Re: PR middle-end/53321: [4.8 Regression] LTO bootstrap failed with bootstrap-profiled

[Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>]

> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz> wrote:
> >>
> >> 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?
> 
> It is called from pass_feedback_split_functions:
> 
>   NEXT_PASS (pass_all_early_optimizations);
>     {
>        ...
>     }
>   NEXT_PASS (pass_ipa_free_inline_summary);
>   NEXT_PASS (pass_ipa_tree_profile);
>     {
>       struct opt_pass **p = &pass_ipa_tree_profile.pass.sub;
>       NEXT_PASS (pass_feedback_split_functions);
>     }
> 
> OK to install?

Hmm, this is an ordering issue, but minnor one.  OK.
As comment says, this should be relaxed anyway and in fact I have path for that
in queue.

Honza
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> -- 
> H.J.