On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Thomas Schwinge
<tho...@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 10:18:35 +0200, Richard Biener
> <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Thomas Schwinge
>> <tho...@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>> > --- gcc/tree-core.h
>> > +++ gcc/tree-core.h
>> > @@ -553,20 +553,6 @@ enum tree_index {
>> > TI_BOOLEAN_FALSE,
>> > TI_BOOLEAN_TRUE,
>> >
>> > - TI_COMPLEX_INTEGER_TYPE,
>> > -[...]
>> > - TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT128X_TYPE,
>> > -
>> > TI_FLOAT_TYPE,
>> > TI_DOUBLE_TYPE,
>> > TI_LONG_DOUBLE_TYPE,
>> > @@ -596,6 +582,23 @@ enum tree_index {
>> > - TI_FLOATN_NX_TYPE_FIRST \
>> > + 1)
>> >
>> > + /* Put the complex types after their component types, so that in
>> > (sequential)
>> > + tree streaming we can assert that their component types have already
>> > been
>> > + handled (see tree-streamer.c:record_common_node). */
>> > + TI_COMPLEX_INTEGER_TYPE,
>> > + TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT_TYPE,
>> > + TI_COMPLEX_DOUBLE_TYPE,
>> > + TI_COMPLEX_LONG_DOUBLE_TYPE,
>> > +
>> > + TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT16_TYPE,
>> > + TI_COMPLEX_FLOATN_NX_TYPE_FIRST = TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT16_TYPE,
>> > + TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT32_TYPE,
>> > + TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT64_TYPE,
>> > + TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT128_TYPE,
>> > + TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT32X_TYPE,
>> > + TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT64X_TYPE,
>> > + TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT128X_TYPE,
>> > +
>> > TI_FLOAT_PTR_TYPE,
>> > TI_DOUBLE_PTR_TYPE,
>> > TI_LONG_DOUBLE_PTR_TYPE,
>>
>> If the above change alone fixes your issues then it is fine to commit.
>
> That alone won't fix the problem, because we'd still have the recursion
> in gcc/tree-streamer.c:record_common_node done differently for x86_64
> target and nvptx offload target.
Doh - obviously.
>> > --- gcc/tree-streamer.c
>> > +++ gcc/tree-streamer.c
>> > @@ -278,9 +278,23 @@ record_common_node (struct streamer_tree_cache_d
>> > *cache, tree node)
>> > streamer_tree_cache_append (cache, node, cache->nodes.length ());
>> >
>> > if (POINTER_TYPE_P (node)
>> > - || TREE_CODE (node) == COMPLEX_TYPE
>> > || TREE_CODE (node) == ARRAY_TYPE)
>> > record_common_node (cache, TREE_TYPE (node));
>> > + else if (TREE_CODE (node) == COMPLEX_TYPE)
>> > + {
>> > + /* Assert that complex types' component types have already been
>> > handled
>> > + (and we thus don't need to recurse here). See PR lto/77458. */
>> > + if (cache->node_map)
>> > + gcc_assert (streamer_tree_cache_lookup (cache, TREE_TYPE (node),
>> > NULL));
>> > + else
>> > + {
>> > + gcc_assert (cache->nodes.exists ());
>> > + bool found = false;
>> > + for (unsigned i = 0; !found && i < cache->nodes.length (); ++i)
>> > + found = true;
>>
>> hmm, this doesn't actually test anything? ;)
>
> ;-) Haha, hooray for patch review!
>
>> > + gcc_assert (found);
>> > + }
>> > + }
>> > else if (TREE_CODE (node) == RECORD_TYPE)
>> > {
>> > /* The FIELD_DECLs of structures should be shared, so that every
>
>> So I very much like to go forward with this kind of change as well
>
> OK, good. So, in plain text, we'll make it a requirement that:
> integer_types trees must only refer to earlier integer_types trees;
> sizetype_tab trees must only refer to integer_types trees, and earlier
> sizetype_tab trees; and global_trees must only refer to integer_types
> trees, sizetype_tab trees, and earlier global_trees.
Yeah, though I'd put sizetypes first.
>> (the assert code
>> should go to a separate helper function).
>
> Should this checking be done only in
> gcc/tree-streamer.c:record_common_node, or should generally
Yes.
> gcc/tree-streamer.c:streamer_tree_cache_append check/assert that such
> recursive trees are already present in the cache? And generally do that,
> or "if (flag_checking)" only?
I think we should restrict it to flag_checking only because in general violating
it is harmless plus we never know what happens on all targets/frontend/flag(!)
combinations.
>
>> Did you try it on more than just
>> the complex type case?
>
> Not yet, but now that you have approved the general concept, I'll look
> into that.
>
> Here's the current patch with the assertion condition fixed, but still
> for complex types only. OK for trunk already?
Ok with the checking blob moved to a helper function,
bool common_node_recorded_p (cache, node)
and its body guarded with if (flag_checking).
[looks to me we miss handling of vector type components alltogether,
maybe there are no global vector type trees ...]
Thanks,
Richard.
> --- gcc/tree-core.h
> +++ gcc/tree-core.h
> @@ -553,20 +553,6 @@ enum tree_index {
> TI_BOOLEAN_FALSE,
> TI_BOOLEAN_TRUE,
>
> - TI_COMPLEX_INTEGER_TYPE,
> - TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT_TYPE,
> - TI_COMPLEX_DOUBLE_TYPE,
> - TI_COMPLEX_LONG_DOUBLE_TYPE,
> -
> - TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT16_TYPE,
> - TI_COMPLEX_FLOATN_NX_TYPE_FIRST = TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT16_TYPE,
> - TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT32_TYPE,
> - TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT64_TYPE,
> - TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT128_TYPE,
> - TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT32X_TYPE,
> - TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT64X_TYPE,
> - TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT128X_TYPE,
> -
> TI_FLOAT_TYPE,
> TI_DOUBLE_TYPE,
> TI_LONG_DOUBLE_TYPE,
> @@ -596,6 +582,23 @@ enum tree_index {
> - TI_FLOATN_NX_TYPE_FIRST \
> + 1)
>
> + /* Put the complex types after their component types, so that in
> (sequential)
> + tree streaming we can assert that their component types have already
> been
> + handled (see tree-streamer.c:record_common_node). */
> + TI_COMPLEX_INTEGER_TYPE,
> + TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT_TYPE,
> + TI_COMPLEX_DOUBLE_TYPE,
> + TI_COMPLEX_LONG_DOUBLE_TYPE,
> +
> + TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT16_TYPE,
> + TI_COMPLEX_FLOATN_NX_TYPE_FIRST = TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT16_TYPE,
> + TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT32_TYPE,
> + TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT64_TYPE,
> + TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT128_TYPE,
> + TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT32X_TYPE,
> + TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT64X_TYPE,
> + TI_COMPLEX_FLOAT128X_TYPE,
> +
> TI_FLOAT_PTR_TYPE,
> TI_DOUBLE_PTR_TYPE,
> TI_LONG_DOUBLE_PTR_TYPE,
> --- gcc/tree-streamer.c
> +++ gcc/tree-streamer.c
> @@ -278,9 +278,26 @@ record_common_node (struct streamer_tree_cache_d *cache,
> tree node)
> streamer_tree_cache_append (cache, node, cache->nodes.length ());
>
> if (POINTER_TYPE_P (node)
> - || TREE_CODE (node) == COMPLEX_TYPE
> || TREE_CODE (node) == ARRAY_TYPE)
> record_common_node (cache, TREE_TYPE (node));
> + else if (TREE_CODE (node) == COMPLEX_TYPE)
> + {
> + /* Assert that a complex type's component type (node_type) has been
> + handled already (and we thus don't need to recurse here). See PR
> + lto/77458. */
> + tree node_type = TREE_TYPE (node);
> + if (cache->node_map)
> + gcc_assert (streamer_tree_cache_lookup (cache, node_type, NULL));
> + else
> + {
> + gcc_assert (cache->nodes.exists ());
> + bool found = false;
> + for (unsigned i = 0; !found && i < cache->nodes.length (); ++i)
> + if (cache->nodes[i] == node_type)
> + found = true;
> + gcc_assert (found);
> + }
> + }
> else if (TREE_CODE (node) == RECORD_TYPE)
> {
> /* The FIELD_DECLs of structures should be shared, so that every
>
>
> Grüße
> Thomas
