On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 05:28:14PM +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On 5/5/06, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >On May 5, 2006, at 7:26 AM, François-Xavier Coudert wrote:
> >
> >>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27437
> >>
> >> Humpf. Does that mean that the patch wasn't regtested before being
> >> applied?
> >
> >No, it was regression tested, just not on x86-linux-gnu like most
> >people is
> >doing.
>
> I'm surprised, then, that on whatever target it was tested it passed
> because of the NEXT_INSN/PREV_INSN bug that HJ mentions in the PR.
>
> IMHO the patch should be reverted until it is fixed and tested properly...
I would suggest this patch.
H.J.
----
2006-05-05 H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* opts.c (decode_options): Don't turn on SEE for -O3.
--- gcc/opts.c.see 2006-05-04 10:59:02.000000000 -0700
+++ gcc/opts.c 2006-05-05 08:54:22.000000000 -0700
@@ -510,7 +510,6 @@ decode_options (unsigned int argc, const
flag_inline_functions = 1;
flag_unswitch_loops = 1;
flag_gcse_after_reload = 1;
- flag_see = 1;
}
if (optimize < 2 || optimize_size)
