https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80803
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||su at cs dot ucdavis.edu
--- Comment #31
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80803
--- Comment #32 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Jun 13 11:40:24 2017
New Revision: 249154
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249154&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR80803 2/2] Diligent queuing in SRA grp_write prop
2017-06-13 Marti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81063
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Jun 13 11:40:24 2017
New Revision: 249154
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249154&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR80803 2/2] Diligent queuing in SRA grp_write prop
2017-06-13 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80803
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
There is a bogus size check at the end of splice_param_accesses() that
is the culprit. But I am in the middle of an IPA-SRA rewrite so I
would prefer to fix it that way, if possible. In any event, I will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70965
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Nov 25 09:49:19 2016
New Revision: 242867
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242867&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 70965] Schedule extra rebuild_cgraph_edges
2016-11-25 Martin Jambo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70965
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
When compiling the following testcase:
$ cat t.c
void bar (void)
{
#pragma omp parallel
{
int *p;
*p = 345
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78589
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #1)
> A similar issue can be seen with IPA cloning. It's more rare, because it's
> triggered only with warnings that are issued late, after IPA transforms
> (note
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78589
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
I have always thought there was a reason why the outline OMP functions
do not have their abstract origin set, but perhaps there isn't.
I am testing a patch for gcc/cp/error.c that (apart from guarding
agains
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78589
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #3)
> Ah, sorry if I misunderstood and got carried away.
BTW, enhancing dumping decls of IPA clones has been discussed to some
length in (a bit forgotten) PR 60761
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78589
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #4)
> I am testing a patch for gcc/cp/error.c that (apart from guarding
> against infinite recursion in some cases) should make g++ produce the
> same output as gcc doe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78599
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78589
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Dec 7 13:09:07 2016
New Revision: 243344
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243344&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Use dump_function_name rather than emit
2016-12-07 Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78599
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78589
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78599
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Jan 9 18:26:37 2017
New Revision: 244232
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244232&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 78365] Prudent type handling in IPA VR-prop
2017-01-09 Martin Jam
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78365
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Jan 9 18:26:37 2017
New Revision: 244232
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244232&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 78365] Prudent type handling in IPA VR-prop
2017-01-09 Martin Jamb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78599
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
I believe this is fixed but I still need to build an instrumented compiler to
verify.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78365
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78599
--- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor ---
Indeed it is.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78365
--- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #11)
> Looks like a GC issue as I was reducing the code but removing the comments
> and empty lines caused the testcase to no longer crash. Adding --param
> ggc-min-e
||2017-01-16
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
Confirmed and most
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79108
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed a fix on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-01/msg01643.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79108
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Jan 23 13:01:31 2017
New Revision: 244802
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244802&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 79108] Put ipa_node_params to GC memory
2017-01-23 Martin Jambor
||2017-01-23
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
The revision number suggests this is mine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79198
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
I am about to test the following, which fixes the test from comment
#1. It does fix a clear bug in the patch I committed today, without
it there we multitudes of identical cgraph duplication hooks active at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79198
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
And based on the IRC discussion I had earlier today with Markus, I
have also added the following to the patch I'm bootstrapping, even
though it is not strictly necessary to prevent OOM in the testcase
from co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79198
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Jan 24 10:04:21 2017
New Revision: 244860
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244860&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 79198] Call ipa-prop func summary destructor
2017-01-24 Martin Jam
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79198
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor ---
Interesting to see stack issues after IPA-CP changes.
Please try compiling with -fno-devirtualize
If it does not help, try -fno-ipa-cp (or both).
If any of the above does help, adding it to just the file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i686-w64-mingw32
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333
--- Comment #16 from Martin Jambor ---
Please check whether the following patch (it is against trunk should
apply on top of GCC 6 too) fixes the issue for you.
It can potentially open a whole can of worms so I want to make sure it
helps before t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333
--- Comment #17 from Martin Jambor ---
OK, so it turns out I botched my testing and the patch from the
previous commit cause PR57330 and we would need something like the
patch below (with a big fat comment why the condition is necessary, if
we go
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
Mine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79375
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 40669
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40669&action=edit
Fix
I will properly test and then propose this patch to address this bug on Monday.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79375
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Feb 8 09:47:09 2017
New Revision: 245275
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245275&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 79375] Avoid passing NULL by reference
2017-02-08 Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79375
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Fixed.
||2017-02-17
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
Apparently the optimize(0) attribute suppresses a necessary call to
ipa_check_create_edge_args
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79579
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Feb 21 14:01:52 2017
New Revision: 245628
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245628&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 79579] Avoid segfault on NULL ipa_edge_args_vector
2017-02-21 Mart
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78140
--- Comment #27 from Martin Jambor ---
I have submitted a patch to the mailing list, which re-uses
value_ranges and ipa_bits in jump functions and manages to save more
than one gigabyte of memory:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-02/msg01
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78140
--- Comment #28 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #27)
> Unfortunately, something else has added a further gigabyte to WPA of
> FF in the last week:
So this fortunately turnout to be a mistake in measurement, I was
c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78140
--- Comment #29 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Mar 1 09:37:27 2017
New Revision: 245805
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245805&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 78140] Reuse same IPA bits and VR info
2017-03-01 Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78140
--- Comment #30 from Martin Jambor ---
With the above commit, we hae avoided the vast majority of memory use
increase. I think that using the same approach to cache ipa_vr
structures (used to store results of IPA-VR) could bring further
savings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79579
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Mar 1 13:53:33 2017
New Revision: 245809
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245809&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 79579] Avoid segfault on NULL ipa_edge_args_vector
2017-03-01 Mart
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79579
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Mar 1 13:54:56 2017
New Revision: 245810
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245810&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 79579] Avoid segfault on NULL ipa_edge_args_vector
2017-03-01 Mart
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79579
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333
--- Comment #20 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 40864
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40864&action=edit
A small self-contained testcase
I have finally managed to put together a small self-contained
testcase. Compi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78140
--- Comment #32 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #30)
> I think that using the same approach to cache ipa_vr
> structures (used to store results of IPA-VR) could bring further
> savings
They were not really signific
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Mine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333
--- Comment #21 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed two ways to fix this on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-03/msg00535.html
(I have not yet looked at how much back-portable they are but I do not
expect any issues.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78687
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 40979
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40979&action=edit
Possible fix
This patch addresses the issue and passes bootstrap and testing on
x86_64-linux. It is definitely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79776
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
The second time insert_vi_for_tree is called on the same decl, it is
from is from associate_varinfo_to_alias (itself called from
call_for_symbol_thunks_and_aliases), which is looking at a
(speculatively) inli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333
--- Comment #22 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Thu Mar 30 13:51:02 2017
New Revision: 246589
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246589&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 77333] Fixup fntypes of gimple calls of clones
2017-03-30 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333
--- Comment #23 from Martin Jambor ---
Fixed on trunk so far. I will prepare & test backports.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80293
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> We have another bugreport that complains about SRA and Martin said he had
> patches but intended to wait for GCC 8.
My patch for PR 78687 unfortunately won't he
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80293
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> That said, the array cases we've seen are somewhat disturbing...
Cases? Can you point me to the other ones, please? What type do they
have?
> maybe we can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333
--- Comment #24 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Apr 11 13:23:48 2017
New Revision: 246838
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246838&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 77333] Fixup fntypes of gimple calls of clones
2017-04-11 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333
--- Comment #25 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Apr 11 13:31:16 2017
New Revision: 246839
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246839&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 77333] Fixup fntypes of gimple calls of clones
2017-04-11 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77333
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
URL|
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
For some reasons the contains_data (well, actually grp_write) SRA flag is not
copied over from q.k.h.c to p.k.h.c. Mine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82363
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
I'm testing the following fix:
diff --git a/gcc/tree-sra.c b/gcc/tree-sra.c
index f5675edc7f1..bac593951e7 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-sra.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-sra.c
@@ -2691,7 +2691,7 @@ propagate_subaccesses_across_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82363
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed a fix on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-10/msg00070.html
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 42293
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42293&action=edit
Testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82416
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82363
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Oct 3 11:43:45 2017
New Revision: 253380
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253380&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 82363] Fix thinko in SRA subaccess propagation
2017-10-03 Martin J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82363
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82416
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 42308
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42308&action=edit
Fix
This is a fix I have come up with so far. The key change is the
simple flip from true to false in
hsa_func
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82363
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82416
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Oct 9 09:41:44 2017
New Revision: 253538
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253538&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 82416] Do not extend operands to at least 32 bits
2017-10-09 Marti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82416
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81702
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|jamborm at gcc
Priority: P3
Component: hsa
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Since r254000 we get the following ICE when compiling
gcc/bisect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81702
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Oct 31 21:36:51 2017
New Revision: 254283
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254283&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 81702] Remove devirtualization assert
2017-10-31 Martin Jambor
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor ---
Fixed on trunk, testing on gcc-7-branch in progress.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81702
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Nov 1 10:35:13 2017
New Revision: 254295
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254295&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 81702] Remove devirtualization assert
2017-11-01 Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81702
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82808
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to prathamesh3492 from comment #4)
> Created attachment 42535 [details]
> Untested fix
>
> Hi,
> The issue here for propagating value of 'm' from f_c1 to foo() is that the
> jump function operatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82808
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> ipa_get_jf_pass_through_result has multiple issues:
>
> static tree
> ipa_get_jf_pass_through_result (struct ipa_jump_func *jfunc, tree input)
> {
> tree rest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66264
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81248
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Nov 27 10:33:06 2017
New Revision: 255163
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255163&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 81248] Fix ipa-sra size check
2017-11-27 Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81248
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
||2017-11-27
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
I see this too and thus confirmed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83179
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Started with Honza's r255103.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83179
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Andrey, what makes you think that the g++.dg/pr79095-4.C and regex.c
issues are related to dump scan failure of ipa/inline-1.c?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83179
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Andrey Guskov from comment #6)
> Simple. Those fails are due to the same revision.
I see, I have missed the very first line in your bug description and
then wondered whether that was the case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82808
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Nov 28 18:52:49 2017
New Revision: 255212
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255212&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 82808] Use proper result types for arithmetic jump functions
2017-1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82808
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Nov 29 22:13:34 2017
New Revision: 255256
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255256&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Be conservative with arithmetic jmp-function types
2017-11-29 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82808
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82027
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> Martin J., any progress on this?
Unfortunately not yet, seems to always be number four on my todo-list.
At the moment I hope to get to it just before Christmas o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83141
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Dec 8 12:11:02 2017
New Revision: 255510
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255510&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Prevent SRA from removing type changing assignment
2017-12-08 Martin J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83141
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Fixed on trunk, should I backport both patches to gcc7? to gcc6?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83141
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
I have creduced the following ICEing testcase from 544.nab_r of SPEC
2017:
$ cat ice.c
typedef struct {
long a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83329
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
Bisecting revealed that the first bad revision is Honza's r255268, but since
that is just a cost adjustment, it seems it has just revealed a pre-existing
latent bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77677
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77973
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77973
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
...and the assert is triggered when remapping the D.3442 part in
clause:
map(tofrom:*x.0 [len: D.3442])
of the target statement.
The variable indeed belongs to the top-level function bind, but there
is an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77973
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60419
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
Good job reducing the testcase to something this small!
Anyway, Jakub's analysis of what is going on is still correct and all
the high level decisions that we do are IMHO correct too. The
invocation of symt
1101 - 1200 of 2365 matches
Mail list logo
