--- Comment #3 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-23 10:04 ---
Subject: Bug 44374
Author: bernds
Date: Thu Sep 23 10:04:33 2010
New Revision: 164552
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=164552
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/44374
* basic-block.h (enum
--- Comment #4 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-23 10:08 ---
Fixed.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #19 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-21 11:12 ---
Can you provide a .i file for which this is reproducible with a cross compiler?
Before/after -fdump-rtl-ira dumps and assembly files could also be helpful.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45445
--- Comment #12 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-16 13:50 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
So stage1 chooses adds but stage2 and stage3 choose lsls for of the lower
half of a long long. Since the behaviour of a stageN xgcc depends on both the
gcc source code and the compiler
--- Comment #3 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-07 11:16 ---
Fixed.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #2 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-06 22:32 ---
Subject: Bug 43137
Author: bernds
Date: Mon Sep 6 22:32:26 2010
New Revision: 163935
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=163935
Log:
PR target/43137
* config/arm/iterators.md
--- Comment #1 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-26 10:57 ---
Ok, I could apply that, but why is it failing? What assembly output is being
produced for it?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45413
--- Comment #4 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-25 14:08 ---
Subject: Bug 45355
Author: bernds
Date: Wed Aug 25 14:08:23 2010
New Revision: 163546
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=163546
Log:
PR middle-end/45355
* combine.c (try_combine
--- Comment #77 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-24 13:13 ---
We might also want to throttle back the change in function.c so that it's only
enabled when extending from a memory location. But it still would be good to
know and fix what exactly is going wrong in fwprop
--- Comment #2 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-21 14:44 ---
Created an attachment (id=21536)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21536action=view)
Potential fix
Can you try this?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45355
--- Comment #26 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-19 13:38 ---
(In reply to comment #25)
Alex Oliva posted some patches to make cselib handle autoinc stuff.
No idea whether http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-03/msg01038.html
is the latest version or if he has a newer one
--- Comment #5 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-19 17:32 ---
Subject: Bug 42172
Author: bernds
Date: Thu Aug 19 17:31:57 2010
New Revision: 163383
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=163383
Log:
PR target/42172
* combine.c
--- Comment #2 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-19 23:34 ---
Subject: Bug 45350
Author: bernds
Date: Thu Aug 19 23:34:07 2010
New Revision: 163389
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=163389
Log:
PR bootstrap/45350
* combine.c (try_combine
--- Comment #24 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-18 14:36 ---
It should be possible to do better in cselib_subst_to_values - for POST_* we
could look up the value of the inner expression, and for PRE_* we could
probably construct a PLUS of some kind. That would
--- Comment #24 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-17 09:47 ---
I think that's beginning to look reasonable. So the problem was that without
alternative 2, such an add would match alternative 3 instead and be split?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44470
--- Comment #22 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-17 13:14 ---
(In reply to comment #19)
x_addr is a VALUE that has no locs:
That happens because it's an autoincrement, and cselib_subst_to_values just
creates an empty value.
It seems to me that we simply need to add a VALUE
--- Comment #18 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-16 23:49 ---
I'm seeing some strange situations where this code is unnecessarily producing
lea insns even when not tuning for Atom.
This code looks very strange. I don't understand why we aren't splitting to a
lea pattern
--- Comment #19 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-16 23:51 ---
Created an attachment (id=21497)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21497action=view)
A patch which should produce more add insns
In other words, don't we at least need this patch to avoid
--- Comment #22 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-17 00:16 ---
I was looking at Spec2k/254.gap/integer.s which has many examples, all of the
form.
- leal(%ecx,%eax), %eax
+ addl%ecx, %eax
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44470
: bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: arm-none-linux-gnueabi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45256
--- Comment #1 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-11 15:19 ---
Created an attachment (id=21454)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21454action=view)
Testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45256
--- Comment #8 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-10 12:48 ---
Subject: Bug 45182
Author: bernds
Date: Tue Aug 10 12:48:16 2010
New Revision: 163057
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=163057
Log:
PR middle-end/45182
* combine.c
--- Comment #9 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-10 12:53 ---
Fixed.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #6 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-10 18:45 ---
Subject: Bug 45177
Author: bernds
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:45:10 2010
New Revision: 163077
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=163077
Log:
PR bootstrap/45177
* config/arm/arm.c
--- Comment #8 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-10 22:31 ---
Yes.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Comment #4 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-09 15:04 ---
I'm reopening this as it's not fixed, and even if we fix it in the RTL
optimizers, it should stay open as a reminder that we produce poor initial RTL.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #69 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-06 09:29 ---
(In reply to comment #68)
Also, since fwprop can lengthen lifetimes arbitrarily (though this wouldn't
happen often) propagate_rtx actually forbids copy propagation of hard
registers:
if (REG_P (new_rtx
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi
--- Comment #1 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-06 21:21 ---
Created an attachment (id=21427)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21427action=view)
A testcase which shows the problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45214
ReportedBy: bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45215
: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45216
--- Comment #1 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-06 22:19 ---
Created an attachment (id=21428)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21428action=view)
A testcase which shows the problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45216
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux
: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45218
--- Comment #56 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-05 11:31 ---
Created an attachment (id=21400)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21400action=view)
A patch to aid debugging
This patch should help pinpoint exactly what went wrong. It adds a dbg-cnt to
the code
--- Comment #66 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-05 19:56 ---
(In reply to comment #57)
Failure occurs for N = 0. N = 1 compiles successfully. Attached files.
Argh. I seem to have swapped the logic of the dbg_cnt test. Still, this
result appears useful.
I think initial
--- Comment #7 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-04 12:47 ---
Created an attachment (id=21394)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21394action=view)
A patch that should fix it
DEBUG_INSNs got me again. Actually the old byte dce was disabled and thus
--- Comment #8 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-04 15:16 ---
*** Bug 45150 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-04 15:16 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 45162 ***
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-04 21:07 ---
Subject: Bug 45162
Author: bernds
Date: Wed Aug 4 21:07:05 2010
New Revision: 162881
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162881
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/45162
* df-problems.c
--- Comment #12 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-04 21:14 ---
Fixed.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #4 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-04 21:16 ---
I'm not seeing this with my ARM cross-compilers. Can you attach a .i file?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45177
--- Comment #12 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-02 10:07 ---
Subject: Bug 40457
Author: bernds
Date: Mon Aug 2 10:06:47 2010
New Revision: 162815
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162815
Log:
PR target/40457
* config/arm/arm.h
--- Comment #18 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-02 20:18 ---
Subject: Bug 45063
Author: bernds
Date: Mon Aug 2 20:17:59 2010
New Revision: 162828
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162828
Log:
PR target/45063
* caller-save.c
--- Comment #54 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-30 15:12 ---
Yeah, that's what I did. I if (0)ed the newly added code block to produce
comparisons, but I haven't found anything yet that looks wrong in the dumps
(and I can't read PA assembly very well). So it would be useful
--- Comment #6 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-29 12:40 ---
Subject: Bug 42575
Author: bernds
Date: Thu Jul 29 12:39:57 2010
New Revision: 162678
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162678
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/42575
* dce.c
--- Comment #15 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-29 13:49 ---
Created an attachment (id=21349)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21349action=view)
Potential fix
Could you verify that this fixes it?
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #51 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-29 19:46 ---
Thanks. I can more-or-less produce the same assembly with a cross compiler,
but just from looking at the assembly and the debugging dumps I can't quite
figure out which function is being miscompiled. Can you
--- Comment #8 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-28 15:46 ---
It sounds like the compiler is being miscompiled? If so, it's probably not
helpful trying to debug the miscompiled compiler binary. The best way to debug
this would be to produce one working build and one failing
--- Comment #14 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-28 22:14 ---
That seems to be helpful - thank you. I think I can reproduce it: insn 2909 is
generated during save_call_clobbered_regs, and I think I see how it relates to
revision 162418. I hope to have a fix tomorrow
--- Comment #4 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-27 09:35 ---
Subject: Bug 45051
Author: bernds
Date: Tue Jul 27 09:34:51 2010
New Revision: 162558
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162558
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/45051
* reload1.c
--- Comment #5 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-27 21:49 ---
Assuming fixed and closing. Please reopen if you still have a problem.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-26 11:00 ---
Vlad intends to remove flag_ira_coalesce anyway, so there's probably not too
much point investigating this.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #39 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-22 11:48 ---
HJ, Dave, can you retest with mainline?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44970
--- Comment #10 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-22 20:02 ---
Huh, I thought I'd replied to this weeks ago - probably wasn't logged in.
Reload can't determine the required structure of a memory address from a
predicate name, so it ignores predicates and only looks
--- Comment #45 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-22 22:54 ---
(In reply to comment #44)
I had a success bootstrap with revision 162414 and function.c reverted
to 162239.
Did the failing bootstrap include the function.c fix in r162391, or was it an
earlier revision
--- Comment #5 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-21 12:37 ---
Subject: Bug 44738
Author: bernds
Date: Wed Jul 21 12:36:44 2010
New Revision: 162372
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162372
Log:
PR middle-end/44738
* tree-ssa.c (warn_uninit
--- Comment #6 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-21 12:39 ---
Fixed.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #8 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-21 22:48 ---
Subject: Bug 45009
Author: bernds
Date: Wed Jul 21 22:48:14 2010
New Revision: 162390
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162390
Log:
PR bootstrap/44970
PR middle-end/45009
--- Comment #38 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-21 22:48 ---
Subject: Bug 44970
Author: bernds
Date: Wed Jul 21 22:48:14 2010
New Revision: 162390
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162390
Log:
PR bootstrap/44970
PR middle-end/45009
--- Comment #35 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-20 14:21 ---
Created an attachment (id=21264)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21264action=view)
Another attempt to fix the pa64 problem
David, here's a new patch which might fix the PA problem. Please apply
--- Comment #36 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-20 15:35 ---
I've committed another fix for the (not only) powerpc problem as r162342.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44970
--- Comment #6 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-20 23:45 ---
Looks like it's making replacements in zero insns. I expected the code to fail
earlier if there aren't any uses of the reg.
I'll fix this tomorrow.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45009
--- Comment #5 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-19 11:27 ---
Fixed now.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #19 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 18:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=21242)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21242action=view)
Another patch
I've managed to reproduce some differences with -g vs. no-debug builds. This
patch fixes them
--- Comment #24 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 20:39 ---
Created an attachment (id=21243)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21243action=view)
Patch v4
I found another potential bug in the interaction between the existing code and
the new one. Fixing
--- Comment #25 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 20:40 ---
(In reply to comment #17)
And on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11 gcc-4.6 162277 in stage2:
../../../gcc/libgcc/../gcc/libgcc2.c:791:1: internal compiler error:
Segmentatio
n fault
If the latest patch does not fix
--- Comment #27 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 21:00 ---
(In reply to comment #26)
Subject: Re: [4.6 regression] Revision 162270 failed to bootstrap
Doing a non bootstrap build, I see the following new fail:
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/950605-1.c execution, -O1
--- Comment #28 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 21:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=21247)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21247action=view)
Minimally tested patch for the hppa problem
Seems like we're extending from the wrong mode. Does this fix
--- Comment #3 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-17 15:53 ---
x86_64 failures are expected due to a backend bug, see the patch I sent today.
HJ, any chance you could run make check on the stage1 compiler on ia64 to find
a testcase?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #6 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-17 16:41 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
x86_64 failures are expected due to a backend bug, see the patch I sent
today.
With the patch in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-07/txt00119.txt
bootstrap fails at stage 1
--- Comment #1 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-17 22:22 ---
Created an attachment (id=21237)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21237action=view)
Potential fix
Does this fix it?
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #11 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-17 22:36 ---
Created an attachment (id=21238)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21238action=view)
Potential fix
Yeah, I think it trips over DEBUG_INSNs. I'm testing this fix, does it help in
any way
--- Comment #12 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-17 23:29 ---
Created an attachment (id=21239)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21239action=view)
Better patch.
Here's something that's a little more likely to work.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #5 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-16 23:48 ---
Subject: Bug 42235
Author: bernds
Date: Fri Jul 16 23:47:46 2010
New Revision: 162270
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162270
Log:
PR target/42235
* postreload.c
--- Comment #4 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-16 02:09 ---
Subject: Bug 42235
Author: bernds
Date: Fri Jul 16 02:09:03 2010
New Revision: 162240
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162240
Log:
PR target/42235
* function.c
--- Comment #11 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-09 09:03 ---
Subject: Bug 40657
Author: bernds
Date: Fri Jul 9 09:03:22 2010
New Revision: 161988
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161988
Log:
PR target/40657
* config/arm/arm.c
--- Comment #8 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-07 15:27 ---
Subject: Bug 44404
Author: bernds
Date: Wed Jul 7 15:26:48 2010
New Revision: 161920
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161920
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/44404
* auto-inc-dec.c
--- Comment #3 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-06 23:45 ---
Subject: Bug 44787
Author: bernds
Date: Tue Jul 6 23:44:55 2010
New Revision: 161893
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161893
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/44787
* config/arm/arm.md
--- Comment #4 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-06 23:46 ---
Fixed.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #4 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-02 16:23 ---
Subject: Bug 42835
Author: bernds
Date: Fri Jul 2 16:22:33 2010
New Revision: 161725
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161725
Log:
PR target/42835
* config/arm/arm-modes.def
--- Comment #3 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-02 16:26 ---
Subject: Bug 42172
Author: bernds
Date: Fri Jul 2 16:25:59 2010
New Revision: 161726
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161726
Log:
PR target/42172
* config/arm/arm.c
--- Comment #9 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-01 09:20 ---
Subject: Bug 44727
Author: bernds
Date: Thu Jul 1 09:20:40 2010
New Revision: 161656
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161656
Log:
PR target/44727
* config/i386/i386.md (peephole2
--- Comment #1 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-01 23:21 ---
Patch looks wrong, issue seems to be with a bogus pattern.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-30 14:17 ---
Subject: Bug 39799
Author: bernds
Date: Wed Jun 30 14:16:28 2010
New Revision: 161605
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161605
Log:
PR tree-optimization/39799
* tree-inline.c
--- Comment #4 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-30 21:52 ---
I can reproduce this. I haven't found the problem, but it seems to go away if
I remove m_ATOM from X86_TUNE_OPT_AGU. Is it possible that there's a bug
related to this in i386.*?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #6 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-30 22:08 ---
Ok, thanks for investigating. I think we may need something like this:
@@ -17574,6 +17574,7 @@ (define_peephole2
|| GET_MODE (operands[0]) == HImode))
|| GET_MODE (operands[0]) == SImode
--- Comment #14 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-29 13:44 ---
Subject: Bug 43902
Author: bernds
Date: Tue Jun 29 13:43:57 2010
New Revision: 161533
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161533
Log:
PR target/43902
* config/arm/arm.md (maddsidi4
--- Comment #22 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-29 22:41 ---
Closing this again. The partial revert was approved and committed as r161534.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #21 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-28 17:50 ---
The patch that was committed (especially the cse.c exp_equiv_p part) seems like
a big hammer, and it does cause missed optimization opportunities.
Reverting it on gcc-4.1-branch, and instead applying the patch
--- Comment #13 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-25 08:56 ---
Subject: Bug 43902
Author: bernds
Date: Fri Jun 25 08:56:24 2010
New Revision: 161366
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161366
Log:
With large parts from Jim Wilson:
PR target
--- Comment #3 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-21 23:59 ---
At first glance, it looks like the tricks in the prefetch_cc simply aren't
valid. It seems to be trying to prevent certain types of addressing modes, but
reload is allowed to change them as it sees fit.
If I read
--- Comment #25 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-17 21:52 ---
Subject: Bug 39871
Author: bernds
Date: Thu Jun 17 21:51:55 2010
New Revision: 160947
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160947
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/39871
* reload1.c
--- Comment #26 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-17 21:54 ---
Fixed.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #11 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-16 13:29 ---
Yes, the check for MULT is for cases where the definition is after the use in
basic-block order; I'd expect this can happen with crazy gotos and maybe in
other cases as well.
Could you retest the MIPS fixed-point
--- Comment #7 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-11 21:32 ---
This would appear to be a bug in the sparc backend then; my patch is only
exposing it. I'll not investigate further and leave this for a Sparc
maintainer since I have no clue about the machine.
--
http
--- Comment #8 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-11 22:36 ---
Fixed.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #9 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-09 20:20 ---
Created an attachment (id=20880)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20880action=view)
A new version of Jim's patch
Here's what I've done with it so far. I've changed the new tree code to be a
proper
--- Comment #7 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-07 21:34 ---
Jim, are you still working on this or should I pick it up?
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-07 22:46 ---
Fixed.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
1 - 100 of 137 matches
Mail list logo
