https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23551
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23551
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23551
Matthew Fortune changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mfortune at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
--- Comment #18 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-09 19:24 ---
Subject: Bug 23551
Author: aoliva
Date: Mon Jul 9 19:24:23 2007
New Revision: 126492
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126492
Log:
Revert:
2007-07-06 Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR de
--- Comment #17 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-06 08:38 ---
Subject: Bug 23551
Author: aoliva
Date: Fri Jul 6 08:38:40 2007
New Revision: 126402
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126402
Log:
PR debug/23551
* tree-ssa-copyrename.c (copy_rename_partition_
--- Comment #16 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-05-10 08:40 ---
Subject: Bug number PR 23551
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-05/msg00703.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
--- Comment #15 from fche at redhat dot com 2007-03-30 22:10 ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> This is basically the same as case 1 (though a constant instead of a call to
> rand()), now do we want not to prop x1 into x? I say we always do want that
> because otherwise we get an extra ass
--- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-30 22:04
---
(In reply to comment #13)
> If aoliva is correct in comment# 11, then some information is being lost
> that could be retained with some additional effort. That would make this
> bug other than invalid - at best a
--- Comment #13 from fche at redhat dot com 2007-03-30 19:21 ---
> Case 1, is also too hard to fix as it would make us lose a lot of
> optimizations.
If aoliva is correct in comment# 11, then some information is being lost
that could be retained with some additional effort. That would
--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-09 05:43
---
Case 2 was filed as PR 29792 and was declared invalid.
Though we get currently:
.uleb128 0x2# (DIE (0x25) DW_TAG_subprogram)
.ascii "foo\0" # DW_AT_name
.byte 0x1 # DW_AT_decl_fil
--- Comment #11 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 06:37 ---
Every inlined function starts with copying of argument initializers into the
formal arguments. This makes such copies too suitable for SSA coalescing.
It appears to me that it would be desirable to arrange for coal
--- Comment #10 from drow at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-21 16:57 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Case 1:
> There is no location info for the parameter x because it has been optimized
> away. Change the variable x in main to y to avoid ambiguity, compile with
> -fdump-tree-all, and look
--- Comment #9 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-13 02:47 ---
If you compile with -dA you will get readable DWARF2 debug info in the .s file.
Case 1:
There is no location info for the parameter x because it has been optimized
away. Change the variable x in main to y to avoid a
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-24
21:08 ---
A lot of these are all because we optimize stuff away. like the
no-inlined-subroutine is because we just
get "return 11;".
Others look like they are fixed in 4.1.0.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show
--- Additional Comments From graydon at redhat dot com 2005-08-24 20:59
---
I should also point out that the compile flags for these cases were always
"-finline -O2 -g"; I'm not sure how best to tell gcc to enable function-inlining
(and nothing else), so this might be a mistake on my par
--- Additional Comments From graydon at redhat dot com 2005-08-24 20:55
---
Created an attachment (id=9582)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9582&action=view)
case 3, debug info dump
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23551
--- Additional Comments From graydon at redhat dot com 2005-08-24 20:54
---
Created an attachment (id=9581)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9581&action=view)
case 3, preprocessed file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23551
--- Additional Comments From graydon at redhat dot com 2005-08-24 20:54
---
Created an attachment (id=9580)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9580&action=view)
case 2, debug info dump
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23551
--- Additional Comments From graydon at redhat dot com 2005-08-24 20:53
---
Created an attachment (id=9579)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9579&action=view)
case 2, preprocessed file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23551
--- Additional Comments From graydon at redhat dot com 2005-08-24 20:52
---
Created an attachment (id=9578)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9578&action=view)
case 1, debug info dump
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23551
--- Additional Comments From graydon at redhat dot com 2005-08-24 20:52
---
Created an attachment (id=9577)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9577&action=view)
case 1, preprocessed file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23551
21 matches
Mail list logo
