This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC][patch] trans-mem: mark transaction begins as returns-twice
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 12:13 -0500, Patrick Marlier wrote:
> On 01/04/2012 11:40 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > On 01/04/12 09:53, Patrick Marlier wrote:
> >> On 01/02/2012 01:10 PM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> >>> This was motivated by the miscompilation of one of the STAMP
> >>> applications (Genome), where a stack slot was used as temp storage for a
> >>> CPU register but not restored when the transaction got aborted and
> >>> restarted (then, after restart, the program crashed because it used
> >>> inconsistent data). With the attached patch and in this particular
> >>> example, the stack slots that are written to in the transaction do not
> >>> get read during the transaction. (-fno-caller-saves was not a
> >>> sufficient solution, BTW.)
> >>
> >> Are you sure this not due to the missing of tm-logging? We xfail until
> >> now for the testsuite but this should be addressed. (Note that I tested
> >> genome months ago and it was working correctly.)
> >>
> >> By the way, what's the status of this problem of tm-logging?
> >
> > I'm chugging along on the TM PR's, but so far the bug reporters are
> > beating me :). I can move this problem to the top of the list if you
> > want. If so, what is the PR?
>
> PR: 51165 51166 51167 51168
> I let Torvald and you decide about the priority.
If that's indeed just a missed optimization as Aldy says on those
reports, then I think this has lower priority. 51752 is higher
priority, for example, even though I'm not very optimistic that we can
fix this quickly...