Hi Steve and Kaz,
Sorry about that. Kaz has a fix shown in rtl-optimization/58220:
--- ORIG/trunk/gcc/final.c 2013-08-22 09:43:35.000000000 +0900
+++ trunk/gcc/final.c 2013-08-22 14:36:51.000000000 +0900
@@ -1650,7 +1650,7 @@ reemit_insn_block_notes (void)
rtx insn, note;
insn = get_insns ();
- for (; insn; insn = next_insn (insn))
+ for (; insn; insn = NEXT_INSN (insn))
{
tree this_block;
It should be committed soon, by Kaz or myself once testing finishes.
Please let me know if that doesn't fix your failures.
Thanks,
Teresa
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Kaz Kojima <kkoj...@rr.iij4u.or.jp> wrote:
> Steve Ellcey <sell...@mips.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2013-08-19 at 22:21 -0700, Teresa Johnson wrote:
>>
>>> 2013-08-19 Teresa Johnson <tejohn...@google.com>
>>>
>>> PR rtl-optimizations/57451
>>> * final.c (reemit_insn_block_notes): Prevent lexical blocks
>>> from crossing split section boundaries.
>>>
>>> * testsuite/g++.dg/tree-prof/pr57451.C: New test.
>>
>> Teresa,
>>
>> This patch is causing a problem in my mips compiler. I am creating a
>> cross-toolchain running on x86 targeting mips-mti-linux-gnu and if I
>> compile glibc using a GCC that has this patch all of the programs I
>> compile go into an infinite loop when run under the qemu simulator. I
>> think it is the dynamic linker that is getting miscompiled, but I
>> haven't tracked down the exact nature of the miscompilation yet. Has
>> anyone else reported any problems with it? I am adding Richard
>> Sandiford to the email list since he is a mips expert and also might
>> have some insight to using next_active_insn vs. next_real_insn vs.
>> next_insn, though it doesn't look like you have changed what is used
>> here.
>
> Similar on SH. I've just filed rtl-optimization/58220.
>
> Regards,
> kaz
--
Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohn...@google.com | 408-460-2413
