This bug is exposed by this patch.
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Dehao Chen <[email protected]> wrote:
> There is another bug in the patch (not covered by unittests,
> discovered through spec benchmarks).
>
> When we remove unused locals, we do not mark the block as used for
> debug stmt, but gimple-streamer-out will still stream out blocks for
> debug stmt. There can be 2 fixes:
>
> 1.
> --- a/gcc/gimple-streamer-out.c
> +++ b/gcc/gimple-streamer-out.c
> @@ -77,7 +77,8 @@ output_gimple_stmt (struct output_block *ob, gimple stmt)
> lto_output_location (ob, LOCATION_LOCUS (gimple_location (stmt)));
>
> /* Emit the lexical block holding STMT. */
> - stream_write_tree (ob, gimple_block (stmt), true);
> + if (!is_gimple_debug (stmt))
> + stream_write_tree (ob, gimple_block (stmt), true);
>
> /* Emit the operands. */
> switch (gimple_code (stmt))
The situation is actually more complicated. We need to remove the
block for all debug stmt as well as DECL_DEBUG_EXPR. Here's a new
patch, which passes all spec2006 benchmarks with LTO. Still testing it
on gcc testsuite. I'll send out an integrated patch tomorrow.
Thanks,
Dehao
diff --git a/gcc/gimple-streamer-out.c b/gcc/gimple-streamer-out.c
index 22bcbca..b044f35 100644
--- a/gcc/gimple-streamer-out.c
+++ b/gcc/gimple-streamer-out.c
@@ -47,6 +47,27 @@ output_phi (struct output_block *ob, gimple phi)
}
}
+static tree
+clear_gimple_op_block_r (tree *tp, int *walk_subtrees, void *data)
+{
+ if (EXPR_P (*tp))
+ {
+ TREE_SET_BLOCK (*tp, NULL);
+ }
+ return NULL_TREE;
+}
+
+static void
+clear_block_for_debug_stmt (gimple stmt)
+{
+ gcc_assert (is_gimple_debug (stmt));
+ if (gimple_debug_source_bind_p (stmt))
+ walk_tree (gimple_debug_source_bind_get_value_ptr (stmt),
+ clear_gimple_op_block_r, NULL, NULL);
+ else
+ walk_tree (gimple_debug_bind_get_value_ptr (stmt),
+ clear_gimple_op_block_r, NULL, NULL);
+}
/* Emit statement STMT on the main stream of output block OB. */
@@ -77,7 +98,13 @@ output_gimple_stmt (struct output_block *ob, gimple stmt)
lto_output_location (ob, LOCATION_LOCUS (gimple_location (stmt)));
/* Emit the lexical block holding STMT. */
- stream_write_tree (ob, gimple_block (stmt), true);
+ if (!is_gimple_debug (stmt))
+ stream_write_tree (ob, gimple_block (stmt), true);
+ else
+ {
+ clear_block_for_debug_stmt (stmt);
+ stream_write_tree (ob, NULL, true);
+ }
/* Emit the operands. */
switch (gimple_code (stmt))
diff --git a/gcc/tree-streamer-out.c b/gcc/tree-streamer-out.c
index ab86b1e..fa89519 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-streamer-out.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-streamer-out.c
@@ -474,6 +474,15 @@ write_ts_decl_minimal_tree_pointers (struct
output_block *ob, tree expr,
lto_output_location (ob, LOCATION_LOCUS (DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (expr)));
}
+static tree
+clear_gimple_op_block_r (tree *tp, int *walk_subtrees, void *data)
+{
+ if (EXPR_P (*tp))
+ {
+ TREE_SET_BLOCK (*tp, NULL);
+ }
+ return NULL_TREE;
+}
/* Write all pointer fields in the TS_DECL_COMMON structure of EXPR to
output block OB. If REF_P is true, write a reference to EXPR's
@@ -504,7 +513,11 @@ write_ts_decl_common_tree_pointers (struct
output_block *ob, tree expr,
stream_write_tree (ob, DECL_VALUE_EXPR (expr), ref_p);
if (TREE_CODE (expr) == VAR_DECL)
- stream_write_tree (ob, DECL_DEBUG_EXPR (expr), ref_p);
+ {
+ tree debug_expr = DECL_DEBUG_EXPR (expr);
+ walk_tree (&debug_expr, clear_gimple_op_block_r, NULL, NULL);
+ stream_write_tree (ob, debug_expr, ref_p);
+ }
}
>
> 2.
> --- a/gcc/tree-ssa-live.c
> +++ b/gcc/tree-ssa-live.c
> @@ -726,9 +726,6 @@ remove_unused_locals (void)
> gimple stmt = gsi_stmt (gsi);
> tree b = gimple_block (stmt);
>
> - if (is_gimple_debug (stmt))
> - continue;
> -
> if (gimple_clobber_p (stmt))
> {
> have_local_clobbers = true;
This will not work because some unittests will fail -fcompare-debug tests.
>
> Either fix could work. Any suggests which one should we go?
>
> Thanks,
> Dehao
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Dehao Chen <[email protected]> wrote:
>> There are two parts that needs memory management:
>>
>> 1. The BLOCK structure. This is managed by GC. I originally thought
>> that removing blocks from tree.gsbase would paralyze GC. This turned
>> out not to be a concern because DECL_INITIAL will still mark those
>> used tree nodes. This patch may decrease the memory consumption by
>> removing blocks from tree/gimple. However, as it makes more blocks
>> become used, they also increase the memory consumption.
>> 2. The data structure in libcpp that maintains the hashtable for the
>> location->block mapping. This is relatively minor because for the
>> largest source I've seen, it only maintains less than 100K entries in
>> the array (less than 1M total memory consumption). However, as it is a
>> global data structure, it may make LTO unhappy. Honza is helping
>> testing the memory consumption on LTO (but we first need to make this
>> patch work for LTO). If the LTO result turns out ok, we probably don't
>> want to put these under GC because: 1. it'll make things much more
>> complicated. 2. using self managed memory is more efficient (as this
>> is frequently used in many passes). 3. not using GC actually saves
>> memory because even though the block is in the map, it can still be
>> GCed as soon as it's not reachable from DECL_INITIAL.
>>
>> I've tested this on some very large C++ files (each one takes more
>> than 10s to build), the memory consumption does not see noticeable
>> increase/decrease.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dehao
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Xinliang David Li <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:13 AM, Richard Guenther
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 7:06 AM, Dehao Chen <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Now I think we are facing a more complex problem. The data structure
>>>>> we use to store the location_adhoc_data are file-static in linemap.c
>>>>> in libcpp. These data structures are not guarded by GTY(()).
>>>>> Meanwhile, as we have removed the block data structure from
>>>>> gimple.gsbase as well as tree.exp (encoding them into an location_t).
>>>>> This could cause block being GCed and the LOCATION_BLOCK becoming
>>>>> dangling pointers.
>>>>
>>>> Uh. Note that it is quite important that we are able to garbage-collect
>>>> unused
>>>> BLOCKs, this is the whole point of removing unused BLOCK scopes in
>>>> remove_unused_locals. So this indeed becomes much more complicated ...
>>>> What would be desired is that the garbage collector can NULL an entry in
>>>> the mapping table when it is not referenced in any other way (that other
>>>> reference would be the BLOCK tree as stored in a FUNCTION_DECLs
>>>> DECL_INITIAL).
>>>
>>> It would be nice to GC those unused BLOCKS. I wonder how many BLOCKS
>>> are created for a large C++ program. This patch saves memory by
>>> shrinking tree size, is it a net win or loss without GC those BLOCKS?
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I tried to manipulate GTY to make it recognize the LOCATION_BLOCK from
>>>>> gimple.gsbase.location. However, neigher nested_ptr nor mark_hook can
>>>>> help me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Another approach would be guard the location_adhoc_data and related
>>>>> data structures in GTY(()). However, this is non-trivial because tree
>>>>> is not visible in libcpp. At the same time, my implementation heavily
>>>>> relies on hashtable to make the code efficient, thus it's quite tricky
>>>>> to make "param_is" and "use_params" work.
>>>>>
>>>>> The final approach, which I'll try tomorrow, would be move all my
>>>>> implementation from libcpp to gcc, and guard them with GTY(()). I
>>>>> still haven't thought of any potential problem of this approach. Any
>>>>> comments?
>>>>
>>>> I think moving the mapping to GC in a lazy manner as I described above
>>>> would be the way to go. For hashtables GC already supports if_marked,
>>>> not sure if similar support is available for arrays/vecs.
>>>>
>>>> Richard.
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Dehao
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Dehao Chen <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> I saw comments in tree-streamer-out.c:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /* Do not stream BLOCK_SOURCE_LOCATION. We cannot handle debug
>>>>>> information
>>>>>> for early inlining so drop it on the floor instead of ICEing in
>>>>>> dwarf2out.c. */
>>>>>> streamer_write_chain (ob, BLOCK_VARS (expr), ref_p);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, what the code is doing seemed contradictory with the comment.
>>>>>> Or am I missing something?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Michael Matz <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Dehao Chen wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Looks like we have two choices:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1. Stream out block info, and use LTO_SET_PREVAIL for TREE_CHAIN(t)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This will actually not work correctly in some cases. The problem is, if
>>>>>>> the prevailing decl is already part of another chain (say in another
>>>>>>> block_var list) you would break the current chain. Hence block vars
>>>>>>> need
>>>>>>> special handling in the lto streamer (another reason why tree_chain is
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>> the most clever think to use for this chain). This problem area needs
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> be solved somehow if block info is to be preserved correctly.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2. Don't stream out block info for LTO, and still call LTO_NO_PREVAIL
>>>>>>>> (TREE_CHAIN (t)).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's also a large hammer as it basically will mean no debug info after
>>>>>>> LTO :-/ Sigh, at this point I have no good solution that doesn't involve
>>>>>>> quite some work, perhaps your hack is good enough for the time being,
>>>>>>> though I hate it :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I got it. Then I'll keep the patch as it is (remove the
>>>>>> LTO_NO_PREVAIL), and work with Honza to resolve the issue he had, and
>>>>>> then we should be good to check in?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Dehao
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ciao,
>>>>>>> Michael.
