http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50249
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-31 11:52:12 UTC ---
Created attachment 25153
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25153
compiler patch necessary to trigger the problem
Attached patch was used on top of r178
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50249
--- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-31 12:14:12 UTC ---
I bisected the failure to r172389, but to me that looks more like a trigger
than a cause:
...
2011-04-13 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/48455
* ira-costs.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-01 12:43:40 UTC ---
Created attachment 25161
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25161
testcase for -O2
To reproduce with O2:
i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc 20010209-1.c -O2 -c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-01 13:06:45 UTC ---
Created attachment 25162
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25162
optimized dump
1. The alloca in main is transformed into this declaration:
D.2129
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-01 13:25:56 UTC ---
Created attachment 25163
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25163
dump before ira
main contains references to frame:
(insn 29 28 30 6 (set (reg:SI 63
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
--- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-01 16:29:16 UTC ---
Created attachment 25166
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25166
ira dump
and after ira, the reference to framereg is still there:
...
(insn 29 28 3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
--- Comment #7 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-01 19:26:48 UTC ---
> fold_builtin_alloca_for_var should record stack alignment change
After expand_var for D.2129 with 128-bit alignment, x_rtl looks like this:
...
(gdb) p x_rtl
$20 = {e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
--- Comment #9 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-02 09:03:54 UTC ---
The following testcase reproduces the same failure without alloca, vla, or the
178353 patch.
stack-stave-restore.c:
...
extern void bar (int*);
char *p;
int
main
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
--- Comment #10 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-02 09:24:33 UTC ---
> The __builtin_stack_restore stays until ira (if we wouldn't by declaring p
> global),
The __builtin_stack_restore stays until ira (if we wouldn't decl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
--- Comment #11 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-02 09:37:42 UTC ---
The problems for testcases 20010209-1.c and stack-stave-restore.c can be
reproduced on x86_64 using -mpreferred-stack-boundary=12.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
--- Comment #14 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-02 10:28:52 UTC ---
> but for some reason it doesn't trigger?
The bb containing the __builtin_stack_restore has 2 successors:
...
:
D.2099_18 = MEM[(int *)&D.2129][5]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
--- Comment #16 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-02 22:47:42 UTC ---
Started testing patch from comment 9, augmented with comments:
...
Index: explow.c
===
--- explow.c (revision
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
--- Comment #18 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-03 12:40:12 UTC ---
> Does this force stack realignment, or only the use of the DRAP if we already
> do stack realignment?
only the use of the DRAP if we already do stack realignment.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50322
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Keywords
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
--- Comment #19 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-14 14:32:12 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Wed Sep 14 14:32:07 2011
New Revision: 178853
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178853
Log:
2011-09-14 Tom de Vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50251
--- Comment #20 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-14 14:33:40 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Wed Sep 14 14:33:35 2011
New Revision: 178854
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178854
Log:
2011-09-14 Tom de Vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50322
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-15 20:44:33 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Thu Sep 15 20:44:30 2011
New Revision: 178895
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178895
Log:
2011-09-15 Tom de Vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50322
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50485
Bug #: 50485
Summary: gcc.target/i386/sse4_1-blendps.c fails spuriously on
i686
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50485
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-22 12:25:23 UTC ---
Created attachment 25339
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25339
proprocessed sse4_1-blendps.c with patch applied to make failure reproducible
To reprod
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50485
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-22 22:11:37 UTC ---
H.J.,
> I think it is wrong to convert memcpy to push/pop here.
Just to be clear here. It's the assignment 'tmp[1] = src2[1]' that gets
translated into
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50494
Bug #: 50494
Summary: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-2char.c fails spuriously on ppc
with -flto
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50494
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-23 14:52:55 UTC ---
Created attachment 25348
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25348
test.c minimized from gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-2char.c
To reproduce:
$ powerpc-linux-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50494
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-23 15:05:19 UTC ---
Same issue occurs for gcc.dg/vect/pr44507.c with -m64.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50499
Bug #: 50499
Summary: segmentation fault in gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-1
c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o with ppc -m64
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50499
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-23 22:08:12 UTC ---
Created attachment 25352
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25352
preprocessed struct-by-value-1_y.c
to reproduce:
$ powerpc-linux-gnu-gcc -c-m64 struct
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50499
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-23 22:10:51 UTC ---
gcc -v configure line:
...
Configured with:
/scratch/vries/b6/pr43864.42.all-fsf-mainline-powerpc-linux-gnu.cfg/src/gcc-mainline/configure
--build=i686-pc-linux-gnu --host
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50494
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-23 22:12:13 UTC ---
Configure line for compiler same as
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50499#c2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50527
Bug #: 50527
Summary: inconsistent vla align
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50527
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-27 09:21:12 UTC ---
> Or alternatively (given we re-compute alignment together with folding alloca),
> assign the same alignment as folding would.
At the point that we determine the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50527
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-27 09:23:21 UTC ---
Created attachment 25368
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25368
proposed patch
> Hm, I suppose we should then make all replacement decl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50527
--- Comment #6 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-27 10:49:23 UTC ---
> I think we can check if the size is constant in evaluate_stmt and
> compute alignment according to that.
We can only do that in the last ccp phase that does fold
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50527
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50249
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43864
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-27 16:10:53 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Sep 27 16:10:42 2011
New Revision: 179275
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179275
Log:
2011-09-27 Tom de Vries
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43864
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-27 16:12:48 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Sep 27 16:12:35 2011
New Revision: 179276
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179276
Log:
2011-09-27 Tom de Vries
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43864
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50485
--- Comment #7 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-28 08:48:05 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Wed Sep 28 08:48:00 2011
New Revision: 179309
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179309
Log:
2011-09-28 Tom de Vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50485
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50527
--- Comment #9 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-07 12:49:54 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Fri Oct 7 12:49:49 2011
New Revision: 179655
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179655
Log:
2011-10-07 Tom de Vries
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50527
--- Comment #10 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-07 12:50:00 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Fri Oct 7 12:49:56 2011
New Revision: 179656
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179656
Log:
2011-10-07 Tom de Vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50527
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50672
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50672
--- Comment #10 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-10 20:14:53 UTC ---
Created attachment 25458
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25458
tentative patch
Currently testing attached patch on x86_64.
2011-10-10 Tom de Vr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50678
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50678
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |ada
--- Comment #10 from vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50702
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50527
--- Comment #12 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13 11:10:06 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Thu Oct 13 11:10:01 2011
New Revision: 179916
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179916
Log:
Fix PR middle-end/50527 ChangeL
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50527
--- Comment #13 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-13 11:18:14 UTC ---
Author: vries
Revision: 179655
Modified property: svn:log
Modified: svn:log at Thu Oct 13 11:18:09 2011
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50764
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-17 21:55:12 UTC ---
Created attachment 25535
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25535
sdiff between 091t.crited and 092t.pre
I don't seen anything obviously wrong
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-17 21:59:29 UTC ---
Created attachment 25536
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25536
tentative patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50672
--- Comment #11 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-18 08:57:43 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Oct 18 08:57:39 2011
New Revision: 180126
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180126
Log:
2011-10-18 Tom de Vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-18 11:12:32 UTC ---
Created attachment 25541
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25541
patch, handles case that either vuse1 or vuse2 is NULL_TREE in update_vuses.
Curren
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50672
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50769
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50769
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-18 14:32:11 UTC ---
Created attachment 25544
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25544
tentative patch
This PR is similar to PR50672.
We discover that blocks 6 and 7 are eq
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
--- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-18 17:14:28 UTC ---
Created attachment 25545
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25545
updated patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50769
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-18 17:16:15 UTC ---
Created attachment 25546
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25546
update patch
currently testing on x86_64.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
--- Comment #6 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-19 15:48:38 UTC ---
Created attachment 25556
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25556
Updated patch, tries to keep dominance info up-to-date.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50769
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-19 16:29:52 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Wed Oct 19 16:29:42 2011
New Revision: 180197
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180197
Log:
2011-10-19 Tom de Vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50769
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
--- Comment #7 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-23 16:06:38 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Sun Oct 23 16:06:32 2011
New Revision: 180341
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180341
Log:
2011-10-23 Tom de Vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
--- Comment #8 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-23 16:06:46 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Sun Oct 23 16:06:40 2011
New Revision: 180342
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180342
Log:
2011-10-23 Tom de Vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
--- Comment #12 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-24 12:06:19 UTC ---
Created attachment 25590
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25590
proposed patch for problem reported in comment 10
2011-10-24 Tom de Vries
PR t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
--- Comment #15 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-26 09:34:00 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Wed Oct 26 09:33:56 2011
New Revision: 180519
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180519
Log:
2011-10-26 Tom de Vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
--- Comment #14 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-26 09:33:52 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Wed Oct 26 09:33:49 2011
New Revision: 180518
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180518
Log:
2011-10-26 Tom de Vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50854
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50851
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mario-baumann at web dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50851
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50854
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cas43 at cs dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50878
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-27 10:37:49 UTC ---
Michael, can you attach the preprocessed source of insn-preds.c?
Thanks,
- Tom
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50764
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-27 14:32:45 UTC ---
Created attachment 25633
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25633
sdiff between 209r.split4 (before sched2) -fno-tree-tail-merge and
-ftree-tail-me
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50764
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-27 15:29:10 UTC ---
Created attachment 25634
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25634
sdiff between 209r.split4 and 210r.sched2 with -ftree-tail-merge
The effect of -fsch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50764
--- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-27 15:54:07 UTC ---
during 223r.dwarf2, maybe_record_trace_start is called with lab == code_label
29, at the start of block 5, and we hit the assert:
...
gcc_checking_assert
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50878
--- Comment #7 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-27 17:03:51 UTC ---
> I see this with 180560 FYI.
Thanks for the testcase, I'm able to reproduce it now.
- Tom
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50878
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50878
--- Comment #8 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-27 18:33:40 UTC ---
Created attachment 25637
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25637
tentative patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50764
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50764
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |rtl-optimization
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50764
--- Comment #8 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-29 12:32:37 UTC ---
> Using this patch, the dead label introduced by cfg_layout_finalize is removed:
To be more precise: Using this patch, the dead label introduced by
cfg_layout_finalize
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50764
--- Comment #9 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-29 17:16:11 UTC ---
Using the bb-reorder patch, the assert is introduced/triggered by r177209:
...
r177209 | rth | 2011-08-02 21:56:29 +0200 (Tue, 02 Aug 2011) | 5 lines
h8300: Generate correct
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50764
--- Comment #10 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-30 07:39:36 UTC ---
Tentative patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-10/msg02767.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50878
--- Comment #9 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-30 08:21:52 UTC ---
Posted fix: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-10/msg02782.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50908
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50908
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-31 09:42:11 UTC ---
Created attachment 25671
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25671
tentative patch
2011-10-31 Tom de Vries
PR tree-optimization/50908
* tree-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50878
--- Comment #11 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-31 10:02:38 UTC ---
> Posted fix: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-10/msg02782.html
Posted fix has been approved:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-10/msg02787.html, but the pa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50908
--- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-31 14:03:56 UTC ---
> Are these also the same bug?
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50878
Yes, see PR50878 comment 11
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50908
--- Comment #6 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-01 12:42:06 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Nov 1 12:42:01 2011
New Revision: 180737
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180737
Log:
2011-11-01 Tom de Vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50908
--- Comment #7 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-01 21:48:26 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Nov 1 21:48:22 2011
New Revision: 180746
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180746
Log:
2011-11-01 Tom de Vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50908
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50908
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||michael.hope at linaro dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50908
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
201 - 300 of 3236 matches
Mail list logo
