This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: PR middle-end/53321: [4.8 Regression] LTO bootstrap failed with bootstrap-profiled
- From: Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
- Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 12:23:53 +0200
- Subject: Re: PR middle-end/53321: [4.8 Regression] LTO bootstrap failed with bootstrap-profiled
- References: <20120707040814.GA23165@intel.com> <20120731123923.GA14617@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <CAMe9rOomcm3rt-pTxZ_B_1NrQgp2kf4yfRL2A21mFpP-6ULDfA@mail.gmail.com>
>
> This patch works passed profiledbootstrap with LTO as well as LTO -O3
> on 176.gcc in SPEC CPU 2000. I have to add 2 inline_edge_summary_vec
> checks to avoid ICE. OK to install?
Thanks, it looks good. I am just concerned about...
> diff --git a/gcc/ipa-split.c b/gcc/ipa-split.c
> index 33cf7d2..7a8844f 100644
> --- a/gcc/ipa-split.c
> +++ b/gcc/ipa-split.c
> @@ -1415,7 +1415,7 @@ execute_split_functions (void)
> }
> /* This can be relaxed; function might become inlinable after splitting
> away the uninlinable part. */
> - if (!inline_summary (node)->inlinable)
> + if (inline_edge_summary_vec && !inline_summary (node)->inlinable)
.. this one. spliting is executed before free_inline_summary and thus should
not be affected. Or is it because of it gets called from process_new_functions
because some IPA pass adds a new function?
If so, I think we need to make sure that process_new_function do not make inline summary
allocated when it was previously free (and thus hunk would be OK).
Honza