From: Kamil Dudka <kdudka@redhat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>,
Sparse Mailing-list <linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org>,
Pekka J Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: linearize bug?
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2011 18:54:40 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201108271854.40694.kdudka@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFxGwAXRWVcv_Qx6C4B_PKqzVVbc8O_znwUt_D6g1iDJvQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 660 bytes --]
On Saturday 27 August 2011 17:53:23 Linus Torvalds wrote:
> The attached patch is ENTIRELY UNTESTED. The only thing I tested it on
> is your test-case. Running "make test" requires stuff that I don't
> even have installed, and I'm lazy ;^o
It seems to break loops with no conditions. The following piece of code:
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
for(;;)
printf("");
}
... translates into:
main:
.L0x7f233ed67010:
<entry-point>
call.32 %r2 <- printf, ""
ret.32
... which is obviously wrong. I am not sure if handling that special case
separately (as done in the attached patch) is a correct way to fix it.
Kamil
[-- Attachment #2: follow-up.diff --]
[-- Type: text/x-diff, Size: 1314 bytes --]
linearize.c | 11 +++++++----
1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/linearize.c b/linearize.c
index 30e0c9d..9e4b6a4 100644
--- a/linearize.c
+++ b/linearize.c
@@ -2055,7 +2055,7 @@ pseudo_t linearize_statement(struct entrypoint *ep, struct statement *stmt)
struct statement *statement = stmt->iterator_statement;
struct statement *post_statement = stmt->iterator_post_statement;
struct expression *post_condition = stmt->iterator_post_condition;
- struct basic_block *loop_top, *loop_body, *loop_continue, *loop_end;
+ struct basic_block *loop_body, *loop_continue, *loop_end;
concat_symbol_list(stmt->iterator_syms, &ep->syms);
linearize_statement(ep, pre_statement);
@@ -2078,9 +2078,12 @@ pseudo_t linearize_statement(struct entrypoint *ep, struct statement *stmt)
linearize_statement(ep, post_statement);
/* No post-condition means that it's the same as the pre-condition */
- if (!post_condition)
- linearize_cond_branch(ep, pre_condition, loop_body, loop_end);
- else
+ if (!post_condition) {
+ if (pre_condition)
+ linearize_cond_branch(ep, pre_condition, loop_body, loop_end);
+ else
+ add_goto(ep, loop_body);
+ } else
linearize_cond_branch(ep, post_condition, loop_body, loop_end);
set_activeblock(ep, loop_end);
break;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-27 16:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-27 6:29 linearize bug? Jeff Garzik
2011-08-27 11:34 ` Kamil Dudka
2011-08-27 15:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-08-27 15:37 ` Jeff Garzik
2011-08-27 15:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-08-27 16:54 ` Kamil Dudka [this message]
2011-08-27 17:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-08-27 17:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-08-27 19:26 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-08-27 20:03 ` Jeff Garzik
2011-08-28 6:26 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-08-27 23:39 ` [PATCH] cse: update PHI users when throwing away an instruction Kamil Dudka
2011-08-28 0:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-08-28 6:32 ` Christopher Li
2011-08-28 6:33 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-08-28 8:53 ` Jeff Garzik
2011-08-27 22:07 ` linearize bug? Jeff Garzik
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-11-12 4:09 Jeff Garzik
2006-11-13 4:43 ` Linus Torvalds
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201108271854.40694.kdudka@redhat.com \
--to=kdudka@redhat.com \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.