[Bug rtl-optimization/57970] segfault in sched-deps.c

2017-11-02 Thread egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57970

Eric Gallager  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |INVALID

--- Comment #7 from Eric Gallager  ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #6)
> (In reply to Chris King from comment #5)
> > Would a unit test case be acceptable?  That should be an easy way to evince
> > this bug and I'd be glad to write one.
> 
> It might not've been when you wrote this, but I guess now that David Malcolm
> has added unit testing capabilities to gcc, maybe...
> (See gcc/selftest.h and gcc/selftest.c for info)

Since there's been no response with even a unit-test since then, closing due to
lack of reproducibility.

[Bug rtl-optimization/57970] segfault in sched-deps.c

2017-08-02 Thread egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57970

Eric Gallager  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #6 from Eric Gallager  ---
(In reply to Chris King from comment #5)
> Would a unit test case be acceptable?  That should be an easy way to evince
> this bug and I'd be glad to write one.

It might not've been when you wrote this, but I guess now that David Malcolm
has added unit testing capabilities to gcc, maybe...
(See gcc/selftest.h and gcc/selftest.c for info)

[Bug rtl-optimization/57970] segfault in sched-deps.c

2013-11-10 Thread colanderman at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57970

--- Comment #5 from Chris King  ---
Would a unit test case be acceptable?  That should be an easy way to evince
this bug and I'd be glad to write one.


[Bug rtl-optimization/57970] segfault in sched-deps.c

2013-11-10 Thread colanderman at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57970

--- Comment #4 from Chris King  ---
Sorry, not interested: like I said above, it's very difficult to trigger, and
the only code I've been able to trigger it with is proprietary.

You can either read sched-deps.c and understand the code path which fails
(which I outlined) and how the patch fixes it, or close the bug and ignore the
patch.  I keep my own branch, so I don't really care.


[Bug rtl-optimization/57970] segfault in sched-deps.c

2013-11-10 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57970

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
   Last reconfirmed||2013-11-10
 Ever confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Well we need a testcase.  You can use
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/A_guide_to_testcase_reduction to reduce the testcase to
the smallest one that fails still.


[Bug rtl-optimization/57970] segfault in sched-deps.c

2013-11-10 Thread colanderman at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57970

--- Comment #2 from Chris King  ---
If you don't want proposed patches attached to bug reports, then I suggest you
remove the text "proposed patch" which is next to the "Add an attachment" link.


[Bug rtl-optimization/57970] segfault in sched-deps.c

2013-11-10 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57970

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Component|other   |rtl-optimization
   Severity|major   |normal

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Patches should go to gcc-patches@ .