[Bug lto/41230] [LTO] Segfault using -flto with -fvar-tracking-assignments

2009-09-15 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-15 10:15 --- Fixed. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNE

[Bug lto/41230] [LTO] Segfault using -flto with -fvar-tracking-assignments

2009-09-15 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-15 10:14 --- Subject: Bug 41230 Author: rguenth Date: Tue Sep 15 10:14:29 2009 New Revision: 151714 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151714 Log: 2009-09-15 Richard Guenther PR lto/41230

[Bug lto/41230] [LTO] Segfault using -flto with -fvar-tracking-assignments

2009-09-09 Thread aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 18:42 --- (In reply to comment #3) > Hmm, dropping the stmt looks like it would be a "hack". Alex - if I just set > flag_var_tracking_assignments to 1 if I encounter a GIMPLE_DEBUG > is there sth else that I need to do to "en

[Bug lto/41230] [LTO] Segfault using -flto with -fvar-tracking-assignments

2009-09-03 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-09-03 10:25 --- Subject: Re: [LTO] Segfault using -flto with -fvar-tracking-assignments On Wed, 2 Sep 2009, rmansfield at qnx dot com wrote: > --- Comment #6 from rmansfield at qnx dot com 2009-09-02 22:50 --- > (In reply to

[Bug lto/41230] [LTO] Segfault using -flto with -fvar-tracking-assignments

2009-09-03 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-09-03 08:53 --- (In reply to comment #3) > Hmm, dropping the stmt looks like it would be a "hack". Alex - if I just set > flag_var_tracking_assignments to 1 if I encounter a GIMPLE_DEBUG during > read-in > I get > > t.c: In function 'f

[Bug lto/41230] [LTO] Segfault using -flto with -fvar-tracking-assignments

2009-09-02 Thread rmansfield at qnx dot com
--- Comment #6 from rmansfield at qnx dot com 2009-09-02 22:50 --- (In reply to comment #5) > Note that in general you have to repeat all options on the link command line, > otherwise you are building with -O0 there. Yep, I realize that. I just came across this crash by accidentally lea

[Bug lto/41230] [LTO] Segfault using -flto with -fvar-tracking-assignments

2009-09-02 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-02 20:55 --- Note that in general you have to repeat all options on the link command line, otherwise you are building with -O0 there. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41230

[Bug lto/41230] [LTO] Segfault using -flto with -fvar-tracking-assignments

2009-09-02 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-02 20:34 --- Dropping the stmts works for at least the testcase, but it looks ugly. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41230

[Bug lto/41230] [LTO] Segfault using -flto with -fvar-tracking-assignments

2009-09-02 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-02 20:30 --- Hmm, dropping the stmt looks like it would be a "hack". Alex - if I just set flag_var_tracking_assignments to 1 if I encounter a GIMPLE_DEBUG during read-in I get t.c: In function 'foo': t.c:1:6: error: unrecogniza

[Bug lto/41230] [LTO] Segfault using -flto with -fvar-tracking-assignments

2009-09-02 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-02 20:13 --- You need to include -fvar-tracking-assignments in the final link as well. I guess we need to either special-case it or drop debug stmts on stream-in if -fvta is not set. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed

[Bug lto/41230] [LTO] Segfault using -flto with -fvar-tracking-assignments

2009-09-02 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-02 19:31 --- I will have a look. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added