Hi Jakub,
I can confirm it's OK now.
Thanks,
Christophe.
On 10 January 2014 17:56, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> On 10 January 2014 17:45, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 05:44:22PM +0100, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>> It seems this patch causes several regressions in gfortran on ARM t
On 10 January 2014 17:45, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 05:44:22PM +0100, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> It seems this patch causes several regressions in gfortran on ARM too:
>> gfortran.dg/default_format_1.f90
>> gfortran.dg/default_format_denormal_1.f90
>> gfortran.dg/fmt_bz_bn.f
>>
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 05:44:22PM +0100, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> It seems this patch causes several regressions in gfortran on ARM too:
> gfortran.dg/default_format_1.f90
> gfortran.dg/default_format_denormal_1.f90
> gfortran.dg/fmt_bz_bn.f
> gfortran.dg/fmt_read_bz_bn.f90
> gfortran.dg/g77/f77-e
Hello,
It seems this patch causes several regressions in gfortran on ARM too:
gfortran.dg/default_format_1.f90
gfortran.dg/default_format_denormal_1.f90
gfortran.dg/fmt_bz_bn.f
gfortran.dg/fmt_read_bz_bn.f90
gfortran.dg/g77/f77-edit-t-in.f
gfortran.dg/list_read_4.f90
gfortran.dg/namelist_11.f
gfor
Hello!
>> So like this instead? Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and
>> i686-linux. For 4.8 I'd still prefer the earlier patch though.
>>
>> 2013-12-18 Jakub Jelinek
>>
>> PR rtl-optimization/58668
>> * cfgcleanup.c (flow_find_cross_jump): Don't count
>> any jumps if dir_p is NULL. Rem
On 12/19/13 13:34, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:38:49PM +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote:
Why not use active_insn_p instead of hand-checks for USE and CLOBBER insns?
Because it brings in the JUMP_TABLE_DATA mess into the picture?
Not as long as you look only between BB_HEAD an
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:38:49PM +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> >> Why not use active_insn_p instead of hand-checks for USE and CLOBBER insns?
> >
> > Because it brings in the JUMP_TABLE_DATA mess into the picture?
>
> Not as long as you look only between BB_HEAD and BB_END
> (JUMP_TABLE_DATA o
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:21:52PM +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote:
>> On Wednesday, December 18, 2013, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > As discussed in the PR, this testcase ICEs on arm, because ifcvt
>> > is relying on active instruction counts from v
> Because it brings in the JUMP_TABLE_DATA mess into the picture? Some of the
> places already guard it with INSN_P and similar checks and do more things
> than just counting the insns under those conditionals, so in other places
> one can't just use say prev_active_insn or next_active_insn anyway
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:21:52PM +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 18, 2013, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > As discussed in the PR, this testcase ICEs on arm, because ifcvt
> > is relying on active instruction counts from various routines
> > (count_bb_insns, flow_find_cross_jump a
On Wednesday, December 18, 2013, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> As discussed in the PR, this testcase ICEs on arm, because ifcvt
> is relying on active instruction counts from various routines
> (count_bb_insns, flow_find_cross_jump and flow_find_head_matching_sequence),
> but each of those routi
11 matches
Mail list logo
