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...
