5560 - t5562 + t5564 -
+0.80e1_dp * t5565 + t5568 + t5572 +
+t5574
+t5611 = t5579 - t5585 + t5590 - t5595 +
+t5597 - t5602 + t5604 + t5607 +
+t5610
+t5613 = t5469 + t5541 + t5575 + t5611
+t6223 = t6189 -
+0.36e0_dp * t83 * t84 * t5613 +
+t6222
+t6227 = - t8 * (t5305 + t6223)
+e_ndrho_ndrho_rho(ii) = e_ndrho_ndrho_rho(ii) +
+ t6227 * sx
+t6352 = t5440 - t5443 - t5446 - t5449 -
+t5451 - t5454 +
+0.40e1_dp * t102 * t327 * t2057 * t557 -
+t5456 + t5459 - t5462 + t5466 -
+t5468
+t6363 = t5480 - t5489 +
+0.96e2_dp * t1054 * t640 * t3679
+t6367 = t5472 - t5474 - t5478 - t5523 +
+t5525 + t5531 + t5533 + t5535 +
+t5537 - 0.20e1_dp * t102 * t105 * t6363 +
+t5540
+t6370 = t5545 - t5548 + t5551 + t5553 -
+t5558 + t5560 - t5562 + t5564 -
+0.40e1_dp * t5565 +
+t5568 + t5572 + t5574
+t6373 = t5579 - t5585 + t5590 - t5595 +
Re: Fix PR middle-end/57370
Ping.
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
I have a new patch that supersedes this. The new patch also fixes PR
tree-optimization/57393 and PR tree-optimization/58011. Bootstraps and
no test regression on x86_64/linux. Ok for trunk?
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Fix UID assignment and reset
of debug statements that cause inconsistent IR.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
PR tree-optimization/57393
PR tree-optimization/58011
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Ping.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
A newly generated statement in build_and_add_sum function of
tree-ssa-reassoc.c has to be assigned the UID of its adjacent
statement. In one instance, it was assigned the wrong uid (of an
earlier phi statement) which messed up the IR and caused the test
program to hang. Bootstraps and no test regressions on x86_64/linux.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Do not use the UID of a
phi
node for a non-phi gimple statement.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-options -O2 -ffast-math }
+! PR middle-end/57370
+
+ SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc(e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ grad_deriv,npoints, sx)
+IMPLICIT REAL*8 (t)
+INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
+REAL(kind=dp), DIMENSION(1:npoints) :: e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ e_ndrho_ndrho_rho
+ DO ii=1,npoints
+ IF( grad_deriv = 2 .OR. grad_deriv == -2 ) THEN
+t1425 = t233 * t557
+t1429 = beta * t225
+t1622 = t327 * t1621
+t1626 = t327 * t1625
+t1632 = t327 * t1631
+t1685 = t105 * t1684
+t2057 = t1636 + t8 * (t2635 + t3288)
+ END IF
+ IF( grad_deriv = 3 .OR. grad_deriv == -3 ) THEN
+t5469 = t5440 - t5443 - t5446 - t5449 -
+t5451 - t5454 - t5456 + t5459 -
+t5462 + t5466 - t5468
+t5478 = 0.240e2_dp * t1616 * t973 * t645 * t1425
+t5489 = 0.16e2_dp * t1429 * t1658
+t5531 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1626
+t5533 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1632
+t5537 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1622
+t5541 = t5472 - t5478 - t5523 + t5525 +
+t5531 + t5533 + t5535 + t5537 +
+t5540
+t5565 = t112 * t1685
+t5575 = t5545 - t5548 + t5551 + t5553 -
+t5558 + t5560 - t5562 + t5564 -
+0.80e1_dp * t5565 + t5568 + t5572 +
+t5574
+t5611 = t5579 - t5585 + t5590 - t5595 +
+t5597 - t5602 + t5604 + t5607 +
+t5610
+t5613 = t5469 + t5541 + t5575 + t5611
+t6223 = t6189 -
+0.36e0_dp * t83 * t84 * t5613 +
+t6222
+t6227 = - t8 * (t5305 + t6223)
+e_ndrho_ndrho_rho(ii) = e_ndrho_ndrho_rho(ii) +
+ t6227 * sx
+t6352 = t5440 - t5443 - t5446 - t5449 -
+t5451 - t5454 +
+0.40e1_dp * t102 * t327 * t2057 * t557 -
+t5456 + t5459 - t5462 + t5466 -
+t5468
+t6363 = t5480 - t5489 +
+0.96e2_dp * t1054 * t640 * t3679
+t6367 = t5472 - t5474 - t5478 - t5523 +
+t5525 + t5531 + t5533 + t5535 +
+t5537 - 0.20e1_dp * t102 * t105 * t6363 +
+t5540
+t6370 = t5545 - t5548 + t5551 + t5553 -
+t5558 + t5560 - t5562 + t5564 -
+0.40e1_dp * t5565 +
+t5568 + t5572 + t5574
+t6373 = t5579 - t5585 + t5590 - t5595 +
+t5597 - t5602 + t5604 + t5607 +
+t5610
+t6375 = t6352 + t6367 + t6370 + t6373
+t6380 = - 0.36e0_dp * t83 * t84 * t6375 + t5701
Re: Fix PR middle-end/57370
I have a new patch that supersedes this. The new patch also fixes PR
tree-optimization/57393 and PR tree-optimization/58011. Bootstraps and
no test regression on x86_64/linux. Ok for trunk?
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Fix UID assignment and reset
of debug statements that cause inconsistent IR.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
PR tree-optimization/57393
PR tree-optimization/58011
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-31.c: New testcase.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Ping.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
A newly generated statement in build_and_add_sum function of
tree-ssa-reassoc.c has to be assigned the UID of its adjacent
statement. In one instance, it was assigned the wrong uid (of an
earlier phi statement) which messed up the IR and caused the test
program to hang. Bootstraps and no test regressions on x86_64/linux.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Do not use the UID of a phi
node for a non-phi gimple statement.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-options -O2 -ffast-math }
+! PR middle-end/57370
+
+ SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc(e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ grad_deriv,npoints, sx)
+IMPLICIT REAL*8 (t)
+INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
+REAL(kind=dp), DIMENSION(1:npoints) :: e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ e_ndrho_ndrho_rho
+ DO ii=1,npoints
+ IF( grad_deriv = 2 .OR. grad_deriv == -2 ) THEN
+t1425 = t233 * t557
+t1429 = beta * t225
+t1622 = t327 * t1621
+t1626 = t327 * t1625
+t1632 = t327 * t1631
+t1685 = t105 * t1684
+t2057 = t1636 + t8 * (t2635 + t3288)
+ END IF
+ IF( grad_deriv = 3 .OR. grad_deriv == -3 ) THEN
+t5469 = t5440 - t5443 - t5446 - t5449 -
+t5451 - t5454 - t5456 + t5459 -
+t5462 + t5466 - t5468
+t5478 = 0.240e2_dp * t1616 * t973 * t645 * t1425
+t5489 = 0.16e2_dp * t1429 * t1658
+t5531 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1626
+t5533 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1632
+t5537 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1622
+t5541 = t5472 - t5478 - t5523 + t5525 +
+t5531 + t5533 + t5535 + t5537 +
+t5540
+t5565 = t112 * t1685
+t5575 = t5545 - t5548 + t5551 + t5553 -
+t5558 + t5560 - t5562 + t5564 -
+0.80e1_dp * t5565 + t5568 + t5572 +
+t5574
+t5611 = t5579 - t5585 + t5590 - t5595 +
+t5597 - t5602 + t5604 + t5607 +
+t5610
+t5613 = t5469 + t5541 + t5575 + t5611
+t6223 = t6189 -
+0.36e0_dp * t83 * t84 * t5613 +
+t6222
+t6227 = - t8 * (t5305 + t6223)
+e_ndrho_ndrho_rho(ii) = e_ndrho_ndrho_rho(ii) +
+ t6227 * sx
+t6352 = t5440 - t5443 - t5446 - t5449 -
+t5451 - t5454 +
+0.40e1_dp * t102 * t327 * t2057 * t557 -
+t5456 + t5459 - t5462 + t5466 -
+t5468
+t6363 = t5480 - t5489 +
+0.96e2_dp * t1054 * t640 * t3679
+t6367 = t5472 - t5474 - t5478 - t5523 +
+t5525 + t5531 + t5533 + t5535 +
+t5537 - 0.20e1_dp * t102 * t105 * t6363 +
+t5540
+t6370 = t5545 - t5548 + t5551 + t5553 -
+t5558 + t5560 - t5562 + t5564 -
+0.40e1_dp * t5565 +
+t5568 + t5572 + t5574
+t6373 = t5579 - t5585 + t5590 - t5595 +
+t5597 - t5602 + t5604 + t5607 +
+t5610
+t6375 = t6352 + t6367 + t6370 + t6373
+t6380 = - 0.36e0_dp * t83 * t84 * t6375 + t5701
+t6669 = -t4704 - t8 * (t6344 + t6380 + t6665)
+e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho(ii)
Re: Fix PR middle-end/57370
Ping.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
A newly generated statement in build_and_add_sum function of
tree-ssa-reassoc.c has to be assigned the UID of its adjacent
statement. In one instance, it was assigned the wrong uid (of an
earlier phi statement) which messed up the IR and caused the test
program to hang. Bootstraps and no test regressions on x86_64/linux.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Do not use the UID of a phi
node for a non-phi gimple statement.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-options -O2 -ffast-math }
+! PR middle-end/57370
+
+ SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc(e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ grad_deriv,npoints, sx)
+IMPLICIT REAL*8 (t)
+INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
+REAL(kind=dp), DIMENSION(1:npoints) :: e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ e_ndrho_ndrho_rho
+ DO ii=1,npoints
+ IF( grad_deriv = 2 .OR. grad_deriv == -2 ) THEN
+t1425 = t233 * t557
+t1429 = beta * t225
+t1622 = t327 * t1621
+t1626 = t327 * t1625
+t1632 = t327 * t1631
+t1685 = t105 * t1684
+t2057 = t1636 + t8 * (t2635 + t3288)
+ END IF
+ IF( grad_deriv = 3 .OR. grad_deriv == -3 ) THEN
+t5469 = t5440 - t5443 - t5446 - t5449 -
+t5451 - t5454 - t5456 + t5459 -
+t5462 + t5466 - t5468
+t5478 = 0.240e2_dp * t1616 * t973 * t645 * t1425
+t5489 = 0.16e2_dp * t1429 * t1658
+t5531 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1626
+t5533 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1632
+t5537 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1622
+t5541 = t5472 - t5478 - t5523 + t5525 +
+t5531 + t5533 + t5535 + t5537 +
+t5540
+t5565 = t112 * t1685
+t5575 = t5545 - t5548 + t5551 + t5553 -
+t5558 + t5560 - t5562 + t5564 -
+0.80e1_dp * t5565 + t5568 + t5572 +
+t5574
+t5611 = t5579 - t5585 + t5590 - t5595 +
+t5597 - t5602 + t5604 + t5607 +
+t5610
+t5613 = t5469 + t5541 + t5575 + t5611
+t6223 = t6189 -
+0.36e0_dp * t83 * t84 * t5613 +
+t6222
+t6227 = - t8 * (t5305 + t6223)
+e_ndrho_ndrho_rho(ii) = e_ndrho_ndrho_rho(ii) +
+ t6227 * sx
+t6352 = t5440 - t5443 - t5446 - t5449 -
+t5451 - t5454 +
+0.40e1_dp * t102 * t327 * t2057 * t557 -
+t5456 + t5459 - t5462 + t5466 -
+t5468
+t6363 = t5480 - t5489 +
+0.96e2_dp * t1054 * t640 * t3679
+t6367 = t5472 - t5474 - t5478 - t5523 +
+t5525 + t5531 + t5533 + t5535 +
+t5537 - 0.20e1_dp * t102 * t105 * t6363 +
+t5540
+t6370 = t5545 - t5548 + t5551 + t5553 -
+t5558 + t5560 - t5562 + t5564 -
+0.40e1_dp * t5565 +
+t5568 + t5572 + t5574
+t6373 = t5579 - t5585 + t5590 - t5595 +
+t5597 - t5602 + t5604 + t5607 +
+t5610
+t6375 = t6352 + t6367 + t6370 + t6373
+t6380 = - 0.36e0_dp * t83 * t84 * t6375 + t5701
+t6669 = -t4704 - t8 * (t6344 + t6380 + t6665)
+e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho(ii) = e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho(ii) +
+ t6669 * sx
+ END IF
+ END DO
+ END SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc
+
Index: gcc/tree-ssa-reassoc.c
===
--- gcc/tree-ssa-reassoc.c(revision 200429)
+++ gcc/tree-ssa-reassoc.c(working copy)
@@ -1207,7 +1207,7 @@ build_and_add_sum (tree type, tree op1, tree op2,
if (gimple_code (op1def) == GIMPLE_PHI)
{
gsi = gsi_after_labels (gimple_bb (op1def));
- gimple_set_uid (sum, gimple_uid (op1def));
+ gimple_set_uid (sum, gimple_uid (gsi_stmt (gsi)));
gsi_insert_before (gsi, sum, GSI_NEW_STMT);
}
else
Fix PR middle-end/57370
A newly generated statement in build_and_add_sum function of
tree-ssa-reassoc.c has to be assigned the UID of its adjacent
statement. In one instance, it was assigned the wrong uid (of an
earlier phi statement) which messed up the IR and caused the test
program to hang. Bootstraps and no test regressions on x86_64/linux.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Do not use the UID of a phi
node for a non-phi gimple statement.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90: New testcase.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reassoc_12.f90 (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-options -O2 -ffast-math }
+! PR middle-end/57370
+
+ SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc(e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ grad_deriv,npoints, sx)
+IMPLICIT REAL*8 (t)
+INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
+REAL(kind=dp), DIMENSION(1:npoints) :: e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho,
+ e_ndrho_ndrho_rho
+ DO ii=1,npoints
+ IF( grad_deriv = 2 .OR. grad_deriv == -2 ) THEN
+t1425 = t233 * t557
+t1429 = beta * t225
+t1622 = t327 * t1621
+t1626 = t327 * t1625
+t1632 = t327 * t1631
+t1685 = t105 * t1684
+t2057 = t1636 + t8 * (t2635 + t3288)
+ END IF
+ IF( grad_deriv = 3 .OR. grad_deriv == -3 ) THEN
+t5469 = t5440 - t5443 - t5446 - t5449 -
+t5451 - t5454 - t5456 + t5459 -
+t5462 + t5466 - t5468
+t5478 = 0.240e2_dp * t1616 * t973 * t645 * t1425
+t5489 = 0.16e2_dp * t1429 * t1658
+t5531 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1626
+t5533 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1632
+t5537 = 0.160e2_dp * t112 * t1622
+t5541 = t5472 - t5478 - t5523 + t5525 +
+t5531 + t5533 + t5535 + t5537 +
+t5540
+t5565 = t112 * t1685
+t5575 = t5545 - t5548 + t5551 + t5553 -
+t5558 + t5560 - t5562 + t5564 -
+0.80e1_dp * t5565 + t5568 + t5572 +
+t5574
+t5611 = t5579 - t5585 + t5590 - t5595 +
+t5597 - t5602 + t5604 + t5607 +
+t5610
+t5613 = t5469 + t5541 + t5575 + t5611
+t6223 = t6189 -
+0.36e0_dp * t83 * t84 * t5613 +
+t6222
+t6227 = - t8 * (t5305 + t6223)
+e_ndrho_ndrho_rho(ii) = e_ndrho_ndrho_rho(ii) +
+ t6227 * sx
+t6352 = t5440 - t5443 - t5446 - t5449 -
+t5451 - t5454 +
+0.40e1_dp * t102 * t327 * t2057 * t557 -
+t5456 + t5459 - t5462 + t5466 -
+t5468
+t6363 = t5480 - t5489 +
+0.96e2_dp * t1054 * t640 * t3679
+t6367 = t5472 - t5474 - t5478 - t5523 +
+t5525 + t5531 + t5533 + t5535 +
+t5537 - 0.20e1_dp * t102 * t105 * t6363 +
+t5540
+t6370 = t5545 - t5548 + t5551 + t5553 -
+t5558 + t5560 - t5562 + t5564 -
+0.40e1_dp * t5565 +
+t5568 + t5572 + t5574
+t6373 = t5579 - t5585 + t5590 - t5595 +
+t5597 - t5602 + t5604 + t5607 +
+t5610
+t6375 = t6352 + t6367 + t6370 + t6373
+t6380 = - 0.36e0_dp * t83 * t84 * t6375 + t5701
+t6669 = -t4704 - t8 * (t6344 + t6380 + t6665)
+e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho(ii) = e_ndrho_ndrho_ndrho(ii) +
+ t6669 * sx
+ END IF
+ END DO
+ END SUBROUTINE xb88_lr_adiabatic_lda_calc
+
Index: gcc/tree-ssa-reassoc.c
===
--- gcc/tree-ssa-reassoc.c(revision 200429)
+++ gcc/tree-ssa-reassoc.c(working copy)
@@ -1207,7 +1207,7 @@ build_and_add_sum (tree type, tree op1, tree op2,
if (gimple_code (op1def) == GIMPLE_PHI)
{
gsi = gsi_after_labels (gimple_bb (op1def));
- gimple_set_uid (sum, gimple_uid (op1def));
+ gimple_set_uid (sum, gimple_uid (gsi_stmt (gsi)));
gsi_insert_before (gsi, sum, GSI_NEW_STMT);
}
else
