[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2021-01-28 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #41 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:faed344ee5f17b9a19961b3b1f8ea0ed10db6f2d commit r9-9208-gfaed344ee5f17b9a19961b3b1f8ea0ed10db6f2d Author: Eric Botcazou

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2021-01-28 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #40 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4be929be0317b2baf1c67b430ad0a2fbaed05152 commit r10-9307-g4be929be0317b2baf1c67b430ad0a2fbaed05152 Author: Eric Botcazou

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2021-01-28 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #39 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f7a6d314e7f7eeb6240a4f62511c189c90ef300c commit r11-6951-gf7a6d314e7f7eeb6240a4f62511c189c90ef300c Author: Eric Botcazou Date:

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2021-01-27 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #38 from Eric Botcazou --- > Feel free to improve things - I do not have any Windows system to > test on or an idea what you think needs to be improved. I would > guess similar things apply to compare-debug which it was derived

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2021-01-27 Thread rguenther at suse dot de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #37 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Wed, 27 Jan 2021, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 > > --- Comment #36 from Eric Botcazou --- > > Because I didn't try to invent a

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2021-01-27 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #36 from Eric Botcazou --- > Because I didn't try to invent a clever way to detect which ones will > actually exist (but I know lto1 will). Sure some extra-compare-if-exists > could be invented. If there's no way to compare

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2021-01-27 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #35 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #33) > The bootstrap-lto.mk patch breaks LTO bootstrap on Windows: you cannot > compare executables on this system since they are timestamped. I really > don't see

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2021-01-26 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #34 from Eric Botcazou --- "cmp -i 256" seems to be a way out though.

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2021-01-26 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2019-05-02 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #32 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu May 2 13:58:47 2019 New Revision: 270798 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270798=gcc=rev Log: 2019-05-02 Richard Biener PR bootstrap/85574 * Makefile.tpl

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2019-01-15 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #31 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #30) > We may still want to backport to gcc 7 branch. The ICF bug at least > exists there as well. Sure.

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2019-01-15 Thread hubicka at ucw dot cz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #30 from Jan Hubicka --- We may still want to backport to gcc 7 branch. The ICF bug at least exists there as well.

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2019-01-14 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2019-01-10 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #28 from Jan Hubicka --- Author: hubicka Date: Thu Jan 10 16:53:39 2019 New Revision: 267817 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267817=gcc=rev Log: Backported from mainline 2019-01-02 Richard Biener PR

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2019-01-10 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #27 from Jan Hubicka --- Author: hubicka Date: Thu Jan 10 11:54:26 2019 New Revision: 267805 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267805=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/85574 Modified:

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2019-01-03 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #26 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Jan 3 12:23:27 2019 New Revision: 267552 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267552=gcc=rev Log: 2019-01-03 Jan Hubicka PR tree-optimization/85574 *

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2019-01-02 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #25 from Jan Hubicka --- I have tracked down the firefox issue to be -fno-lifetime-dse=1 being used in with -fprofile-use but not with -fprofile-generate. I am down to 36 mismatches now and those seems real sourcecode changes (will

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2019-01-02 Thread hubicka at ucw dot cz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #24 from Jan Hubicka --- > Patch needs ">>>" to be repaced by "> > >" to bootstrap, but then I get 756 > mismatches building firefox, while previously it was 1300 and before the > rebuild_type_inheritance_graph 6273, so we are

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2019-01-02 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #23 from Jan Hubicka --- Patch needs ">>>" to be repaced by "> > >" to bootstrap, but then I get 756 mismatches building firefox, while previously it was 1300 and before the rebuild_type_inheritance_graph 6273, so we are improving.

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2019-01-02 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #22 from Jan Hubicka --- Created attachment 45318 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45318=edit patch for operand_equal_p in tree-ssa-uncprop

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2019-01-02 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #21 from Jan Hubicka --- Looks like last minute change in this patch https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2014-06/msg00838.html https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-06/msg01600.html

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2019-01-02 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #20 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On January 2, 2019 5:25:09 PM GMT+01:00, "hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org" wrote: >https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 > >--- Comment #19 from Jan Hubicka --- >gcc 5 has: >inline bool

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2019-01-02 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #19 from Jan Hubicka --- gcc 5 has: inline bool val_ssa_equiv_hash_traits::equal_keys (tree value1, tree value2) {

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2019-01-02 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #18 from Richard Biener --- OK, so it looks like uncprop causes a lot of differences (minor dump differences appear from profile-estimate and printf-return-value2 as well). --- prev-gcc/cc1.ltrans99.196t.uncprop1 2019-01-02

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2019-01-02 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #17 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Wed Jan 2 08:49:07 2019 New Revision: 267506 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267506=gcc=rev Log: 2019-01-02 Richard Biener PR ipa/85574 * ipa-icf.h

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2018-12-21 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #16 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #15) > Created attachment 45278 [details] > patch for the ICF issue > > Conveniently the congruence_classes have a UID. So the attached sorts after > that before

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2018-12-21 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #15 from Richard Biener --- Created attachment 45278 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45278=edit patch for the ICF issue Conveniently the congruence_classes have a UID. So the attached sorts after that before

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2018-12-21 Thread hubicka at ucw dot cz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 --- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka --- > Yeah. Note that the debug stmt differences _might_ be explained by > ICF in case ICF ignores debug stmts when merging. But since the > ICF dumps are ordered differently it's hard to see actual decision >

[Bug lto/85574] [8/9 Regression] LTO bootstapped binaries differ

2018-12-21 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85574 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Target Milestone|9.0