--- Comment #3 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-16 10:32 ---
Subject: Bug 32340
Author: rask
Date: Mon Jul 16 10:32:05 2007
New Revision: 126675
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126675
Log:
PR target/32340
* configure.host (
--- Comment #3 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-18 13:47 ---
Subject: Bug 32808
Author: rask
Date: Wed Jul 18 13:47:28 2007
New Revision: 126720
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126720
Log:
PR target/32808
* config/cri
--- Comment #11 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-26 09:33 ---
Reopening since this was only partially fixed.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-27 23:03 ---
Subject: Bug 32471
Author: rask
Date: Fri Jul 27 23:03:01 2007
New Revision: 127005
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=127005
Log:
PR testsuite/32471
* gcc.dg/torture/pr3036
ty: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: rask at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: frv-unknown-elf
http://gcc.gnu.or
--- Comment #1 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-07 14:44 ---
Created an attachment (id=14032)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14032&action=view)
Testcase to compile with -O2 -mcpu=fr400
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33011
--- Comment #10 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-14 14:39 ---
Subject: Bug 30315
Author: rask
Date: Tue Aug 14 14:39:24 2007
New Revision: 127481
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=127481
Log:
PR target/30315
* config/i38
s: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: rask at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unkonwn-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unkonwn-linu
--- Comment #3 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-16 19:49 ---
Revision 127532 works.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-19 13:00 ---
void *foo(unsigned a, unsigned b) {
unsigned sum = a + b;
if (sum < a) return 0;
if (sum == 0) sum = 1;
To be able to optimize both comparisons, we need to have the same comparison
operands. The o
--- Comment #7 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-20 16:06 ---
Created an attachment (id=14082)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14082&action=view)
Preprocessed testcase; compile with -O2 -g -m2a -fno-builtin
It appears to fail the same way as earlier
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, build, ice-checking
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: rask at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: m32r-unknown-elf
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33132
--- Comment #9 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-22 12:56 ---
Subject: Bug 32557
Author: rask
Date: Wed Aug 22 12:56:35 2007
New Revision: 127703
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=127703
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/32557
* df-pr
--- Comment #11 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-23 12:18 ---
I don't know if it has been fixed on powerpc64-suse-linux-gnu yet.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32557
D
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: rask at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-
--- Comment #2 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-31 11:42 ---
It still fails here at revision 127986. I forgot to mention the configure
flags:
--target m32r-unknown-elf --with-newlib --enable-sim --disable-gdb
--disable-nls --enable-checking=yes,rtl
Note in particular that I
--- Comment #12 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 08:52 ---
Closing as suggested off-line by Andreas Jaeger.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 19:48 ---
Subject: Bug 32965
Author: rask
Date: Wed Sep 5 19:47:56 2007
New Revision: 128146
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128146
Log:
PR web/32965
PR tree-optimizati
--- Comment #14 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 19:48 ---
Subject: Bug 13756
Author: rask
Date: Wed Sep 5 19:47:56 2007
New Revision: 128146
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128146
Log:
PR web/32965
PR tree-optimizati
--- Comment #4 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 19:56 ---
Fixed with revision 128146. The online documentation will be updated
automatically within 24 hours.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-09 19:22 ---
Subject: Bug 30315
Author: rask
Date: Sun Sep 9 19:21:59 2007
New Revision: 128305
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128305
Log:
PR target/30315
* config/i38
--- Comment #7 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-09 21:08 ---
Did you read comment #1?
Does -fno-strict-aliasing magically "fix" your code?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33111
--- Comment #2 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-09 21:17 ---
This still happens with revision 128297.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: rask at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: cris-axis-elf
http://gcc.gn
--- Comment #12 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-10 14:20 ---
Subject: Bug 32154
Author: rask
Date: Mon Sep 10 14:20:10 2007
New Revision: 128344
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128344
Log:
PR other/32154
* configure.ac: For
--- Comment #13 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-10 14:27 ---
Fixed as of revision 128344.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-11 00:40 ---
This happens starting with revision 127744 and is definitely related to bug
33203.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2007-08/msg00039.html
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #3 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-11 08:52 ---
This was a newlib bug.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: rask at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: rask at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: fr30-unknown-elf
OtherBugsDependingO 12019
nThis:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33388
--- Comment #1 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-11 12:29 ---
More problems:
/n/12/rask/src/all/libgcc/../gcc/libgcc2.c: In function '__popcountdi2':
/n/12/rask/src/all/libgcc/../gcc/libgcc2.c:813: internal compiler error: RTL
check: expected code 'reg', hav
4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, build, ice-checking
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: rask at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: rask at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: fr30-unknow
--- Comment #4 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-11 21:07 ---
I think this can actually be fixed because memory operands appear to be
properly delimited.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-11 21:25 ---
That code looks very similar to the doubly linked lists that AmigaOS
exec.library uses. Just remove the XL and XLM prefixes from the names and it's
the same. That code indeed plays nasty type casting tricks to re
--- Comment #9 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-12 13:12 ---
This still happens with GCC 4.3 when trying to bootstrap with BOOT_CFLAGS='-O2
-g -fomit-frame-pointer -masm=intel' and it blocks me from working on bug
29493.
/home/rask/build/gcc-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/
--- Comment #11 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-14 10:15 ---
Yes, that worked.
It is quite obvious from trying a bootstrap with -masm=intel that nobody ever
uses Intel syntax, because there are assorted issues around the edges.
Additionally, I'm now blocked by binutils bu
--- Comment #10 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-14 10:42 ---
I'm testing mipsisa64-unknown-elf, sh-unknown-elf and v850-unknown-elf right
now.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21185
--- Comment #12 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-14 13:12 ---
Testing on v850-unknown-elf suggests that getcwd() is also needed by
libgfortran.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21185
--- Comment #16 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-14 13:43 ---
I get the same build failure on sh-unknown-elf and mipsisa64-unknown-elf. I'm
continuing without the static keyword and with s/amod/amode/g.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21185
--- Comment #20 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-15 10:19 ---
arm-unknown-elf has 8000+ failures.
Some of them are similar to this one (which happen on the other targets as
well):
/n/12/rask/src/all/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/chmod_1.f90:0: warning: 'const'
attribute
--- Comment #15 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-16 12:57 ---
1. You should use define_insn_and_split.
2. If possible (which I think it is here), splitting before reload should
produc.e better code.
Btw, what is the ICE?
Also, it seems to me that avr.h defines MOVE_MAX
--- Comment #16 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-16 13:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=14211)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14211&action=view)
quick and dirty patch to reduce code size
A fundamental problem with the AVR back end is that it sabota
--- Comment #17 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-16 13:54 ---
The patch is against mainline revision 128431.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11180
--- Comment #19 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-16 17:30 ---
Created an attachment (id=14213)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14213&action=view)
quick and dirty patch to reduce code size
Here's a patch which doesn't mess up the stack poin
--- Comment #21 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-17 11:13 ---
It's probably someting simple, see config.log. Like I said, the patch is a
quick and dirty one and the AVR back end can use more work than that, most of
which means deleting patterns. Examples: All and, ior
--- Comment #23 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-18 07:14 ---
> configure:10398: error: unrecognizable insn:
> (insn 105 104 106 2 (set (subreg:QI (reg/f:HI 52) 0)
> (subreg:QI (label_ref:HI 57) 0)) -1 (nil))
> configure:10398: internal compiler error: in
--- Comment #2 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-18 13:26 ---
Fixed as of revision 128577.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-18 13:25 ---
Subject: Bug 33388
Author: rask
Date: Tue Sep 18 13:24:44 2007
New Revision: 128577
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128577
Log:
PR target/33388
PR target/33397
--- Comment #1 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-18 13:25 ---
Subject: Bug 33397
Author: rask
Date: Tue Sep 18 13:24:44 2007
New Revision: 128577
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128577
Log:
PR target/33388
PR target/33397
--- Comment #4 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-18 13:28 ---
Fixed with revision 128577.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-18 13:34 ---
With bug 33388 and bug 33397 fixed, the fix for bug 32154 fixes this one as
well (as of revision 128577).
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
7; in bfin_adjust_cost, at
config/bfin/bfin.c:3120
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, build, ice-checking
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo:
--- Comment #25 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-18 19:49 ---
> c:/avrdev/gcc/gcc-4.3-20070914/libobjc/Object.m:66: error: unrecognizable
> insn:
> (insn 54 4 55 2 c:/avrdev/gcc/gcc-4.3-20070914/libobjc/Object.m:65 (set
> (reg:QI 22 r22 [ D.2345 ])
> (subr
--- Comment #3 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-19 16:12 ---
Technically, the code is undefined (overflow of signed integer val). Using -O2
-fno-strict-overflow results in a loop test, but the code looks dubious:
table_init:
pushl %ebp# 51*pushsi2
--- Comment #5 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-19 16:39 ---
table_init:
pushl %ebp# 51*pushsi2[length = 1]
movl$117835012, %eax# 20*movsi_1/1 [length = 5]
movl%esp, %ebp # 52*movsi_1/1 [length = 2
--- Comment #13 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-20 09:55 ---
> Are you telling me that *any* integer overflow allows a compiler to generate a
> buggy code without any notice ?
No, unsigned integer overflow is well defined.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.
tatus: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, ice-checking
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: rask at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: m32c-unknown-elf
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33551
--- Comment #8 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 12:05 ---
It works for me too at revision 128761.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #18 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-26 21:06 ---
I ran into this with 4.3 a few weeks ago.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-30 20:35 ---
Please look in your config.log for messages from collect2 and post the last
linker failure one plus any that look wrong.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #1 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-02 18:08 ---
This behaviour is as documented.
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-03 22:13 ---
You could open a request for a warning when a null pointer check is optimized
away after dereferencing the pointer.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33629
ReportedBy: rask at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: m32c-unknown-elf avr-unknown-none
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33782
Component: pch
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: rask at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33829
--- Comment #4 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-19 16:30 ---
Subject: Bug 32369
Author: rask
Date: Tue Jun 19 16:30:03 2007
New Revision: 125851
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125851
Log:
2007-06-19 Rask Ingemann Lambertsen <[EMAI
--- Comment #9 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-19 17:35 ---
Subject: Bug 32335
Author: rask
Date: Tue Jun 19 17:35:16 2007
New Revision: 125853
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125853
Log:
2007-06-19 Rask Ingemann Lambertsen <[EMAI
--- Comment #13 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-20 19:57 ---
Subject: Bug 32335
Author: rask
Date: Wed Jun 20 19:57:32 2007
New Revision: 125892
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125892
Log:
2007-06-20 Rask Ingemann Lambertsen <[EMAI
--- Comment #14 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-20 19:59 ---
Subject: Bug 32335
Author: rask
Date: Wed Jun 20 19:58:57 2007
New Revision: 125893
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=125893
Log:
2007-06-20 Rask Ingemann Lambertsen <[EMAI
--- Comment #22 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-27 22:23 ---
Subject: Bug 32418
Author: rask
Date: Wed Jun 27 22:23:35 2007
New Revision: 126067
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126067
Log:
2007-06-27 Rask Ingemann Lambertsen <[EMAI
--- Comment #5 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-22 11:51 ---
Subject: Bug 29493
Author: rask
Date: Mon Oct 22 11:50:56 2007
New Revision: 129548
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129548
Log:
PR target/29473
PR target/29493
--- Comment #12 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-22 11:51 ---
Subject: Bug 29473
Author: rask
Date: Mon Oct 22 11:50:56 2007
New Revision: 129548
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129548
Log:
PR target/29473
PR target/29493
--- Comment #13 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-22 13:06 ---
Fixed as of revision 129548.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-22 13:07 ---
Fixed as of revision 129548.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-22 13:47 ---
http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2004-06/msg00419.html
It was bug in gas. The testcase works these days.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-22 14:00 ---
This works with revision 129548, which I think is the one that fixed it.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-25 18:04 ---
This works fine in 4.3. Looking at the commit log, I'd say it was fixed by
revision 121981.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #3 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-25 18:58 ---
I see a substantial improvent when testing on the compile farm hardware:
processor : 3
vendor_id : AuthenticAMD
cpu family : 15
model : 65
model name : Dual-Core AMD Opteron(tm
--- Comment #6 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-27 12:46 ---
As far as I can tell (from running cc1 in a debugger), the problem is not so
much the size of the file, but that it contains two large functions and GCC
leaks memory. After compiling the first large function, the
--- Comment #4 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-27 13:40 ---
*** Bug 33918 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-27 13:40 ---
This is not a regression (as far as I know), so it won't be fixed in anything
earlier than 4.3.0.
GCC dies trying to figure out which of BYTE PTR, WORD PTR, etc. it should print
for a structure. You may be able to
--- Comment #6 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-27 15:24 ---
Tested revision 129548 which works.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-27 23:16 ---
Created an attachment (id=14417)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14417&action=view)
possible patch
Please give this patch a try. I need it to build GCC with OpenWatcom, which
wants parame
--- Comment #9 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-27 23:36 ---
It happens to work because all the compilers people use to build GCC pass
varargs the same way as non-varargs, at least for the number of arguments
received by the gen_* functions. IOW you shouldn't see any
--- Comment #10 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-28 11:14 ---
Created an attachment (id=14419)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14419&action=view)
patch v2, i386 fix added
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|
--- Comment #7 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-28 12:40 ---
Created an attachment (id=14420)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14420&action=view)
Reenable alloca() on non-GCC compilers
The memory fragmentation problem is to be caused by libibert
--- Comment #8 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-28 12:57 ---
Created an attachment (id=14421)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14421&action=view)
split insn-attrtab.c into three files
Here's the patch to split insn-attrtab.c into smaller pieces
--- Comment #12 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-28 14:00 ---
In reply to comment #11:
> How many times do I have to say this is bad for most RISC targets (hosts)?
I don't particularily care how many times you say it. Show some code (which
works) and/or show some tim
--- Comment #13 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-28 14:02 ---
In reply to comment #7:
> I need it to build GCC with OpenWatcom, which wants parameters on the stack
> by default.
Er, that's in registers by default, of course.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show
--- Comment #15 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-28 15:54 ---
In reply to comment #14:
> is your patch supposed to help with testcase presented in comment #6?
No, it's aimed at the problem from the description. That is, GCC itself doesn't
work if compiled with a c
--- Comment #9 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-28 17:48 ---
I just tried with only the alloca patch, and despite the unsplit insn-attrtab.c
file, process size tops at just 205 MB. It looks like GCC 4.3.0 is in a much
better shape than GCC 4.1.1, so I'm letting go of th
--- Comment #5 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-29 15:11 ---
Is it possible to reproduce this on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu somehow? I've
tried to no avail with -Os and -mregparm=0 -Os on both testcases. What is a
known bad revision?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bug
--- Comment #17 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-30 00:14 ---
Created an attachment (id=14438)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14438&action=view)
patch v3, varargs free
In reply to comment #16:
> You can cast them at the time of calling and sto
--- Comment #10 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-31 14:44 ---
Oops, I'm sorry about stealing your bug, Jakub. I didn't see you had taken it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31507
--- Comment #9 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-31 14:37 ---
Created an attachment (id=14448)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14448&action=view)
patch for testing
This seems to be a simple mismatch between what push_operand() accepts and what
matc
--- Comment #12 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-31 15:00 ---
> That's IMHO wrong, you are changing the meaning of < constraint.
Yes, I see what you mean, they ('<' and '>') are defined independently of stack
direction. They should howe
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rask at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #10 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-06 20:14 ---
Subject: Bug 32787
Author: rask
Date: Tue Nov 6 20:14:22 2007
New Revision: 129944
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129944
Log:
2007-11-06 Rask Ingemann Lambertsen <[EMAI
--- Comment #4 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-07 16:35 ---
Francois-Xavier, do you still see a performance regression? If so, please post
asm output (-S -dp) from both versions?
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
NCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: rask at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: sh-unknown-elf
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34040
--- Comment #1 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-09 10:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=14513)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14513&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34040
--- Comment #2 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-09 11:08 ---
It's not unusual to need more than one instruction pattern for the same machine
instruction. See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-10/msg01318.html>
and the followup for a recent example and what you can
1 - 100 of 157 matches
Mail list logo
