Re: Fix wrong code issues with ipa-sra

2023-01-30 Thread Jan Hubicka via Gcc-patches
> Hello, > > Coverity flagged a real issue in this patch: > > On Mon, 16 Jan 2023, Jan Hubicka via Gcc-patches wrote: > > --- a/gcc/ipa-utils.cc > > +++ b/gcc/ipa-utils.cc > [...] > > +bitmap > > +find_always_executed_bbs (function *fun, bool assume_return_or_eh) > > +{ > > + auto_vec stack; > >

Re: Fix wrong code issues with ipa-sra

2023-01-21 Thread Alexander Monakov
Hello, Coverity flagged a real issue in this patch: On Mon, 16 Jan 2023, Jan Hubicka via Gcc-patches wrote: > --- a/gcc/ipa-utils.cc > +++ b/gcc/ipa-utils.cc [...] > +bitmap > +find_always_executed_bbs (function *fun, bool assume_return_or_eh) > +{ > + auto_vec stack; > + auto_vec terminating_b

Fix wrong code issues with ipa-sra

2023-01-16 Thread Jan Hubicka via Gcc-patches
Hi, this patch fixes wrong code issues in ipa-sra where we are trying to prove that on every execution of a given function a call to other function will happen. The code uses post dominators and makes a wrong query (which passes only for first BB in function). Hoever post-dominators are only valid