This is one more try to fix PR83712:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83712
The patch was successfully bootstrapped and tested on x86-64, i686,
and ppc64.
Committed as rev. 258504.
Index: ChangeLog
===
--- Chan
On 03/10/2018 09:40 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> A few people reported that the patch broke i686. I am going to work on
> the patch more. Meanwhile I've reverted the patch.
Just a note, none of my other builds failed. Though i686 probably
stresses the class-likely-spilled bits than any other.
A few people reported that the patch broke i686. I am going to work on
the patch more. Meanwhile I've reverted the patch.
On 03/09/2018 11:16 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
The following patch fixes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83712
It is another "cannot find a spill reg for r
On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 8:16 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> The following patch fixes
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83712
>
> It is another "cannot find a spill reg for reload" problem. LRA has already
> a code splitting hard reg live ranges to avoid such problem. This code is
>
On 03/09/2018 09:16 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> The following patch fixes
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83712
>
> It is another "cannot find a spill reg for reload" problem. LRA has
> already a code splitting hard reg live ranges to avoid such problem.
> This code is in LRA
The following patch fixes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83712
It is another "cannot find a spill reg for reload" problem. LRA has
already a code splitting hard reg live ranges to avoid such problem.
This code is in LRA inheritance pass. Unfortunately, the code does
splitting
