On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Bingfeng Meib...@broadcom.com wrote:
Hello,
I came across a function renaming issue in GCC 4.4.
~/work/install-x86/bin/gcc -Wall -Winline -O3 -g -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64
-save-temps -c bzip2.c -fdump-tree-all
Function saveInputFileMetaInfo is renamed to
function renaming
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Bingfeng
Meib...@broadcom.com wrote:
Hello,
I came across a function renaming issue in GCC 4.4.
~/work/install-x86/bin/gcc -Wall -Winline -O3 -g
-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -save-temps -c bzip2.c -fdump-tree-all
Function
-
From: Richard Guenther [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
Sent: 16 June 2009 13:56
To: Bingfeng Mei
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Questionable function renaming
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Bingfeng
Meib...@broadcom.com wrote:
Hello,
I came across a function renaming issue
0.001 0.00 0.00 snocString
Bingfeng
-Original Message-
From: Richard Guenther [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
Sent: 16 June 2009 14:02
To: Bingfeng Mei
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Questionable function renaming
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:01 PM
-
From: Richard Guenther [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
Sent: 16 June 2009 14:02
To: Bingfeng Mei
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Questionable function renaming
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Bingfeng
Meib...@broadcom.com wrote:
Is it possible to restore the original name
Mei
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Questionable function renaming
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Bingfeng
Meib...@broadcom.com wrote:
Is it possible to restore the original name if the copy
propagation is not profitable and doesn't go ahead?
The calling convention
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 04:34:01PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 06:49:58AM -0700, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
Thanks, I didn't notice both functions have different arguments after
transformation.
However, gprof produces T.251 in its statistics, completely unknown
