Bug found at last, it's in the following hunk, the ampersand in
&exit_block_uses is wrong... :-@
@@ -3951,7 +3949,7 @@ df_get_exit_block_use_set (bitmap exit_b
{
rtx tmp = EH_RETURN_STACKADJ_RTX;
if (tmp && REG_P (tmp))
- df_mark_reg (tmp, exit_block_uses);
+ df_
That was a bug, indeed, but unfortunately it wasn't the one causing the
crash I posted earlier... Even after fixing it I get the same backtrace
from gdb.
So the petition "spot the bug" holds...
Thanks,
Dimitris
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
>
>> Bug found, in df_mark_reg I need to iterate until regno + n, not n. The error
>> is at the following hunk:
>>
>> --- gcc/df-scan.c 2011-02-02 20:08:06 +
>> +++ gcc/df-scan.
On 07/25/11 16:20, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
>
>> Bug found, in df_mark_reg I need to iterate until regno + n, not n. The error
>> is at the following hunk:
>>
>> --- gcc/df-scan.c 2011-02-02 20:08:06 +
>> +++ gcc/df-scan.c 2011-
Hi,
On Mon, 25 Jul 2011, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
> Bug found, in df_mark_reg I need to iterate until regno + n, not n. The error
> is at the following hunk:
>
> --- gcc/df-scan.c 2011-02-02 20:08:06 +
> +++ gcc/df-scan.c 2011-07-24 17:16:46 +
> @@ -3713,35 +3717,40 @@ df_m
Bug found, in df_mark_reg I need to iterate until regno + n, not n. The
error is at the following hunk:
--- gcc/df-scan.c 2011-02-02 20:08:06 +
+++ gcc/df-scan.c 2011-07-24 17:16:46 +
@@ -3713,35 +3717,40 @@ df_mark_reg (rtx reg, void *vset)
if (regno < FIRST_PSEUDO_REGIST
Hi Steven,
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011, Steven Bosscher wrote:
Can you please create your patches with the -p option, so that it's
easier to see what function you are changing? Also, even for an RFC
patch a ChangeLog is more than just nice to have ;-)
Do you mean an entry in Changelog file in root dir
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 6:08 PM, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> attached is my attempt to replace bitmaps, that we are *sure* they will
> never map any pseudo regs, with HARD_REG_SETs. Jakub, I have moved the check
> you suggested, for never surpassing FIRST_PSEUDO_REGS, into hard-reg
