https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87008
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|9.0 |8.3.1
Summary|[8/9 Regression
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Fixed on trunk, I am in the process of testing a straightforward backport to
GCC 8.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89693
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Te commit did not appear here because I made a pasto in the commit message, the
fix landed as:
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270364&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Reorganize cgraph_node::clone_of_p
2019-04-1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89693
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Apr 15 14:31:57 2019
New Revision: 270371
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270371&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Reorganize cgraph_node::clone_of_p
2019-04-15 Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89693
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81616
--- Comment #53 from Martin Jambor ---
I'd vote for marking this fixed (and asking anyone with other ideas what could
be improved in generic tuning to open a new bug).
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 26163
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-linux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85762
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Apr 17 15:52:16 2019
New Revision: 270414
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270414&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-04-17 Martin Jambor
Backport from mainline
201
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85459
--- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Apr 17 15:52:16 2019
New Revision: 270414
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270414&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-04-17 Martin Jambor
Backport from mainline
201
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87008
--- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Apr 17 15:52:16 2019
New Revision: 270414
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270414&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-04-17 Martin Jambor
Backport from mainline
201
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85459
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85762
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87008
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90128
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
I have only seen this when compiling with -march=native on Zen, but even at -O2
(which I overlooked yesterday, and which is also confirmed by LNT).
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 26163
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-linux
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 26163
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-linux
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 26163
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-linux
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: gcov-profile
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 26163
Target Milestone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42970
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #6)
>
> Stage 1 has opened again.
And therefore I have submitted a cleaned-up version for review:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-05/msg00472.html
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: go
Assignee: ian at airs dot com
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: cmang at google dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-linux
Target: x86_64-linux
When I attempted to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90883
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> ...I also wonder why SRA does not elide the aggregate copy.
SRA has a special condition not to attempt to totally scalarize array
of chars, so that it does not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90889
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90889
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor ---
OK, this is new: The problem is that topological ordering on which
IPA-CP operates is bogus, reverting Martin's r272115 restored Ada LTO
bootstrap for me.
I however tried breakpointing in IPA-CP's ignore_ed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90889
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
OK, I found the edge which is now ignored but should not be, it was one level
above what I originally tried. I have proposed a fix in:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-06/msg00986.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90889
--- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Jun 18 08:14:09 2019
New Revision: 272408
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272408&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix IPA-CP topological sorting
2019-06-18 Martin Jambor
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90889
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90939
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
The assert is there since the original implementation of IPA known
bits propagation which was done for integers only. Some two months
later Prathamesh replaced propagation of alignment with moving
alignment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90939
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
I proposed a patch in the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-06/msg01479.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90939
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Jun 25 11:05:19 2019
New Revision: 272646
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272646&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 90939] Remove outdated assert in ipcp_bits_lattice::meet_with
2019-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90939
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Jun 26 12:04:08 2019
New Revision: 272689
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272689&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 90939] Remove outdated assert in ipcp_bits_lattice::meet_with
2019-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90939
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Thu Jun 27 11:26:52 2019
New Revision: 272747
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272747&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 90939] Remove outdated assert in ipcp_bits_lattice::meet_with
2019-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90939
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91020
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91020
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
In the first example, even if we ignored the addressability, the
individual array items, which are structures, are copied whole:
D.2240[_27] = D.2241[_27]
This complicates detection when separation into dis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91020
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 46543
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46543&action=edit
Proof-of-concept patch
This is a proof of concept (and only mildly tested) patch which leads
to successful vect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89330
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 46544
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46544&action=edit
WIP patch
I have written another patch that removes the edges from the vector at
the time speculation is resol
Priority: P3
Component: d
Assignee: ibuclaw at gdcproject dot org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-linux
Target: x86_64-linux
When LTO-bootstrapping GCC with the D language, I get the following
warnings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91006
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89330
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #45730|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86371
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Jul 4 12:08:16 2018
New Revision: 262398
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262398&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Remove spurious $HOME include from BRIG FE Makefile
2018-07-04 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86371
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Jul 4 12:20:26 2018
New Revision: 262399
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262399&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Remove spurious $HOME include from BRIG FE Makefile
2018-07-04 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86371
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Jul 4 12:22:29 2018
New Revision: 262400
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262400&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Remove spurious $HOME include from BRIG FE Makefile
2018-07-04 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86371
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
,
||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
On AMD Zen CPUs at least, we found that the number of iterations executed by
the hottest loop is considerably higher with -ffast-math (just patch the
benchmark and see for yourself). The reason
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: ---
Created attachment 44535
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86948
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87188
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
gcc61.fsffrance.org unfortunately seems inaccessible, can you post
-fdump-tree-esra-details dump here together with the preceeding tree
dump file?
I cannot see anything wrong with the dump excerpt that you p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87188
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to dave.anglin from comment #7)
> On 2018-09-05 4:55 AM, jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87188
> >
> > --- Comment
||2018-09-18
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
Confirmed and mine. Sorry about that, I only tested a previous iteration of
the patch on non
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87347
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
Bah, I should have thought about this. The following will fix it, I'll
properly test it and submit a patch later this week.
diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
index 1766a256633..a96d15fef1d 10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87339
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
My intention is to move the _Float128 bits a to a special test for x86_64... on
Friday.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87347
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
So I did not manage to do so last week but I have submitted it today:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-09/msg01373.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87339
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Well, I did not quite manage on Friday, but I have submitted the patch now:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-09/msg01374.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87339
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Sep 25 16:28:40 2018
New Revision: 264579
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264579&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 87339] Fix failure of gcc.dg/warn-abs-1.c on some targets
2018-09-2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87339
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87347
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Sep 26 11:58:18 2018
New Revision: 264640
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264640&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 87347] Prevent segfaults if TYPE_ARG_TYPES is NULL
2018-09-26 Mart
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87347
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84213
--- Comment #17 from Martin Jambor ---
Yes, 521.wrf_r indeed now builds fine with LTO. Thanks everyone for a quick
fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83990
--- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Feb 13 12:25:36 2018
New Revision: 257623
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257623&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 83990] Fix location handling in ipa_modify_call_arguments
2018-02-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83990
--- Comment #15 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Feb 14 12:55:47 2018
New Revision: 257656
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257656&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix location handling in ipa_modify_call_arguments
2018-02-14 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83990
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Our friends at AMD reported that, compared to gcc 7.2, 429.mcf is
about 6% slower when compiled with just -O2
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
It has been brought to my attention that the run-time of benchmark
437.leslie3d from SPEC 2006
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Compared to gcc 7.2, 436.cactusADM is about 8% and 6% slower when run
on an AND Ryzen and an AMD EPYC respectively after
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84149
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84149
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 43588
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43588&action=edit
Prototype patch
I have to leave the office now but this is the (only very very lightly tested)
prototype patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84737
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Do I understand it correctly that you suspect that the new IPA-CP
clone that is created from r256888 on is harmful? In that case, you
want to test that by trying higher values of ipa-cp-eval-threshold,
somet
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84737
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
I guess you'll need to check whether it is PR 55334 (i.e. not preserving
restrict accross ipa-cp and/or inlining) coming back somehow...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84947
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
>
> Does IPA-CP in any way handle jump functions of float types?
It does not create any jump functions tracking individual bits, we
only create that part of jump
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84947
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Apr 3 13:27:26 2018
New Revision: 259029
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259029&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Bits propagation only for int and ptr types
2018-03-29 Martin Liska
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84947
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426
Bug 63426 depends on bug 84947, which changed state.
Bug 84947 Summary: UBSAN:
ipcp_bits_lattice::meet_with(generic_wide_int >,
generic_wide_int >, unsigned int)
../../gcc/ipa-cp.c:1058
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84947
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84149
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #43588|0 |1
is obsolete|
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
According to my repeated measurements, r262486 and r262864 caused ~14%
regression (roughly 7% and 7% each) in run-time of SPEC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87528
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kugan at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||87528
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87528
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Can you point me to the source for which we generate the popcount call(s)?
> It might be not final value replacement but instead code-generating a niter
> analy
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
>
> Can any of you fix that please?
If doing that only in stage 3 is fine, I can.
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
OK
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87615
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
It's actually, ipa_polymorphic_call_context::get_dynamic_type that causes
problems here. I'll prepare a patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88214
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
I don't think this has much to do with IPA-CP per se. What is
happening is that call_may_clobber_ref_p_1 extracts SSA_NAME_PTR_INFO
of an SSA_NAME that is a base of a MEM_REF and runs
pt_solutions_intersect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88214
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
OK, I take it all back. SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO and SSA_NAME_PTR_INFO
share storage by design, the latter should not be accessed because the
SSA_NAME is an integer but it still happens to be a base in a MEM_REF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88214
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
I'm going to test the following fix:
diff --git a/gcc/ipa-prop.c b/gcc/ipa-prop.c
index 7405235..4dbe268 100644
--- a/gcc/ipa-prop.c
+++ b/gcc/ipa-prop.c
@@ -1569,7 +1569,8 @@ determine_locally_known_aggrega
||2012-11-12
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor 2012-11-12
12:03:12 UTC ---
Confirmed and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55253
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55305
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55253
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor 2012-11-13
14:31:23 UTC ---
Created attachment 28675
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28675
Fix
I am currently bootstrapping this fix. I'll submit it to the mailing list if
all goes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55253
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55253
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor 2012-11-13
18:56:27 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Nov 13 18:56:24 2012
New Revision: 193484
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193484
Log:
2012-11-13 Martin Jambor
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55253
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
||2012-11-16
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor 2012-11-16
16:07:31 UTC ---
Mine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55260
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor 2012-11-17
12:45:05 UTC ---
Even though they both lead to the same ICE, the testcase in the
summary and the one from comment #2 are actually caused by different
bugs in ipa-cp.c.
I have just submitted t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55260
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor 2012-11-20
11:20:47 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Nov 20 11:20:41 2012
New Revision: 193657
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193657
Log:
2012-11-20 Martin Jambor
PR
||2012-11-20
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor 2012-11-20
20:33:37 UTC ---
I'm lo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55260
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor 2012-11-21
17:03:46 UTC ---
This is the second fix, as posted to the mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-11/msg01724.html
also slightly related is:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55260
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor 2012-11-21
17:04:54 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Nov 21 17:04:45 2012
New Revision: 193700
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193700
Log:
2012-11-21 Martin Jambor
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55260
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55448
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor 2012-11-27
20:45:50 UTC ---
I have proposed a patch on the mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-11/msg02265.html
It still needs a testcase from this bug but addresses this problem.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55415
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor 2012-11-27
20:46:11 UTC ---
I have proposed a patch on the mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-11/msg02265.html
801 - 900 of 2365 matches
Mail list logo
