http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56988
Bug #: 56988
Summary: ipa-cp incorrectly propagates a field of an aggregate
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57088
Bug #: 57088
Summary: Post-reload instruction splitting clobbers live
register
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54938
--- Comment #4 from Easwaran Raman 2012-10-16
17:04:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Thanks Jörn.
> The problem is not related to my changes in PR 51244. It is caused by the
> latest change to optabs.c:
>
> 2012-10-15 Easwaran Raman
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54957
--- Comment #3 from Easwaran Raman 2012-10-17
18:08:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=192488
>
>
> sh4-unknown-linux-gnu no longer builds libgcc.
>
> 0x7df7df emit_cmp_and_jump_i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54957
--- Comment #5 from Easwaran Raman 2012-10-17
18:24:48 UTC ---
Created attachment 28465
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28465
Proposed patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54957
--- Comment #6 from Easwaran Raman 2012-10-17
18:26:30 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Created attachment 28465 [details]
> Proposed patch
I haven't tested the patch. Ryan, could you please confirm this patch fixes the
crashes?
T
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54957
Easwaran Raman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #28465|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54957
--- Comment #11 from Easwaran Raman 2012-10-17
20:31:21 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Created attachment 28467 [details]
> emit_case_dispatch_table testcase
>
> Here's a csmith generated testcase that crashes with -O0 -fexceptions
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57337
--- Comment #1 from Easwaran Raman ---
Could you please attach the preprocessed file? Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57046
Easwaran Raman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eraman at google dot com
--- Comment #8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57088
Easwaran Raman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: eraman at google dot com
Created attachment 30493
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30493&action=edit
Preprocessed source of the test case
$ ./g++_4_8 --version
g++_4_8 (GCC) 4.8.1
Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57878
--- Comment #1 from Easwaran Raman ---
Created attachment 30494
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30494&action=edit
Disassembly of the compiled r.ii
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57878
--- Comment #2 from Easwaran Raman ---
After IRA, we have:
(insn 116 115 117 6 (set (reg:DI 130 [ D.3288 ])
(mem:DI (plus:SI (reg/v/f:SI 172 [orig:109 __first ] [109])
(const_int 4 [0x4])) [10 MEM[base: _1, index: _44, off
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
--- Comment #18 from Easwaran Raman ---
Could you confirm if the patch in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-07/msg01584.html fix this? I am waiting
for someone to review that patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
--- Comment #21 from Easwaran Raman ---
Created attachment 30690
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30690&action=edit
Proposed patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
--- Comment #22 from Easwaran Raman ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #20)
> Yes, the patch maybe fixes the debuginfo issue, but there's something else
> that is wrong. E.g., on the testcase from PR58018, we have in
> reassociate_bb *af
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
--- Comment #27 from Easwaran Raman ---
These two test cases pass for me (compiles with -O3) with the attached patch
(http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30690).
gcc --version returns:
gcc (GCC) 4.9.0 20130821 (experimental)
At what r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
Easwaran Raman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #30690|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33911
Easwaran Raman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eraman at google dot com
--- Comment
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: eraman at google dot com
CC: jason at redhat dot com
Created attachment 31175
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31175&action=edit
Proposed patch
The fix to PR c++/11750 at r193504 caused a regression
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: eraman at google dot com
Created attachment 0
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=0&action=edit
preprocessed test case obtained using creduce
$ ./g++_4_9 --version
g++_4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62146
--- Comment #1 from Easwaran Raman ---
Created attachment 1
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=1&action=edit
Patch to remove obsolete REG_EQUAL note during RTL copy prop
This patch kills the REG_EQUAL note during cprop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62146
Easwaran Raman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44194
--- Comment #9 from Easwaran Raman 2011-04-12
22:39:23 UTC ---
Created attachment 23968
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23968
Patch to dse.c to be less conservative with calls.
Currently dse kills all stores on a call since c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48583
Summary: Mismatch between CFG and IR after cfglayout
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assigne
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48583
--- Comment #3 from Easwaran Raman 2011-04-13
00:18:38 UTC ---
Sorry for the noise. I have a patch to DSE that fails with nrv5.C and I thought
this is somehow causing it.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44194
Easwaran Raman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #23968|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44194
Easwaran Raman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eraman at google dot com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44194
--- Comment #15 from Easwaran Raman 2011-04-15
22:22:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2011, eraman at google dot com wrote:
>
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44194
> >
> >
> 2011-04-17 10:44:02 UTC ---
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2011, eraman at google dot com wrote:
>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44194
>>
>> --- Comment #15 from Easwaran Raman 2011-04-15
>> 22:22:15 UTC ---
>> (In reply to comment #14)
>>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44575
--- Comment #7 from Easwaran Raman 2010-09-30
00:21:17 UTC ---
This is a variation of the same problem where __builtin_va_arg overwrites into
adjacent stack location [Not sure if I should reopen this bug or file a new
one]:
$ cat vararg.cc
#inc
6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: eraman at google dot com
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49414
--- Comment #2 from Easwaran Raman 2011-06-15
16:58:57 UTC ---
The DSE opportunity doesn't arise in ia32 since the struct is returned through
stack. Is the following patch restricting the test to x86_64 ok? (I have tested
that it works correctly
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44194
--- Comment #21 from Easwaran Raman 2011-06-15
20:34:32 UTC ---
The DSE patch still leaves 2 redundant stores. The following patch will enable
DSE to remove those two stores. Does this look ok?
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr44194-1.c
=
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49429
--- Comment #1 from Easwaran Raman 2011-06-15
22:22:05 UTC ---
Can you please attach the dse1 dump with and without my patch so that I can
look into it? I will also try to build a IA64 cross compiler and see if I can
spot what's happening, but I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49429
--- Comment #7 from Easwaran Raman 2011-06-16
00:05:51 UTC ---
>From the dump after the dse.c changes, I see the following for the function
test2_31:
starting to process insn 90
v: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49429
--- Comment #8 from Easwaran Raman 2011-06-16
16:27:44 UTC ---
Compiling x.c with a ia64-unknown-linux cross compiler, setting a breakpoint in
can_escape(), I see that,
(gdb) p debug_rtx (body)
(set (mem/s/c:DI (reg/f:DI 341) [2 s1+0 S8 A64])
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44194
--- Comment #27 from Easwaran Raman 2011-06-16
17:14:38 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #26)
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2011, xinliangli at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44194
> >
> > davidxl changed:
> >
> >
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49429
--- Comment #9 from Easwaran Raman 2011-06-17
20:43:04 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Compiling x.c with a ia64-unknown-linux cross compiler, setting a breakpoint
> in
> can_escape(), I see that,
>
>
> (gdb) p debug_rtx (body)
> (set (mem/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44194
--- Comment #35 from Easwaran Raman 2011-06-20
16:51:18 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #33)
> > I think these two are totally independent of each other -- one should not be
> > gated against each other. If Eawaran's approach is completely flawed, t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49429
--- Comment #11 from Easwaran Raman 2011-06-20
18:40:46 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> With regards to the question in comment #9, you would probably do better
> asking
> it on the gcc-patches mailing list then in the comment of this bug re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #6 from Easwaran Raman 2011-06-24
22:19:40 UTC ---
Could you please test if r175384 fixes these failures? Otherwise please run one
of the smaller tests with -fdump-rtl-dse1-all and -fdump-rtl-cse2 (the pass
before DSE) and upload thos
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #10 from Easwaran Raman 2011-06-24
23:07:58 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> I still get the -Os failures (I never had the others) with r175389 and have
> attached the requested rtl dumps.
This doesn't look like a DSE related bug t
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
--- 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
46 matches
Mail list logo
