On Fri, 9 Sep 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:

> On Fri, 9 Sep 2011, Martin Jambor wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 04:29:40PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > > On Wed, 10 Aug 2011, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > > 
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > > > 
> > > > FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-sra-2.c scan-tree-dump eipa_sra "About to replace 
> > > > expr cow_.*D.->red with \\*ISRA"
> > > > FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-sra-2.c scan-tree-dump eipa_sra "About to replace 
> > > > expr cow_.*D.->green with ISRA"
> > > > FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-sra-2.c scan-tree-dump eipa_sra "About to replace 
> > > > expr calf_.*D.->red with \\*ISRA"
> > > > FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-sra-2.c scan-tree-dump eipa_sra "About to replace 
> > > > expr calf_.*D.->green with ISRA"
> > > > FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-sra-6.c scan-tree-dump-times eipa_sra "foo " 1
> > 
> > This has recvently been reported as PR 50052.
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > > > 
> > > > I must admin I continue to be confused about exactly what it is that
> > > > tree_non_mode_aligned_mem_p is supposed to be testing for.  We have:
> > > > 
> > > >   if (TREE_CODE (exp) == SSA_NAME
> > > >       || TREE_CODE (exp) == MEM_REF
> > > >       || mode == BLKmode
> > > >       || is_gimple_min_invariant (exp)
> > > >       || !STRICT_ALIGNMENT)
> > > >     return false;
> > > > 
> > > > So if we passed in the plain MEM_REF, this would be considered no 
> > > > problem.
> > > > The COMPONENT_REF does not add any additional misalignment, so one would
> > > > hope that this also shouldn't be a problem.
> > > > 
> > > > However, just because there *is* a COMPONENT_REF around it, we suddenly
> > > > realize the fact that don't have points-to information for the MEM_REF
> > > > and therefore consider *it* (and consequently the whole COMPONENT_REF)
> > > > to be potentially misaligned ...
> > > 
> > > Yep.  That's because we are totally confused about alignment :/
> > > 
> > > Martin, what we need to do is get expands idea of what alignment
> > > it woudl assume for a handled_component_ref and compare that
> > > to what it would say if we re-materialize the mem as a MEM_REF.
> > > 
> > > Unfortunately there isn't a function that you can use to mimic
> > > expands behavior (that of the normal_inner_ref: case), the closest
> > > would be to look for TYPE_PACKED or TYPE_ALIGN in addition to
> > > what get_object_alignment gives us.
> > > 
> > > Thus something like
> > > 
> > >   align = get_object_alignment (exp);
> > >   if (!TYPE_PACKED (TREE_TYPE (exp))
> > >       && (TREE_CODE (exp) != COMPONENT_REF
> > >           || !DECL_PACKED (TREE_OPERAND (exp, 1))))
> > >     align = MAX (TYPE_ALIGN (TREE_TYPE (exp)), align);
> > >   if (GET_MODE_ALIGNMENT (mode) > align)
> > >     return true;
> > > 
> > 
> > This fixed the failing testcase ipa-sra-2.c but it creates a
> > misaligned access for the testcase below so I changed it to:
> > 
> >   align = get_object_alignment (exp);
> >   if (!TYPE_PACKED (TREE_TYPE (exp)))
> >     {
> >       bool encountered_packed = false;
> >       tree t = exp;
> > 
> >       while (TREE_CODE (t) == COMPONENT_REF)
> 
> that should be handled_component_p (t) then to catch p->a.b[i].c
> with packed a.
> 
> But the normal_inner_ref: case doesn't suggest that we need to dive
> into handled-components at all ... but it uses DECL_MODE of
> an outermost COMPONENT_REF instead of TYPE_MODE.  Maybe the easiest
> would be to simply call get_inner_reference like the normal_inner_ref
> case does to obtain the mode, perform the packed_p check and
> decide based on that (supposed that the mode difference is what
> makes the new testcase fail).  Also look for the predicates that
> guard the extract_bit_field call ... (yeah, I know ...)

Btw, it would be nice to try to produce a testcase for x86 by
using SSE vector types and make sure we do / do not expand to
unaligned moves (thus, both check for correctness and optimality).

Richard.

> >         if (DECL_PACKED (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1)))
> >           {
> >             encountered_packed = true;
> >             break;
> >           }
> >         else
> >           t = TREE_OPERAND (t, 0);
> > 
> >       if (!encountered_packed)
> >         align = MAX (TYPE_ALIGN (TREE_TYPE (exp)), align);
> >     }
> >   if (GET_MODE_ALIGNMENT (mode) > align)
> >     return true;
> > 
> > I'm currently bootstrapping this on a sparc64 on the compile farm.  Is
> > the patch OK if it passes (it has passed bootstrap and testing on
> > x86_64-linux but that is no surprise)?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Martin
> > 
> > 
> > 2011-09-08  Martin Jambor  <mjam...@suse.cz>
> > 
> >     PR tree-optimization/50052
> >     * tree-sra.c (tree_non_mode_aligned_mem_p): Look at TYPE_ALIGN if
> >     there is no packed field decl in exp.
> > 
> >     * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr49094-2.c: New test.
> > 
> > Index: src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr49094-2.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr49094-2.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
> > +/* { dg-do run } */
> > +/* { dg-options "-O" } */
> > +
> > +struct in_addr {
> > +  unsigned int s_addr;
> > +};
> > +
> > +struct ip {
> > +  struct in_addr ip_src,ip_dst;
> > +  unsigned char ip_p;
> > +  unsigned short ip_sum;
> > +};
> > +
> > +struct ip2 {
> > +  unsigned char blah;
> > +  unsigned short sheep;
> > +  struct ip ip;
> > +} __attribute__ ((aligned(1), packed));
> > +
> > +struct ip2 ip_fw_fwd_addr;
> > +
> > +int test_alignment( char *m )
> > +{
> > +  struct ip2 *ip = (struct ip2 *) m;
> > +  struct in_addr pkt_dst;
> > +  pkt_dst = ip->ip.ip_dst ;
> > +  if( pkt_dst.s_addr == 0 )
> > +    return 1;
> > +  else
> > +    return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int __attribute__ ((noinline, noclone))
> > +intermediary (char *p)
> > +{
> > +  return test_alignment (p);
> > +}
> > +
> > +int
> > +main (int argc, char *argv[])
> > +{
> > +  ip_fw_fwd_addr.ip.ip_dst.s_addr = 1;
> > +  return intermediary ((void *) &ip_fw_fwd_addr);
> > +}
> > Index: src/gcc/tree-sra.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- src.orig/gcc/tree-sra.c
> > +++ src/gcc/tree-sra.c
> > @@ -1086,6 +1086,23 @@ tree_non_mode_aligned_mem_p (tree exp)
> >      return false;
> >  
> >    align = get_object_alignment (exp);
> > +  if (!TYPE_PACKED (TREE_TYPE (exp)))
> > +    {
> > +      bool encountered_packed = false;
> > +      tree t = exp;
> > +
> > +      while (TREE_CODE (t) == COMPONENT_REF)
> > +        if (DECL_PACKED (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1)))
> > +          {
> > +            encountered_packed = true;
> > +            break;
> > +          }
> > +        else
> > +          t = TREE_OPERAND (t, 0);
> > +
> > +      if (!encountered_packed)
> > +        align = MAX (TYPE_ALIGN (TREE_TYPE (exp)), align);
> > +    }
> >    if (GET_MODE_ALIGNMENT (mode) > align)
> >      return true;
> >  
> > 
> > 
> 
> 

-- 
Richard Guenther <rguent...@suse.de>
SUSE / SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nuernberg - AG Nuernberg - HRB 16746
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer

Reply via email to