[Bug target/63404] [5 Regression] gcc 5 miscompiles linux block layer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63404 Jiong Wang jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sch...@linux-m68k.org --- Comment #14 from Jiong Wang jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org --- *** Bug 63463 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug target/63404] [5 Regression] gcc 5 miscompiles linux block layer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63404 Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #13 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- Fixed.
[Bug target/63404] [5 Regression] gcc 5 miscompiles linux block layer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63404 --- Comment #12 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: rth Date: Fri Oct 10 15:56:07 2014 New Revision: 216096 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216096root=gccview=rev Log: PR target/63404 * shrink-wrap.c (move_insn_for_shrink_wrap): Don't use single_set. Restrict the set of expressions we're willing to move. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/shrink-wrap.c
[Bug target/63404] [5 Regression] gcc 5 miscompiles linux block layer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63404 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sasha.levin at oracle dot com --- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- *** Bug 63481 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug target/63404] [5 Regression] gcc 5 miscompiles linux block layer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63404 --- Comment #10 from Pat Haugen pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jiong Wang from comment #8) and I am curious about whether there are any performance change since this insn sink change. I built/ran cpu2000 and didn't see any difference outside the noise range. The number of shrink-wrapped procedures over the entire benchmark suite build went from 558 to 567.
[Bug target/63404] [5 Regression] gcc 5 miscompiles linux block layer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63404 Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Keywords||wrong-code Last reconfirmed||2014-09-29 CC||jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org, ||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 Summary|gcc 5 miscompiles linux |[5 Regression] gcc 5 |block layer |miscompiles linux block ||layer Target Milestone|--- |5.0 --- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- Started with r215563.
[Bug target/63404] [5 Regression] gcc 5 miscompiles linux block layer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63404 --- Comment #4 from Jiong Wang jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org --- sorry for causing the trouble. the reason might be the flag is an implified register while it's not take into account in current shrink-wrap reg read/write analysis. I will revert my patch temperarily if I couldn't find a proper fix today.
[Bug target/63404] [5 Regression] gcc 5 miscompiles linux block layer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63404 --- Comment #5 from Jiong Wang jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org --- we need to check the following else if (GET_CODE == CLOBBER || GET_CODE (x) == USE || GET_CODE (x) == ASM_INPUT) I will post the fix after pass x86 bootstrap and regression
[Bug target/63404] [5 Regression] gcc 5 miscompiles linux block layer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63404 Pat Haugen pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6 from Pat Haugen pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jiong Wang from comment #5) we need to check the following else if (GET_CODE == CLOBBER || GET_CODE (x) == USE || GET_CODE (x) == ASM_INPUT) I will post the fix after pass x86 bootstrap and regression r215563 also introduced a miscompare on PowerPC for cpu2000 benchmark 254.gap. Applying your patch proposed on the gcc-patches ml for this bug fixes the issue.
[Bug target/63404] [5 Regression] gcc 5 miscompiles linux block layer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63404 --- Comment #7 from Jiong Wang jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Pat Haugen from comment #6) (In reply to Jiong Wang from comment #5) we need to check the following r215563 also introduced a miscompare on PowerPC for cpu2000 benchmark 254.gap. Applying your patch proposed on the gcc-patches ml for this bug fixes the issue. thanks for reporting this, sorry for causing trouble.
[Bug target/63404] [5 Regression] gcc 5 miscompiles linux block layer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63404 --- Comment #8 from Jiong Wang jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Pat Haugen from comment #6) (In reply to Jiong Wang from comment #5) we need to check the following else if (GET_CODE == CLOBBER || GET_CODE (x) == USE || GET_CODE (x) == ASM_INPUT) I will post the fix after pass x86 bootstrap and regression r215563 also introduced a miscompare on PowerPC for cpu2000 benchmark 254.gap. Applying your patch proposed on the gcc-patches ml for this bug fixes the issue. and I am curious about whether there are any performance change since this insn sink change.
[Bug target/63404] [5 Regression] gcc 5 miscompiles linux block layer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63404 --- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr --- For the record the test gfortran.dg/typebound_operator_3.f03 also failed with -O1 and -m64 (see https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/2014-09/msg00226.html). This is fixed by the patch at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg02568.html.
