On 11/30/2015 01:42 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
Yeah. I've pondered with clearing the hashmap after each pass
(and hope no IPA pass would redirect edges). Or even more aggressive,
clear the hashmap as well when we do set_cfun ().
Maybe you can try that?
And no, I don't think any pass expects t
On Fri, 27 Nov 2015, Alan Lawrence wrote:
> On 27/11/15 15:07, Alan Lawrence wrote:
> > On 23/11/15 09:43, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > On Fri, 20 Nov 2015, Alan Lawrence wrote:
> > >
> > > > ...the asserts
> > > > you suggested in
> > > > (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D68117#c27)
On 27/11/15 15:07, Alan Lawrence wrote:
On 23/11/15 09:43, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015, Alan Lawrence wrote:
...the asserts
you suggested in (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D68117#c27)...
>>
So I have to ask, how sure are you that those assertions are(/should
be
On 23/11/15 09:43, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015, Alan Lawrence wrote:
...the asserts
you suggested in (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D68117#c27)...
>>
So I have to ask, how sure are you that those assertions are(/should
be!) "correct"? :)
Ideally they should be
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015, Alan Lawrence wrote:
> On 6 November 2015 at 10:39, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> ../spec2000/benchspec/CINT2000/254.gap/src/polynom.c:358:11: error:
> >> location
> >> references block not in block tree
> >> l1_279 = PHI <1(28), l1_299(33)>
> >
> > ^^^
> >
> > this is the erro
On 6 November 2015 at 10:39, Richard Biener wrote:
>> ../spec2000/benchspec/CINT2000/254.gap/src/polynom.c:358:11: error: location
>> references block not in block tree
>> l1_279 = PHI <1(28), l1_299(33)>
>
> ^^^
>
> this is the error to look at! It means that the GC heap will be corrupted
> quit
On 11/06/2015 05:26 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, 6 Nov 2015, Alan Lawrence wrote:
On 06/11/15 10:39, Richard Biener wrote:
../spec2000/benchspec/CINT2000/254.gap/src/polynom.c:358:11: error:
location
references block not in block tree
l1_279 = PHI <1(28), l1_299(33)>
^^^
this is the er
On Fri, 6 Nov 2015, Alan Lawrence wrote:
> On 06/11/15 10:39, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > ../spec2000/benchspec/CINT2000/254.gap/src/polynom.c:358:11: error:
> > > location
> > > references block not in block tree
> > > l1_279 = PHI <1(28), l1_299(33)>
> >
> > ^^^
> >
> > this is the error to lo
On 06/11/15 10:39, Richard Biener wrote:
../spec2000/benchspec/CINT2000/254.gap/src/polynom.c:358:11: error: location
references block not in block tree
l1_279 = PHI <1(28), l1_299(33)>
^^^
this is the error to look at! It means that the GC heap will be corrupted
quite easily.
Thanks, I'll
On Fri, 6 Nov 2015, Alan Lawrence wrote:
> On 28/10/15 13:38, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > Applied as follows.
> >
> > Bootstrapped / tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
> >
> > Richard.
> >
> > 2015-10-28 Richard Biener
> >
> > * fold-const.c (negate_expr_p): Adjust the division case
On 28/10/15 13:38, Richard Biener wrote:
Applied as follows.
Bootstrapped / tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Richard.
2015-10-28 Richard Biener
* fold-const.c (negate_expr_p): Adjust the division case to
properly avoid introducing undefined overflow.
(fold_negat
On Tue, 27 Oct 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> >
> > The following patch adjusts negate_expr_p to account for the fact
> > that we can't generally change a - (b - c) to (c - b) + a because
> > -INF - 0 is ok while 0 - -INF not. Similarly for a - (b +
On Tue, 27 Oct 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> The following patch adjusts negate_expr_p to account for the fact
> that we can't generally change a - (b - c) to (c - b) + a because
> -INF - 0 is ok while 0 - -INF not. Similarly for a - (b + c).
> While creating testcases I noticed that MULT_EXPR
13 matches
Mail list logo
