http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57422
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51505
--- Comment #5 from Andrey Belevantsev 2012-01-17
16:05:26 UTC ---
Created attachment 26353
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26353
untested patch
I've tried to implement what Paolo suggests, the attached patch bootstraps but
o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51505
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #26353|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51505
--- Comment #9 from Andrey Belevantsev 2012-01-18
09:46:41 UTC ---
This seems like an overkill as we only need to remove a single vector. The
below helper looks enough:
+/* Remove the EQ_USES vector for INSN assuming it exists. */
+void
+df_re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51505
--- Comment #11 from Andrey Belevantsev 2012-01-18
12:02:36 UTC ---
No problem -- I will go back to df_notes_rescan and repost to gcc-patches.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51505
--- Comment #12 from Andrey Belevantsev 2012-01-19
07:29:25 UTC ---
Author: abel
Date: Thu Jan 19 07:29:18 2012
New Revision: 183296
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183296
Log:
gcc/:
2012-01-19 Andrey Belevantsev
PR r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51106
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45472
--- Comment #18 from Andrey Belevantsev 2012-01-19
09:28:56 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> By the way I think we could get cases where the user wrote volatile in one
> case
> and non-volatile in another so fixing up the merging is still a g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51106
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev 2012-01-20
06:22:31 UTC ---
Author: abel
Date: Fri Jan 20 06:22:24 2012
New Revision: 183325
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183325
Log:
gcc:/
2012-01-20 Andrey Belevantsev
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51106
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.0
Summary|[4.5/4.6/4.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51447
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
||2012-01-24
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Andrey Belevantsev 2012-01-24
09:07:20 UTC ---
Confirmed. We have a loop with a couple thousands of bbs and >20k datar
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51389
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev 2012-01-24
09:08:24 UTC ---
Created attachment 26441
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26441
Proposed patch
The patch described above.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48374
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev 2012-01-25
13:20:47 UTC ---
Author: abel
Date: Wed Jan 25 13:20:43 2012
New Revision: 183519
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183519
Log:
gcc:
PR rtl-optimization/48374
* se
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51389
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev 2012-01-27
13:47:45 UTC ---
Author: abel
Date: Fri Jan 27 13:47:41 2012
New Revision: 183624
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183624
Log:
PR middle-end/51389
* Makefile.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51389
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.0
--- Comment #5 from Andrey Bel
|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Looks like mine.
|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Sure. I have somewhat free month now so I'm going over sel-sched bugs.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86979
--- Comment #9 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Eric, thanks for pointing me out to the old PR. From that and what I could
understand here from the sched logs, it's not clear to me how to correctly
clone REG_ARGS_SIZE insns, so the safest patch of fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88879
--- Comment #6 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #4)
> Thanks. This broke when the patch for PR 85458 was applied, and Andreas
> raised it on the gcc-patches thread:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83530
--- Comment #12 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Apr 9 09:08:28 2018
New Revision: 259228
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259228&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/83530
* sel-sched.c (force_next_in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83962
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Apr 9 09:16:34 2018
New Revision: 259229
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259229&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/83962
* sel-sched-ir.c (tidy_contro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83913
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Apr 9 09:42:25 2018
New Revision: 259230
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259230&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/83913
* sel-sched-ir.c (merge_expr_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83480
--- Comment #14 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Apr 9 10:19:50 2018
New Revision: 259231
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259231&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/80463
PR rtl-optimization/83972
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83972
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Apr 9 10:19:50 2018
New Revision: 259231
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259231&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/80463
PR rtl-optimization/83972
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80463
--- Comment #15 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Apr 9 10:19:50 2018
New Revision: 259231
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259231&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/80463
PR rtl-optimization/83972
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83480
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85099
Bug 85099 depends on bug 83480, which changed state.
Bug 83480 Summary: ICE in create_block_for_bookkeeping, at sel-sched.c:4557
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83480
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83972
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Known to fail|8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85306
--- Comment #1 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Jakub has added -w to the test options in r259249. I'm sorry I have missed
this one when committing. If this works for you now, I think you can close the
PR.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83852
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84842
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83852
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Fri Apr 13 10:24:02 2018
New Revision: 259373
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259373&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/83852
* gcc.dg/pr83852.c: New test
||2018-04-16
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org,
||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
We fail when trying to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85409
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
This one is cool. We hit an assert saying we cannot hold of successor info
anymore. The succs vector size is of max_ws (maximum lookahead) + 1, but guess
what, there's a lot of debug insns and these ar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85423
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85423
--- Comment #5 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Apr 23 15:19:06 2018
New Revision: 259563
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259563&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/85423
* sel-sched-ir.c (has_depen
||2018-04-24
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org,
||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org,
||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84842
--- Comment #12 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #11)
> Thanks, I managed to reproduce it. The unusual thing here is hardreg 63
> being considered call-clobbered in its reg_raw_mode=TImode but not narrower
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82398
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Andrey, any progress on this?
Sorry, I have somehow missed this PR. The second hunk of Alexander's patch
looks fine. In the first I would rather rewrite t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83513
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #2)
> Thanks. So the fix for PR 82398 was incomplete. Here we have insns:
>
> i1: uid: 43 prio: 0 usefulness: 100%
> i2: uid: 20 prio: 3 usefulness: 0%
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80463
--- Comment #12 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #11)
> How about this one? It makes only trunk gcc ICE, though.
>
> short int t2;
> int cd, aa, ft;
>
> void
> dh (void)
> {
> int qs = 0;
>
> if (t2 < 1)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80463
--- Comment #13 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Andrey Belevantsev from comment #12)
> (In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #11)
> > How about this one? It makes only trunk gcc ICE, though.
> >
> > short int t2;
> > int cd, aa, ft;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83913
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
||2018-01-30
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Thank you for the test. This is another variant of PR80463 c#3. I have a
hackish patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83480
--- Comment #12 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
> Not fully fixed yet, the testcase still ICEs with:
> -O2 -g -gstatement-frontiers -fselective-scheduling2 -fsel-sched-pipelining
> -fgcse-sm -floop-paralle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83962
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Here we're trying remove a jump to the next block but fail to adjust the
barrier. This is something that tidy_fallthru_edge would do for us, but we
don't get to the point we can call it, before that the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83530
--- Comment #8 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Pat Haugen from comment #7)
> Assuming this is a latent selective scheduling bug since I can reproduce
> with r243865 by adding -fsched-pressure --param sched-pressure-algorithm=2.
> Looking
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86979
--- Comment #12 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
> Any progress on this?
I know what happens but am not fully sure as of why. The sp register should not
be available for the problematic move, so I'm figuri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86979
--- Comment #13 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
So now I understand, finally. We move up an sp decrement and are supposed to
check that sp is available on the paths that are not touched by the move. There
are several successors of the move target blo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86979
--- Comment #17 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #16)
> Andrey: Can you please send a patch for it into gcc-patches mailing list?
Sure, I've sent the patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89676
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Mar 18 07:51:06 2019
New Revision: 269751
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269751&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/89676
* sel-sched.c (compute_av_set_at_b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87273
--- Comment #5 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
In this PR we're pipelining a loop with a conditional that has lots of code on
the left arm and just a few blocks on the right arm. In this situation it is
natural for the right scheduling fence to end
||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
The code that fails here tries to skip the inner loop's body to get to the next
blocks in the outer loop. The failing asse
|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #17 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Created attachment 45991
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45991&action=edit
tentative patch
This is a rather complex situation. The assert checks that we have co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86928
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86928
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Andrey Belevantsev from comment #2)
> We're not somehow updating liveness information at all times when we change
> control flow. E.g. we do update liveness in sel_split_edge, but not in
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85412
--- Comment #8 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Sigh. We set reset_sched_cycles_p to pipelining_p after the conditional, but
we have missed that in sel_sched_region_1 pipelining_p will be set to false.
So that initial patch should have the following
||2019-03-21
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org,
||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85876
--- Comment #1 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
This is caused by the overeager fix of PR 48235. We're unwinding the
first_insn variable (the border to which we step backwards in code motion) too
far so it gets beyond the original fence, which happen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85412
--- Comment #10 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #9)
> (In reply to Andrey Belevantsev from comment #8)
> > trunk doesn't
> > ICE for me.
>
> I don't have a good testcase at hand (it's just a matter of time, t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85528
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88652
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88652
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> (In reply to Andrey Belevantsev from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> > > Any progress on this please?
> >
> > Maybe a stupid q
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83530
--- Comment #11 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
I've made a deeper comparison with what the Haifa does. We diverge because the
loop in reset_sched_cycles only models resource stalls and relies on the
information from the earlier scheduling pass for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84872
--- Comment #2 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Nothing to do with sel-sched as is :) We're just asking to make loop
preheaders that will be fallthrough blocks. The loop has blocks 5 and 6 (6->5
is a loop latch), and the pred block is block 7 but th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55889
--- Comment #5 from Andrey Belevantsev 2013-01-09
14:26:22 UTC ---
I've just got back from the holidays, I will take a look probably on Friday.
David's analysis hints that the scheduler should treat the insn as unique (i.e.
it is cannot b
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #6 from Andrey Belevantsev 2013-01-11
14:23:41 UTC ---
Created attachment 29146
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29146
Restore debug printing
Da
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55889
--- Comment #8 from Andrey Belevantsev 2013-01-18
11:09:13 UTC ---
Created attachment 29202
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29202
more debug printing patch
>From the log, the problem looks as follows. There is
i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55889
--- Comment #11 from Andrey Belevantsev 2013-01-21
10:15:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Neither insn 24/145 nor insn 28 move through insn 17. The two UNSPEC 44 insn
> (LC..2,, LCM..2) are inputs to insn 17. The pseudos are moved in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55889
--- Comment #13 from Andrey Belevantsev 2013-01-21
13:23:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> I've tried to reproduce this with a cross compiler (without cross binutils) on
> x86_64-linux host, but it ICEs elsewhere:
>
> ../configure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55889
--- Comment #20 from Andrey Belevantsev 2013-01-21
17:31:57 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> Indeed, with #c18 patch I can reproduce the ICE. Andrey, can you try that
> too?
Sure, will do, I'll be out of office on Tuesday though. Th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55889
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55889
--- Comment #23 from Andrey Belevantsev 2013-01-24
13:37:05 UTC ---
You are right from the target maintainer point of view, as you understand what
really happens in the code. But this is not what the compiler sees as the
relations between
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55889
--- Comment #26 from Andrey Belevantsev 2013-02-01
12:22:05 UTC ---
You are right, your suggestions is what I sketched in comment #21 as choices 1
or 2. Sorry for my unclear expalanation of what was actually happening.
I don't have a pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56200
Bug #: 56200
Summary: queens benchmark is faster with -O0 than with any
other optimization level
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69032
--- Comment #2 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Created attachment 37490
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37490&action=edit
proposed patch
We fail to find the proper seqno for the fresh bookkeeping copy here. The
problem is that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69102
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Created attachment 37550
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37550&action=edit
proposed patch
The problem here is readonly dependence contexts in selective scheduler. We're
trying to c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69307
--- Comment #6 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Created attachment 37551
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37551&action=edit
proposed patch
Here before reload we're trying to rename a hard register. At the very final
point of choo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64411
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Mar 15 15:13:29 2016
New Revision: 234216
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234216&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/64411
* sched-deps.c (get_implicit_reg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63384
--- Comment #6 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Mar 15 15:25:41 2016
New Revision: 234217
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234217&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR rtl-optimization/63384
* sel-sched.c (invoke_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=0
--- Comment #9 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Mar 15 15:36:44 2016
New Revision: 234218
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234218&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/0
* sel-sched-ir.c (merge_expr): Avoid c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69032
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Mar 15 15:42:07 2016
New Revision: 234219
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234219&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR rtl-optimization/69032
* sel-sched-ir.c (get_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69102
--- Comment #6 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Mar 21 07:52:05 2016
New Revision: 234359
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234359&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR rtl-optimization/69102
* sched-deps.c (sched_a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69307
--- Comment #9 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Mar 21 07:54:36 2016
New Revision: 234360
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234360&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/69307
* gcc.target/arm/pr69307.c:
||2016-03-31
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Andrey Tarasevich from comment #0)
> Created attachment 38016 [details]
> tes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64411
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Thu Mar 31 13:50:15 2016
New Revision: 234620
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234620&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-03-15 Andrey Belevantsev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=0
--- Comment #11 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Thu Mar 31 13:55:36 2016
New Revision: 234622
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234622&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-03-15 Andrey Belevantse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69032
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Thu Mar 31 14:01:22 2016
New Revision: 234624
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234624&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-03-15 Andrey Belevantsev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69102
--- Comment #7 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Thu Mar 31 14:16:18 2016
New Revision: 234625
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234625&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-03-21 Andrey Belevantsev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70292
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64411
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tarasevich at cs dot
uni-saarland.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70292
--- Comment #2 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Thu Mar 31 14:37:08 2016
New Revision: 234627
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234627&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/70292
* gcc.c-torture/pr70292.c: New test.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69032
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69307
--- Comment #10 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Thu Mar 31 14:50:57 2016
New Revision: 234629
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234629&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-03-12 Andrey Belevantsev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64411
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80463
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79570
--- Comment #11 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> Fixed on the trunk so far.
FWIW I stared at the code for some time but couldn't devise anything better
than your patch. The hunk itself is somewhat suspi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79985
--- Comment #5 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Well, we can special case this in sel-sched either along the lines of
df-scan.c, or even easier, just forbid any asm reordering given the DF hunk.
Generally speaking, we've been bitten a couple of times
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80463
--- Comment #6 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Any progress with this?
I can make a patch for the dependency problem. I'm not sure what happened to
the hot/cold block partitioning verification code -- I
101 - 200 of 323 matches
Mail list logo
