This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Help forging a function_decl

Later I found out that cgraph_mark_needed_node was already being
called in cgraph_finalize_function, and that should really keep my
function from being removed. But when the function
cgraph_remove_unreachable_nodes executes, it is marked as unreachable
just because at this point it is not marked as needed anymore.
The piece of code which is doing that is
function_and_variable_visibility, in ipa.c. Oddly, the condition for
doing so is having DECL_EXTERNAL set for my fndecl, which I just said,
was my former mistake.
I really don't know why this erratic behavior is happening, I am
explicitly setting DECL_EXTERNAL to false.


Rodolfo Guilherme Wottrich
Universidade Estadual de Campinas - Unicamp

2013/7/23 Rodolfo Guilherme Wottrich <>:
> Hello,
> 2013/7/23 Martin Jambor <>:
>> Hi,
>> But you do call cgraph_add_new_function on it as well, right?  If not,
>> how is its symbol table node (also called and serving as the call
>> graph node) created?
> I call finish_function for my decl. Inside that function, there's this
> one call to cgraph_add_new_function, but the condition it is inside is
> bypassed:
> /* ??? Objc emits functions after finalizing the compilation unit.
>   This should be cleaned up later and this conditional removed.  */
>   if (cgraph_global_info_ready)
>   {
>     cgraph_add_new_function (fndecl, false);
>     return;
>   }
> Right after that, there's a call to cgraph_finalize_function, which I
> guess works the way it should, creating its cgraph node. I took a look
> at the comment in cgraph_add_new_function and it states that "this
> function is intended to be used by middle end and allows insertion of
> new function at arbitrary point of compilation.  The function can be
> either in high, low or SSA form GIMPLE." As I'm doing it in parsing
> time and there was no gimplification passes yet, I guess it is ok not
> to use it at this point.
>> (And BTW, you are hacking on trunk, right?  Older versions can be
>> quite a bit different here.)
> I understand that, but I intend to use Dragonegg to obtain LLVM IR
> after the gcc front-end has done its work, so I'm hacking version
> 4.6.4, which is said to work better with Dragonegg.
>> What do you mean by "50% of the time?"  That you get different results
>> even when you do not change your compiler?  That should not happen and
>> means you invoke undefined behavior, most likely depending on some
>> uninitialized stuff (assuming your HW is OK) so you are probably not
>> clearing some allocated structure or something.  (Do you know why
>> DECL_EXTERNAL was set?  That looks weird).
> Yeah, exactly: different results even not changing the compiler.
> About DECL_EXTERNAL: it was my fault. At first I was trying to
> reproduce the creation of a function_decl as in
> create_omp_child_function, in omp-low.c, and I eventually forgot that
> I set that attribute when playing with the possibilities.
>> Anyway, my best guess is that your function is removed by
>> symtab_remove_unreachable_nodes in ipa.c.  (And now I also see that
>> analyze_functions in cgraphunit.c is also doing its own unreachable
>> node removal, but hopefully runs early enough this should not be your
>> problem.)  If your function is static and is not called or referenced
>> from anywhere else, gcc will try to get rid of it.
> I traced the execution path in gdb, and it happens that the function
> is really being removed in cgraph_remove_unreachable_nodes in ipa.c
> (that's basically the same function you pointed out, just another gcc
> version). I don't know why that happens anyway, neither why it happens
> intermittently when not debugging and never when debugging. My
> function is not called or referenced yet, but neither is another
> function in my source code which I put just in order to test this
> issue, and yet it is not removed like my forged one. So it is in
> respect to being or not static. A doubt: I tested setting TREE_STATIC
> for my decl, but does that mean my function is static? The
> documentation on the TREE_STATIC macro is: "In a FUNCTION_DECL,
> nonzero if function has been defined".
>> Try setting DECL_PRESERVE_P of your decl (or calling
>> cgraph_mark_force_output_node on its call graph node which is cleaner
>> but should be equivalent for debugging, I suppose).  If that helps,
>> this is most likely your problem.
> I tried DECL_PRESERVE_P and it didn't work. In this version of gcc
> there's no cgraph_mark_force_output_node. I tried
> cgraph_mark_needed_node instead, didn't work either.
>> What do you mean?  That your function is not output or that you cannot
>> use gdb at all?
> That my function is never output when using gdb.
>> Add -fdump-ipa-all switch and look whether the function appears
>> there.  Especially the cgraph dump can usually tell you that a
>> function was removed as unreachable.  Grep all dumps for "Reclaiming
>> functions:" and see whether your function is listed.
> You were right, but this is a direct consequence of my function being
> removed like discussed before.
> I'll keep investigating the problem and will inform you in case
> something changes.
> Thank you,
> ---
> Rodolfo Guilherme Wottrich
> Universidade Estadual de Campinas - Unicamp

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]