On Tue, 24 Apr 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> >
> > I've been carrying this patch for quite some while now and really
> > want to go forward with it - the problem is that while all default
> > languages work fine after this patch Ada shows some testsuite
> > regressions. I've had various hacks/workarounds throughout the
> > Ada frontend for them, but lost track of what fixed what and
> > they all felt like hacks anyway.
> >
> > Thus - I know the patch will add Ada testsuite regressions. But it will
> > not break Ada bootstrap. Ada is not in the set of default languages,
> > nor is it considered release critical.
> >
> > Are the Ada folks happy with helping to fix the fallout after-the-fact
> > (I got Eric to fix the bootstrap issues that were first present - thanks
> > for that)? I am happy to revisit my hacks/workarounds and post them,
> > but it will be ultimatively easier to review them if you can see
> > the FAIL for yourself (there are some workarounds/hacks posted on the
> > mailinglist for previous attempts IIRC).
> >
> > Thanks for your consideration.
> >
> > The patch is currently under re-testing (it needs the 2nd patch
> > below, which was already approved but back in time broke Ada
> > bootstrap - I didn't verify if that still occurs).
>
> To followup myself - bootstrap with just the 2nd patch is still
> broken:
>
> /abuild/rguenther/obj2/./gcc/xgcc -B/abuild/rguenther/obj2/./gcc/
> -B/usr/local/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/
> -B/usr/local/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/ -isystem
> /usr/local/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/include -isystem
> /usr/local/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/sys-include -c -g -O2 -m32 -fpic
> -W -Wall -gnatpg -nostdinc -m32 s-secsta.adb -o s-secsta.o
> s-secsta.adb:501:4: error: size of variable 'System.Secondary_Stack.Chunk'
> is too large
> Chunk : aliased Chunk_Id (1, Static_Secondary_Stack_Size);
> ^
> make[9]: *** [s-secsta.o] Error 1
>
> And the following is the list of regressions introduced by the combined
> patch set:
>
> === acats tests ===
> FAIL: a71004a
> FAIL: c36204d
> FAIL: c36205l
> FAIL: c37404b
> FAIL: c41107a
> FAIL: c41204a
> FAIL: c43204c
> FAIL: c43204e
> FAIL: c43204f
> FAIL: c43204g
> FAIL: c43204h
> FAIL: c43204i
> FAIL: c52102a
> FAIL: c52102c
> FAIL: c64103c
> FAIL: c64103d
> FAIL: c64106a
> FAIL: c95087a
> FAIL: cc1224a
> FAIL: cc1311a
> FAIL: cc3106b
> FAIL: cc3224a
> FAIL: cd2a31a
>
> === acats Summary ===
> # of expected passes 2297
> # of unexpected failures 23
>
> === gnat tests ===
>
>
> Running target unix/
> FAIL: gnat.dg/array11.adb (test for warnings, line 12)
> FAIL: gnat.dg/loop_optimization3.adb (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gnat.dg/loop_optimization3.adb execution test
> FAIL: gnat.dg/object_overflow.adb (test for warnings, line 8)
> FAIL: gnat.dg/renaming5.adb scan-tree-dump-times optimized "goto" 2
> FAIL: gnat.dg/return3.adb scan-assembler loc 1 6
> FAIL: gnat.dg/test_8bitlong_overflow.adb (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gnat.dg/test_8bitlong_overflow.adb execution test
>
> === gnat Summary for unix/ ===
>
> # of expected passes 1089
> # of unexpected failures 8
> # of expected failures 13
> # of unsupported tests 2
>
> Running target unix//-m32
> FAIL: gnat.dg/array11.adb (test for warnings, line 12)
> FAIL: gnat.dg/loop_optimization3.adb (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gnat.dg/loop_optimization3.adb execution test
> FAIL: gnat.dg/object_overflow.adb (test for warnings, line 8)
> FAIL: gnat.dg/renaming5.adb scan-tree-dump-times optimized "goto" 2
> FAIL: gnat.dg/return3.adb scan-assembler loc 1 6
> FAIL: gnat.dg/test_8bitlong_overflow.adb (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gnat.dg/test_8bitlong_overflow.adb execution test
>
> === gnat Summary for unix//-m32 ===
>
> # of expected passes 1089
> # of unexpected failures 8
> # of expected failures 13
> # of unsupported tests 2
>
> === gnat Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 2178
> # of unexpected failures 16
> # of expected failures 26
> # of unsupported tests 4
>
> Most of the ACATS errors are "raised STORAGE_ERROR : object too large"
> or "error: size of variable '...' is too large". The gnat testsuite
> adds "warning: "Storage_Error" will be raised at run time" to this.
>
> I remember one workaround (which usually involves re-setting TREE_OVERFLOW
> at strathegic places) fixes most of ACATS. I'll try to isolate that
> (but it's a hack and does not feel "right").
Ah, and all ACATS fails and
-FAIL: gnat.dg/loop_optimization3.adb (test for excess errors)
-FAIL: gnat.dg/loop_optimization3.adb execution test
-FAIL: gnat.dg/test_8bitlong_overflow.adb (test for excess errors)
-FAIL: gnat.dg/test_8bitlong_overflow.adb execution test
are fixed by for example
Index: trunk/gcc/stor-layout.c
===================================================================
--- trunk.orig/gcc/stor-layout.c 2012-04-25 14:14:52.321710059 +0200
+++ trunk/gcc/stor-layout.c 2012-04-25 14:13:43.595714163 +0200
@@ -2182,11 +2182,29 @@ layout_type (tree type)
that (possible) negative values are handled appropriately
when determining overflow. */
else
- length
- = fold_convert (sizetype,
- size_binop (PLUS_EXPR,
- build_int_cst (TREE_TYPE (lb), 1),
- size_binop (MINUS_EXPR, ub, lb)));
+ {
+ /* ??? When it is obvious that the range is signed
+ represent it using ssizetype. */
+ if (TREE_CODE (lb) == INTEGER_CST
+ && TREE_CODE (ub) == INTEGER_CST
+ && TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (lb))
+ && tree_int_cst_lt (ub, lb))
+ {
+ lb = double_int_to_tree
+ (ssizetype,
+ double_int_sext (tree_to_double_int (lb),
+ TYPE_PRECISION (TREE_TYPE (lb))));
+ ub = double_int_to_tree
+ (ssizetype,
+ double_int_sext (tree_to_double_int (ub),
+ TYPE_PRECISION (TREE_TYPE (ub))));
+ }
+ length
+ = fold_convert (sizetype,
+ size_binop (PLUS_EXPR,
+ build_int_cst (TREE_TYPE (lb), 1),
+ size_binop (MINUS_EXPR, ub, lb)));
+ }
/* If we arrived at a length of zero ignore any overflow
that occured as part of the calculation. There exists
thus are because array TYPE_DOMAIN is built using unsigned sizetype
but these Ada testcases have array domains which really need signed
types. The above is of course a hack, but one that otherwise survives
bootstrap / test of all languages.
Thus, we arrive at the following Ada regression status if the patch series
is applied (plus the above incremental patch):
=== acats tests ===
=== acats Summary ===
# of expected passes 2320
# of unexpected failures 0
Native configuration is x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
=== gnat tests ===
Running target unix/
FAIL: gnat.dg/array11.adb (test for warnings, line 12)
FAIL: gnat.dg/object_overflow.adb (test for warnings, line 8)
FAIL: gnat.dg/renaming5.adb scan-tree-dump-times optimized "goto" 2
FAIL: gnat.dg/return3.adb scan-assembler loc 1 6
=== gnat Summary for unix/ ===
# of expected passes 1093
# of unexpected failures 4
# of expected failures 13
# of unsupported tests 2
Running target unix//-m32
FAIL: gnat.dg/array11.adb (test for warnings, line 12)
FAIL: gnat.dg/object_overflow.adb (test for warnings, line 8)
FAIL: gnat.dg/renaming5.adb scan-tree-dump-times optimized "goto" 2
FAIL: gnat.dg/return3.adb scan-assembler loc 1 6
=== gnat Summary for unix//-m32 ===
# of expected passes 1093
# of unexpected failures 4
# of expected failures 13
# of unsupported tests 2
=== gnat Summary ===
# of expected passes 2186
# of unexpected failures 8
# of expected failures 26
# of unsupported tests 4
Which I consider reasonable?
Thanks,
Richard.
