--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-17
03:04 ---
Hmm, we now have a missed optimization of removing the loop but that is not a
regression so closing
as fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-13
17:28 ---
Subject: Bug 22236
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-13 17:28:43
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog tree-cfg.c tree-chrec.c
--- Additional Comments From sebastian dot pop at cri dot ensmp dot fr
2005-07-27 09:04 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong code for casts and scev
dberlin at dberlin dot org wrote:
> > I don't think it is possible to properly convert these ivs without
> > knowing an approximation
--- Additional Comments From sebastian dot pop at cri dot ensmp dot fr
2005-07-27 09:01 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong code for casts and scev
dberlin at dberlin dot org wrote:
> > A sequence of unsigned char 1, 2, ..., 255 has to be converted to
> > signed char that would wra
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
18:41 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong code for
casts and scev
On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 17:19 +0200, Sebastian Pop wrote:
> Dorit Naishlos wrote:
> >
> > The modifications you suggest will make the test
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
18:34 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong code for
casts and scev
On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 12:10 +0200, Sebastian Pop wrote:
> After inlining, we end up with a loop containing the following code:
>
>b.
--- Additional Comments From sebastian dot pop at cri dot ensmp dot fr
2005-07-26 15:15 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong code for casts and scev
Dorit Naishlos wrote:
>
> The modifications you suggest will make the tests uninteresting - they were
> introduced with unknown loop-
--- Additional Comments From dorit at il dot ibm dot com 2005-07-26 13:59
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong code for casts and
scev
Hi Sebastian,
The modifications you suggest will make the tests uninteresting - they were
introduced with unknown loop-bound/offset on purpose
--- Additional Comments From richard dot guenther at gmail dot com
2005-07-26 10:38 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong code for casts and scev
You should also add the (two) testcases from the PR.
Richard.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22236
--- Additional Comments From sebastian dot pop at cri dot ensmp dot fr
2005-07-26 10:06 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong code for casts and scev
After inlining, we end up with a loop containing the following code:
b.0_3 = (signed char) b_8;
D.1621_4 = (int) b.0_3;
a_5
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-22
21:02 ---
Sebastian, an you look into this please?
--
What|Removed |Added
GCC target triplet|powerpc
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-06
13:40 ---
Confirmed:
-O0 passes
-O1 fails
-O2 passes (because of VRP)
-O3 passes (because of VRP).
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO|22212 |
nThis||
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22236
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-30
02:04 ---
Note you might need -fno-tree-vrp to expose the bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22236
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-30
02:04 ---
Note you might need -fno-vrp to expose the bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22236
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-29
20:59 ---
Here is a testcase which will fail even after the patch for 14490:
void abort(void);
static inline void
foo (signed char a)
{
int b = a - 0x7F;
if (b > 1)
abort();
}
int main()
{
unsigned char b;
--
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO||14490
nThis||
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22236
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-29
20:50 ---
I think this was introduced by:
2005-06-07 Sebastian Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR 18403 and meta PR 21861.
* Makefile.in (tree-chrec.o): Depend on CFGLOOP_H and TREE_FLOW_H.
* tree-c
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-29
20:37 ---
I should note that after I fix PR 14490, this becomes a latent bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22236
--
What|Removed |Added
GCC target triplet||powerpc-darwin
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
Version|4.0.1
20 matches
Mail list logo
