--- Comment #11 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-19 02:18
---
Should this bug go into WORKSFORME state?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24899
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-19 00:32
---
(In reply to comment #8)
> I can't reproduce this with r107187.
I cannot reproduce it either with 107184 either.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24899
--- Comment #9 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-18 23:37 ---
This does in no way block the removal of loop.c. Rather, the (now latent
again) bug would disappear with loop.c if/when we nuke it.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #8 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-18 23:35 ---
I can't reproduce this with r107187.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24899
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfir
--- Comment #7 from federico at novell dot com 2005-11-16 18:44 ---
In the original code, art_uta_new() is in a separate module (a whole different
library, actually). I don't know if this will affect inlining in this example.
--
federico at novell dot com changed:
What
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-16 18:07 ---
>From looking at the RTL dumps, old-loop is where the difference is introduced
so blocking the meta-bug for loop.c issues (this goes under section a of that
meta bug).
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-16 18:05 ---
-floop-optimize2 fixes it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24899
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-16 17:56 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > The only difference at the tree level is:
> That is -O1 vs -O2
And -fno-optimize-sibling-calls makes no difference.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bu
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-16 17:55 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> The only difference at the tree level is:
That is -O1 vs -O2
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24899
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-16 17:55 ---
The only difference at the tree level is:
- uta = art_uta_new (clip_x1, clip_y1, clip_x1 + 1, clip_y1 + 1);
+ uta = art_uta_new (clip_x1, clip_y1, clip_x1 + 1, clip_y1 + 1) [tail call];
- uta = art_uta_new (clip_
11 matches
Mail list logo
