http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51782
--- Comment #28 from Martin Jambor 2012-02-22
10:37:11 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Feb 22 10:37:03 2012
New Revision: 184463
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184463
Log:
2012-02-22 Martin Jambor
PR middle-end/5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51782
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52395
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor 2012-02-27
16:25:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Martin, can we make sure that 'base' as passed to build_ref_for_offset
> is not artificially constructed by any of its callers? Thus, that it is
> at most
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52395
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor 2012-02-27
17:15:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> The main issue is, of course, that we re-write base of the LHS of the
> assignments at all.
>
> Index: gcc/tree-sra.c
> ===
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52419
Bug #: 52419
Summary: Wrong expansion of misaligned vector store
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52407
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52419
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52419
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
||2012-02-29
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor 2012-02-29
15:26:30 UTC ---
Mine, the problem is that
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52430
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor 2012-02-29
16:45:04 UTC ---
Created attachment 26787
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26787
Proposed untested fix
n_cloning_candidates is zero because ipcp_initialize_node_lattices
thinks that
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52430
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52430
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor 2012-03-05
12:50:33 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Mar 5 12:50:29 2012
New Revision: 184928
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184928
Log:
2012-03-05 Martin Jambor
PR tree-optimiza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52430
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52605
Bug #: 52605
Summary: LTO -g ICE when looking up context of VMTs of classes
defined within functions
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45579
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40058
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor 2012-03-21
10:05:24 UTC ---
If this ever gets fixed, we can remove a test in SRA as in:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-03/msg01356.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|mjambor at suse dot cz |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor 2012-03-23
22:45:47 UTC ---
OTOH, I can confirm that the problematic variable is value, just not
SRAing that one makes the testcase to return 120. (In the same
function, SRA creates replacements also for stack a
||2012-03-24
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor 2012-03-24
00:50:09 UTC ---
Right, sorry, the square
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor 2012-03-24
00:51:38 UTC ---
Created attachment 26971
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26971
Proposed untested fix
I'm currently bootstrapping and testing this patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50052
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor 2012-03-26
15:46:22 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Mar 26 15:46:14 2012
New Revision: 185807
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=185807
Log:
2012-03-26 Martin Jambor
PR tree-optimiza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50052
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45579
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor 2012-03-27
18:22:44 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Mar 27 18:22:39 2012
New Revision: 185891
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=185891
Log:
2012-03-27 Martin Jambor
PR middle-end/52
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor 2012-03-28
15:04:53 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Mar 28 15:04:45 2012
New Revision: 185920
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=185920
Log:
2012-03-28 Martin Jambor
PR middle-end/52
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor 2012-03-28
18:03:34 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Mar 28 18:03:28 2012
New Revision: 185921
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=185921
Log:
2012-03-28 Martin Jambor
PR middle-end/5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor 2012-03-28
18:20:28 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Mar 28 18:20:20 2012
New Revision: 185923
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=185923
Log:
2012-03-28 Martin Jambor
PR middle-end/5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52878
Bug #: 52878
Summary: sparc64 bootstrap failure: "MASK_LONG_DOUBLE_128"
redefined
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52890
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52890
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor 2012-04-11
15:53:44 UTC ---
But when I add the following line to the patch linked above, the
problem goes away:
Index: src/gcc/tree-sra.c
===
--- s
at gcc dot |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor 2012-04-11
16:06:31 UTC ---
I'm assigning this to myself, after I commit the aforementioned patch
(hopefully very soon), I'll work on a followup similar to
at gcc dot |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor 2012-04-12
15:10:50 UTC ---
Well, what happens is that the target of devirtualization which is
loaded from the VMT is:
constant 0>
I'll investigate why.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52939
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor 2012-04-12
17:05:01 UTC ---
Created attachment 27143
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27143
Simple testcase
This should be a simpler testcase. What happens is that we are
attempting to devirt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52939
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52939
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor 2012-04-13
17:57:30 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Apr 13 17:57:21 2012
New Revision: 186428
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=186428
Log:
2012-04-13 Martin Jambor
PR middle-end/52
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52939
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor 2012-04-16
10:02:12 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Apr 16 10:02:04 2012
New Revision: 186489
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=186489
Log:
2012-04-16 Martin Jambor
PR middle-end/52
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52939
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49843
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52890
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor 2012-04-17
15:45:47 UTC ---
The last case is caused by IPA-SRA, -fno-ipa-sra helps, I belive. All
pre-requesite patches are committed now so I'll concentrate on this
now and hopefully come up with a patch soon.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49423
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at codesourcery dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52693
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52605
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58789
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Well, IPA-CP devirtualization is required to trigger the bug but it is
a clone materialization problem.
The following line (invoked as a consequence of fold_stmt
devirtualization) in cgraph_update_edges_for_c
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
OK, I did the bisecting and the bug has been properly fixed on trunk
by http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg00366.html
I did not want to backport it unless there was a bug but since there
is one now
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57084
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Oct 29 14:32:13 2013
New Revision: 204163
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204163&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-29 Martin Jambor
PR middle-end/58789
Backport from mai
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58789
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Oct 29 14:32:13 2013
New Revision: 204163
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204163&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-29 Martin Jambor
PR middle-end/58789
Backport from mai
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58789
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10474
--- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor ---
I have submitted a different patch that addresses this issue, this
time by splitting live ranges of pseudos representing the formal
parameters of a function. The patch is pending review/approval and
the curr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10474
--- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Oct 30 12:01:46 2013
New Revision: 204205
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204205&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-30 Martin Jambor
PR rtl-optimization/10474
* ira.c (f
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
I'll revert the patch momentarily. Sorry for the trouble and thanks for any
testcases.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10474
--- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Thu Oct 31 13:39:26 2013
New Revision: 204254
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204254&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-31 Martin Jambor
PR rtl-optimization/58934
Revert:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58934
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Thu Oct 31 13:39:26 2013
New Revision: 204254
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204254&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-31 Martin Jambor
PR rtl-optimization/58934
Revert:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58984
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
As far as I'm concerned, the patch is fine. Thanks for taking care of it.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58934
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
I have re-submitted my patch in which this bug is fixed, you can find
it at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg00598.html
I have verified the patch bootstraps on i686-linux (reported by Jakub
in th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46507
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10474
--- Comment #15 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Nov 12 12:53:53 2013
New Revision: 204698
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204698&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-11-12 Martin Jambor
PR rtl-optimization/10474
* ira.c (i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58934
--- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #12)
> > --- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
> [...]
> > If anyone is willing to test the patch on any platform but especially
> > on those which I
||2013-11-13
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
The test failures should be resolved by
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg01461.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59099
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Hi, I have to leave today but I've posted some information about my
progress with an untested fix to the mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg01649.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59099
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59099
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Nov 19 22:53:06 2013
New Revision: 205061
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=205061&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-11-19 Martin Jambor
PR rtl-optimization/59099
* ira.c (fi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59099
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51982
Bug 51982 depends on bug 10474, which changed state.
Bug 10474 Summary: shrink wrapping for functions
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10474
What|Removed |Added
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10474
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58934
--- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #12)
> FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/pr32604.f90 execution, -O2
> -fbounds-check
>
I did not find this failure in your latest test results
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10474
--- Comment #19 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Ryan Johnson from comment #18)
> Great! Does this mean shrink-wrapping will be in gcc-4.9, at least for
> x86_64 and ppc64?
Well, a fairly basic (but not altogether unreasonable) shrink-wrapping
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58253
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
I do not quite understand why the port needs to look at alignments of
scalars passed by value at all but I assume there is a reason.
When it comes to the IPA-SRA created formal parameter and actual
argument i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58253
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #2)
> Isn't it easier to avoid building a type with different alignment
> in the first place? Or do this adjustment in SRA where the bug
> happens? It seems that w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58253
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #2)
> Isn't it easier to avoid building a type with different alignment
> in the first place? Or do this adjustment in SRA where the bug
> happens? It seems that w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58253
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58253
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Thu Dec 5 18:07:08 2013
New Revision: 205715
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=205715&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-12-05 Martin Jambor
PR ipa/58253
* ipa-prop.c (ipa_modify
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58253
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54779
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 31402
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31402&action=edit
Patch detaching arrays away from aggregates
Eric, to what extent would this patch suffice? It detects situations
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48641
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Indeed. Unfortunately, I will not be able to take a look until January.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59471
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
It should be easy to make SRA safely cope with BIT_FIELD_REFs,
REALPART_EXPRs and IMAGPART_EXPRs under a VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR (as
opposed to those under a COMPONENT_REF, ARRAY_REF, MEM_REF or
similar). I'd prefe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59008
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
IPA-CP is decrementing reference count of parameter 1 instead of
parameter 2. That happens because the variable param_index in
ipcp_discover_new_direct_edges has type bool instead of int. What a
stupid mista
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50605
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor 2011-11-14
13:13:11 UTC ---
I have posted a proposed fix to the mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg01509.html
at gcc dot |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor 2011-11-14
16:50:02 UTC ---
Hm, apparently the effect propagation can still go wild on recursive code and
size effects can overflow to negtive values, triggering this
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50744
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor 2011-11-15
00:25:12 UTC ---
Created attachment 25822
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25822
Testcase suitable for the testsuite
Testcase suitable for the test suite - it is not that difficult
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50605
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor 2011-11-18
15:13:58 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Nov 18 15:13:54 2011
New Revision: 181477
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181477
Log:
2011-11-18 Martin Jambor
PR tree-optimiza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50605
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50744
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor 2011-11-18
18:06:18 UTC ---
Proposed fix posted to the mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg01935.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51269
Bug #: 51269
Summary: Vectorization profitability threshold is not actually
used
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
at gcc dot |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor 2011-11-23
16:01:37 UTC ---
What happens in SRA is this. This a part of the dump before SRA
(ealias):
:
D.2127_5 = *a_1(D);
if (D.2127_5 > 0)
goto ;
e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
--- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor 2011-11-24
12:18:46 UTC ---
Created attachment 25909
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25909
Fix
This is the fix I wrote about yesterday. It bootstraps and tests fine
on x86_64 and we should
at gcc dot |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor 2011-11-30
19:20:23 UTC ---
Mine. At the first glance it seems that load_assign_lhs_subreplacements cannot
create assignment statements with grp_partial_lhs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50622
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor 2011-11-30
19:40:27 UTC ---
Created attachment 25959
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25959
Untested fix
An untested fix. I will run it through bootstrap tomorrow and proceed to
submit it if
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50622
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor 2011-12-01
16:20:02 UTC ---
Patch posted to mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-12/msg00080.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50622
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor 2011-12-02
12:53:06 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Dec 2 12:53:03 2011
New Revision: 181908
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181908
Log:
2011-12-02 Martin Jambor
PR tree-optimiz
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50622
--- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor 2011-12-06
17:16:28 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Dec 6 17:16:19 2011
New Revision: 182057
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182057
Log:
2011-12-06 Martin Jambor
PR tree-optimiz
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50744
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor 2011-12-07
10:30:55 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Dec 7 10:30:49 2011
New Revision: 182076
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182076
Log:
2011-12-07 Martin Jambor
PR tree-optimiza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50744
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
at gcc dot |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor 2011-12-07
10:39:41 UTC ---
Mine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51362
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51362
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51528
Bug #: 51528
Summary: SRA should not create BOOLEAN_TYPE replacements
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51528
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor 2011-12-13
15:26:14 UTC ---
Created attachment 26071
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26071
Testcase
This is the aforementioned test case.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51528
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
501 - 600 of 2387 matches
Mail list logo
