This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Bug in CFG or CD-DCE?
On Wednesday 14 July 2004 03:17, Devang Patel wrote:
> On Jul 13, 2004, at 4:02 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> > On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 06:53, Diego Novillo wrote:
> >> On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 03:46, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> >>> Whether there's a FALLTHRU edge or not is irrelevant. Block L22
> >>> is not control dependent on block L41, itt is control dependent on
> >>> block L26.
> >> Exactly. Though, I did try clearing/recomputing PDOM info. That's
> >> where the bug may be, ultimately.
> > Wait. I don't think that's right. This code is testing CD with PDOM.
> > In this case, block L22 *does* post-dominate block L41.
> I do not know if it is useful or not but it is possible that cd-dce
> receives stale post dominator graph through calculate_dominance_info
> My fix was to free post dominators at the end of the pass that
> post dominators
Freeing did not help in this case. I also thought that this was the
most likely cause of the problem, but it's not.
No, we don't find a _stale_ post dominator graph, we find a _broken_
one. Noreturn blocks are improperly handled when computing post
dominance info. We are working on a fix (rth has a patch posted a