https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120938
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |MOVED
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120938
--- Comment #10 from Jan Hubicka ---
https://github.com/google/autofdo/issues/248
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120938
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120938
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka ---
Porlbem goes away with
diff --git a/gcc/dwarf2out.cc b/gcc/dwarf2out.cc
index d1a55dbcbcb..52ca189531e 100644
--- a/gcc/dwarf2out.cc
+++ b/gcc/dwarf2out.cc
@@ -25012,9 +25012,8 @@ add_call_src_coords_attribute
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120938
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka ---
Looking at the diff there seems to few changes:
- # d.C:16:2
- .loc 1 16 2 is_stmt 1 view .LVU16
+ # d.C:15:8
+ .loc 1 15 8 is_stmt 1 discriminator 1 view .LVU16
This is a line table
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120938
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 61795
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61795&action=edit
Diff
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120938
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 61794
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61794&action=edit
bad assembly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120938
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 61793
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61793&action=edit
good assembly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120938
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
Even smaller set of example. Bad profile:
#include
volatile int variablev;
static void inc()
{
variablev++;
}
static int zero = 0;
int main ()
{
for (int i = 0; i < 1; i++)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120938
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka ---
This is even smaller testcase
#include
volatile int variablev;
static void inc(int a)
{
variablev++;
}
inline int
inline_me (int l)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 1; i++)
{inc(1);inc(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120938
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka ---
Removing the parameter of inc makes the problem to go away. So does removing
the recursion
#include
volatile int variablev;
static int dead ()
{
return 0;
}
static void inc()
{
variablev++;
}
11 matches
Mail list logo
