http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #24 from Eric Botcazou 2011-09-16
21:24:30 UTC ---
> It seems postreload.c should be changed to the following to avoid combining
>
> --- postreload.c(revision 178904)
> +++ postreload.c(working copy)
> @@ -1312,7 +1312,7 @@ r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #23 from Carrot 2011-09-16 06:57:15 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #21)
> > All callee saved registers should never changed after function call. Here fp
> > has been changed is not because it is after a function call, it is because
> >
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #22 from Ramana Radhakrishnan
2011-09-14 20:26:43 UTC ---
On 14 Sep 2011, at 07:48, "ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
>
> --- Comment #21 from Eric Botcazou 2011-09-14
> 06:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #21 from Eric Botcazou 2011-09-14
06:48:01 UTC ---
> All callee saved registers should never changed after function call. Here fp
> has been changed is not because it is after a function call, it is because it
> is after the target of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #20 from Carrot 2011-09-14 03:02:03 UTC
---
> Instruction 2 and 24 refer to the same location, but have different offset
> relative to FP because the call to y changes FP. DSE doesn't (and can not, if
> it is intra-procedural) know th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
Carrot changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||carrot at google dot com
--- Comment #19 from Ca
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #18 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-18
17:59:04 UTC ---
> Hmmm I'm not sure I see this - what's the configure and arch. specific flags
> you used just in case ?
Flags are just -Os.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #16 from Ramana Radhakrishnan
2011-07-18 16:31:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> The machine-dependent reorg pass does something unexpected:
>
> (insn 30 18 14 3 (set (reg/f:SI 11 fp)
> (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 11 fp)
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #17 from Ramana Radhakrishnan
2011-07-18 16:35:22 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> (In reply to comment #15)
> > The machine-dependent reorg pass does something unexpected:
> >
> > (insn 30 18 14 3 (set (reg/f:SI 11 fp)
> >
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #15 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-16
21:18:39 UTC ---
The machine-dependent reorg pass does something unexpected:
(insn 30 18 14 3 (set (reg/f:SI 11 fp)
(plus:SI (reg/f:SI 11 fp)
(const_int 36 [0x24]))) 4 {*arm_addsi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #14 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-15
06:26:17 UTC ---
> Instruction 2 and 24 refer to the same location, but have different offset
> relative to FP because the call to y changes FP. DSE doesn't (and can not, if
> it is intra-procedural)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #13 from Easwaran Raman 2011-07-14
22:10:16 UTC ---
I looked at the dumps for 920501-7.c and second invocation of DSE removes a
necessary store. The relevant dump for function x from
920501-7.c.198r.pro_and_epilogue is below:
(insn 2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #12 from Easwaran Raman 2011-07-14
17:16:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> I have confirmed that the -Os failures began with r175063 and that the tests
> pass for several revision before that and pass for several after, so it's
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |4.7.0
Target Milestone|---
14 matches
Mail list logo
