[llvm-commits] [llvm] r99400 - in /llvm/trunk: lib/CodeGen/LiveIntervalAnalysis.cpp test/CodeGen/Generic/2010-03-24-liveintervalleak.ll

[Evan Cheng]

On Mar 25, 2010, at 4:39 PM, Jakob Stoklund Olesen wrote:

> 
> On Mar 25, 2010, at 4:32 PM, Evan Cheng wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Mar 25, 2010, at 4:30 PM, Jakob Stoklund Olesen wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mar 24, 2010, at 6:50 AM, Torok Edwin wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Modified: llvm/trunk/lib/CodeGen/LiveIntervalAnalysis.cpp
>>>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/lib/CodeGen/LiveIntervalAnalysis.cpp?rev=99400&r1=99399&r2=99400&view=diff
>>>> ==============================================================================
>>>> --- llvm/trunk/lib/CodeGen/LiveIntervalAnalysis.cpp (original)
>>>> +++ llvm/trunk/lib/CodeGen/LiveIntervalAnalysis.cpp Wed Mar 24 08:50:36 2010
>>>> @@ -85,8 +85,10 @@
>>>> void LiveIntervals::releaseMemory() {
>>>> // Free the live intervals themselves.
>>>> for (DenseMap<unsigned, LiveInterval*>::iterator I = r2iMap_.begin(),
>>>> -       E = r2iMap_.end(); I != E; ++I)
>>>> +       E = r2iMap_.end(); I != E; ++I) {
>>>> +    I->second->clear();
>>>>  delete I->second;
>>>> +  }
>>>> 
>>>> r2iMap_.clear();
>>> 
>>> I think LiveInterval::clear is broken. I calls VNI->~VNInfo(), but those VNIs can be referenced from multiple intervals.
>> 
>> Really? Multiple liveinterval's or liverange's?
> 
> LiveIntervals.
> 
> Is a VNI supposed to belong to only one LiveInterval? I don't know any concrete examples where that is not the case, but a lot of funny stuff is going on when coalescing.

I don't think VNI should be shared between liveinterval's. It may be shared temporarily during coalescing though. Either way, VNI are all bump allocated so the dtor should not be called?

Evan

> 
> /jakob
>