[Bug rtl-optimization/34171] [4.3 Regression] Segfault in df_chain_remove_problem with -O3 on alpha

[spark at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #15 from spark at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-11-21 22:43 -------
(In reply to comment #14)
> The patch is semi-wrong.  The call to emit_insn_after_noloc() should already
> set the proper BLOCK_FOR_INSN for every insn.  Only doing the
> df_insn_change_bb() should be sufficient.

Thanks Steven. Something like:

diff -r fad6feb87420 gcc/cfgrtl.c
--- a/gcc/cfgrtl.c      Wed Nov 21 00:17:50 2007 +0000
+++ b/gcc/cfgrtl.c      Wed Nov 21 14:40:43 2007 -0800
@@ -2629,6 +2629,7 @@ cfg_layout_merge_blocks (basic_block a,
   /* In the case basic blocks are not adjacent, move them around.  */
   if (NEXT_INSN (BB_END (a)) != BB_HEAD (b))
     {
+      rtx insn;
       rtx first = unlink_insn_chain (BB_HEAD (b), BB_END (b));

       emit_insn_after_noloc (first, BB_END (a), a);
@@ -2637,6 +2638,14 @@ cfg_layout_merge_blocks (basic_block a,
        first = NEXT_INSN (first);
       gcc_assert (NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK_P (first));
       BB_HEAD (b) = NULL;
+
+      /* emit_insn_after_noloc doesn't call df_insn_change_bb.
+         We need to explicitly call df_insn_change_bb here. */
+      for (insn = NEXT_INSN (first);
+          insn != NEXT_INSN (BB_END (b));
+          insn = NEXT_INSN (insn))
+       df_insn_change_bb (insn);
+
       delete_insn (first);
     }
   /* Otherwise just re-associate the instructions.  */


I see bunch of similar loops throughout cfgrtl.c.
I'll see if I should refactor those loops into separate functions 
(one with set_block_for_insn and one without).


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34171