Iain Sandoe writes:
>> On 22 May 2019, at 16:19, Jeff Law wrote:
>>
>> On 5/22/19 8:44 AM, Vladislav Ivanishin wrote:
>>> Christophe, Rainer,
>>>
>>> Rainer Orth writes:
>>>
Hi Christophe,
> On Fri, 17 May 2019 at 10:12, Vladislav Ivanishin wrote:
>>
> As you have pr
> On 22 May 2019, at 16:19, Jeff Law wrote:
>
> On 5/22/19 8:44 AM, Vladislav Ivanishin wrote:
>> Christophe, Rainer,
>>
>> Rainer Orth writes:
>>
>>> Hi Christophe,
>>>
On Fri, 17 May 2019 at 10:12, Vladislav Ivanishin wrote:
>
As you have probably noticed already, the new
On 5/22/19 8:44 AM, Vladislav Ivanishin wrote:
> Christophe, Rainer,
>
> Rainer Orth writes:
>
>> Hi Christophe,
>>
>>> On Fri, 17 May 2019 at 10:12, Vladislav Ivanishin wrote:
>>> As you have probably noticed already, the new test uninit-28.c fails:
>>> /gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/uninit-28-gim
Christophe, Rainer,
Rainer Orth writes:
> Hi Christophe,
>
>> On Fri, 17 May 2019 at 10:12, Vladislav Ivanishin wrote:
>>>
>> As you have probably noticed already, the new test uninit-28.c fails:
>> /gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/uninit-28-gimple.c:9:16: warning: 'undef' may be
>> used uninitialized in
Rainer Orth writes:
>> On Fri, 17 May 2019 at 10:12, Vladislav Ivanishin wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> Without the patch, two of the newly added tests fail with bogus warnings:
>>>
>>> - gcc.dg/uninit-28-gimple.c (Definition guarded with NE_EXPR, use with
>>> BIT_AND_EXPR. This is an FP my previ
Hi Christophe,
> On Fri, 17 May 2019 at 10:12, Vladislav Ivanishin wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> Without the patch, two of the newly added tests fail with bogus warnings:
>>
>> - gcc.dg/uninit-28-gimple.c (Definition guarded with NE_EXPR, use with
>> BIT_AND_EXPR. This is an FP my previous patch [1]
On Fri, 17 May 2019 at 10:12, Vladislav Ivanishin wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Without the patch, two of the newly added tests fail with bogus warnings:
>
> - gcc.dg/uninit-28-gimple.c (Definition guarded with NE_EXPR, use with
> BIT_AND_EXPR. This is an FP my previous patch [1] knowingly
> overlooks.)
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 10:12 AM Vladislav Ivanishin wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Without the patch, two of the newly added tests fail with bogus warnings:
>
> - gcc.dg/uninit-28-gimple.c (Definition guarded with NE_EXPR, use with
> BIT_AND_EXPR. This is an FP my previous patch [1] knowingly
> overlook
On Fri, 17 May 2019, Jeff Law wrote:
> So my question is are these showing up in practice? The gimple based
> tests seem to be skipping the optimizers that would have eliminated this
> stuff.
>
> In each of the testcases I would have expected jump threading to have
> eliminated the problematical
On 5/17/19 2:12 AM, Vladislav Ivanishin wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Without the patch, two of the newly added tests fail with bogus warnings:
>
> - gcc.dg/uninit-28-gimple.c (Definition guarded with NE_EXPR, use with
> BIT_AND_EXPR. This is an FP my previous patch [1] knowingly
> overlooks.)
> - gcc.dg
Hi!
Without the patch, two of the newly added tests fail with bogus warnings:
- gcc.dg/uninit-28-gimple.c (Definition guarded with NE_EXPR, use with
BIT_AND_EXPR. This is an FP my previous patch [1] knowingly
overlooks.)
- gcc.dg/uninit-30-gimple.c (EQ_EXPR in the predicate guarding use.
T
11 matches
Mail list logo