This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Speed-up use-after-scope (re-writing to SSA) (version 2)
Hi!
On Thu, 26 Jan 2017 11:54:07 +0100, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 09:57:14AM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:19:33 +0100, Martin Liška <mliska@suse.cz> wrote:
> > > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/asan/use-after-scope-3.c
> > > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/asan/use-after-scope-3.c
> > > @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
> > > // { dg-do run }
> > > // { dg-shouldfail "asan" }
> > > +// { dg-additional-options "-O0" }
> >
> > As these tests per "gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/asan/asan.exp" are run with
> > "gcc-dg-runtest", which will "cycle through a list of optimization
> > options as c-torture does", is it really appropriate to hard-code "-O0"
> > here? Shouldn't instead be all testing be "dg-skip"ped (or similar)
> > unless "-O0" is in effect?
>
> Indeed, I see
> UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/asan/use-after-scope-9.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects scan-tree-dump-times asan1 "= ASAN_POISON \\\\(\\\\)" 1
> too.
>
> For that kind of thing, the standard way is to add -ffat-lto-objects.
> As for -O* in */asan/* tests, that is indeed a bug, most tests do it right.
>
> The following patch should fix that, ok for trunk?
Looks good to me (but I can't approve it, as you know).
One additional comment:
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr69276.C.jj 2016-02-04 23:14:18.000000000 +0100
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr69276.C 2017-01-26 11:40:10.490771046 +0100
> @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
> /* { dg-do run } */
> /* { dg-shouldfail "asan" } */
> -/* { dg-additional-options "-O0 -fno-lto" } */
> +/* { dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } { "*" } { "-O0" } } */
> +/* { dg-additional-options "-fno-lto" } */
Probably can get rid of that "-fno-lto", too, as "-flto" is not used
together with "-O0"?
Grüße
Thomas