http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49581
--- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-01-11
17:23:54 UTC ---
On closer inspection, no I can't reproduce this.
The outer transaction has correct PHI nodes with values dependent on whether
the transaction got aborted/restarted or whether we fell through from the
innermost transaction:
# x$6_15 = PHI <10(3), 22(6)>
# x$5_14 = PHI <10(3), 123(6)>
<L2>:
y.0_7 = x$5_14 + x$6_15;
D.1814_21 = (unsigned int) y.0_7;
__builtin__ITM_WU4 (&y, D.1814_21);
__builtin__ITM_commitTransaction ();
I have verified this by visual inspection of the tree dumps and by modifying
the test to print x[5] and x[6] at the end of main(). Upon execution, x[5] and
x[6] look correct when the transaction cancels (10 and 10) and when the
transaction succeeds (123, 22).
This is what I have in main:
x[6] += 12;
if (foo(2)) __transaction_cancel;
}
y = x[5] + x[6];
}
printf("x[5]=%d, x[6]=%d\n", x[5], x[6]); <-- IS CORRECT
I also added a separately linkable foo() to trigger success or failure:
int y;
__attribute__((transaction_safe))
int foo(int x)
{
return 1; /* fail transaction */
}
Torvald do you mind looking at this again? At least on a transaction cancel
everything is working fine.
If you can't reproduce, can you close the PR?
