at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
But it is actually a slightly different problem. The assignment to
d7.pr, which is an empty struct, survives all the way to gimple as a
load from an initializer of size zero, which makes SRA to create an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93516
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93516
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
I proposed a fix on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2020-02/msg00850.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93667
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
It is easy to prevent the ICE with the following, which prevents total
scalarization from happening. However, if someone marked a field with
such an attribute, the encompassing structure perhaps should be
op
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Mine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93516
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
So the problems seems to be that get_ref_base_an_extent returns
different sizes for expressions of the same type - specifically a
RECORD_TYPE with padding - when one is a standalone VAR_DECL and the
other a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92548
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
The problem is that IPA-SRA does not handle structures passed by
invisible reference and 32bit hppa uses it. I would suggest xfailing
the scan it like we did in PR77732. John, since you can actually run
the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93516
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
I'll have a look.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92700
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
At first glance this looks like a dup of PR80635
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93214
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Indeed, the first fixed revision was
r10-6023-f48c6014133c8989702458f9082e34ba6dd326d4:
f48c6014133c8989702458f9082e34ba6dd326d4 is the first fixed commit
commit f48c6014133c8989702458f9082e34ba6dd326d4
Auth
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93214
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
I don't know what helped but I was able to LTO bootstrap Ada today,
specifically master commit r10-6244-e97a3063fb1 (on x86_64-linux).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93385
--- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor ---
Another option, which does not create an inter-pass dependency and
does not clutter tree-inline any more, but which pessimizes IPA-SRA
(put perhaps just alittle bit?), is making sure that the statements
whic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93385
--- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor ---
The assumption is that DCE will eventually remove all gimple
assignments with LHS which has no uses if gimple_has_volatile_ops
returns false for them. I have had only a brief look at DCE today and
it seems
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93385
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
I'm going to test a patch that basically does the following (plus moving
push_cfun a bit):
diff --git a/gcc/ipa-sra.c b/gcc/ipa-sra.c
index 31de527d111..e18dc6958dc 100644
--- a/gcc/ipa-sra.c
+++ b/gcc/ipa-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93385
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor ---
Ah, -fno-tree-dce is specfied on the command line...
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
Yes, IPA-SRA removes the parameter because we do bunch of computations
on them but never store the result anywhere nor pass it to another
function. The problem is that the modulo operation survives the
||2020-01-15
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
I'll take a look
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92240
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93223
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92971
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Jan 10 22:46:46 2020
New Revision: 280151
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=280151&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
IPA-CP: Remove bogus static keyword (PR 92971)
2020-01-10 Martin Jambo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92971
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Jan 10 19:30:56 2020
New Revision: 280131
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=280131&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
IPA-CP: Remove bogus static keyword (PR 92971)
2020-01-10 Martin Jambo
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Christoph Höger from comment #0)
> it looks like the result of ipa_fn_summaries->get (callee); should be
> checked for nullptr.
Indeed, we figure out that after cloning we could devirt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93166
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
I have analyzed this ICE and came to the conclusion that the assert is
wrong for polymorphic context lattices - e.g. in the reported case we
always pass the same class to first parameter, which in the recursi
||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor ---
At least r279561 can be bootstrapped on an x86_64-linux (the subsequent r279563
breaks normal Ada LTO bootstrapped, see PR 93214) so I believe this old bug
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-linux
Target: x86_64-linux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92917
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92917
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Jan 3 13:52:38 2020
New Revision: 279859
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279859&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Avoid segfault when dumping IPA-CP lattices for unoptimized functions (P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93015
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91579
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93084
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to fxue from comment #8)
> [...]
> Then is there a case that a ipcp_lattice be shared by different cgraph nodes?
No, there isn't.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93084
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93015
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Sat Dec 21 11:25:05 2019
New Revision: 279695
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279695&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Avoid segfault when doing IPA-VRP but not IPA-CP (PR 93015)
2019-12-21
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93015
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
I proposed a patch on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-12/msg01451.html
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
Heh, ipcp_store_vr_results checks for flag_ipa_vrp but not for flag_ipa_cp or
optimize, which means that it accesses info which has not been created. I
suppose it's best to do what ipcp_store_bits_re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92971
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92971
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Dec 18 16:08:09 2019
New Revision: 279525
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279525&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
IPA-CP: Remove bogus static keyword (PR 92971)
2019-12-18 Martin Jambo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92486
--- Comment #17 from Martin Jambor ---
If we really decide to fix this in SRA, i can be done (after the previous
patches in the series are in) with something like
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-12/msg01185.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92706
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed the following patches to address this on trunk. The
testcase from comment #3 can be fixed with
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-12/msg01183.html
The original testcase however needs al
||2019-12-17
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
I'll remove it with https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-12/msg01186.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92971
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to fxue from comment #0)
> The variable "values" is defined as static, which makes a questionable side
> effect. History calls will impact result of current call!
>
> for (i = 0; i < count; i++)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92676
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
I proposed a fix on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-12/msg01129.html
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68230
--- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #10)
> Martin Jambor's IPA-SRA rewrite might be relevant here; it sounded like the
> new IPA-SRA will remove parameters that are unused like this, but I didn't
> quite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92741
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #4)
> This comes from:
>
> if (!useless_type_conversion_p (TREE_TYPE (rhs), TREE_TYPE (v->value)))
> {
> if (fold_convertible_p (TREE_TY
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92133
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 92133, which changed state.
Bug 92133 Summary: Support multi versioning on self recursive function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92133
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92697
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Assignee|mjambor at suse dot cz |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92476
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Nov 29 13:36:47 2019
New Revision: 278842
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278842&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add an x86_64 test for PR 92476
2019-11-29 Martin Jambor
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92476
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Nov 29 13:29:35 2019
New Revision: 278841
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278841&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
ipa-cp: Avoid ICEs when looking at expanded thunks and unoptimized funct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92697
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Thu Nov 28 15:39:48 2019
New Revision: 278812
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278812&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
cgraph: ifunc resolvers cannot be made local (PR 92697)
2019-11-28 Mar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92697
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
And for the record, I'm testing a patch.
Assignee: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 47381
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47381&action=edit
testcase
In the attached testcase, IPA-SRA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92109
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91956
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92109
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Nov 25 10:13:08 2019
New Revision: 278670
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278670&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
ipa: Prevent materialization of clones with removed bodies (PR 92109)
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91956
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Nov 25 10:09:42 2019
New Revision: 278669
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278669&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Make IPA-SRA follow comdat-local rules (PR 91956)
2019-11-25 Martin Ja
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91832
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92109
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
After talking to Honza, I have proposed a different patch on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-11/msg02205.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91956
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
I proposed a patch on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-11/msg02203.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92109
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
So this helps:
diff --git a/gcc/cgraphclones.c b/gcc/cgraphclones.c
index bfcebb20495..359ea53d8a6 100644
--- a/gcc/cgraphclones.c
+++ b/gcc/cgraphclones.c
@@ -1079,6 +1079,7 @@ symbol_table::materialize_all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92109
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92528
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Nov 18 15:50:06 2019
New Revision: 278415
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278415&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add testcase for already fixed PR ipa/92528
2019-11-18 Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80635
--- Comment #28 from Martin Jambor ---
The RFC did not receive any real negative feedback so I proposed to commit an
updated patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-11/msg01494.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92528
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #6)
> There is no need to clear polymorphic call context. It does not refer to the
> parameters of caller. If it was valid for all possible contexts it is still
> valid.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92486
--- Comment #15 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #14)
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2019, jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> [...] But yes, for your example we'd copy-prop out c and b which
> might
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92486
--- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #10)
> [...] But total scalarization works with the premise
> that we don't see any direct accesses to source or destination
That is not true, total scalarization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92486
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
While I don't share this preference about assignments, SRA only
ignores padding when doing "total scalarization" aka the poor man's
aggregate copy propagation because in that mode it would have to
invent smal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70929
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9/10 regression] |[8/9 regression]
|Cros
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The following breaks when compiled with -O2 -fno
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92454
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92454
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Nov 13 14:12:58 2019
New Revision: 278142
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278142&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add a few missing checks that IPA_NODE_REF is not NULL (PR 92454)
2019-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92454
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92454
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
I think the patch is (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #2)
> This is the usual problem of trying to process node with no summary
> attached to it. The following fixes the ICE, but I am not sure if there
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80635
--- Comment #27 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #26)
> Hi Martin,
>
> Wouldn't it be better if the testcase tested that no warning is given for a
> true case? Otherwise if the bug is fixed, no warning will be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80635
--- Comment #25 from Martin Jambor ---
I have posted an RFC patch alleviating the situation somewhat to the mailing
list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-11/msg00614.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92409
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> @@ -3634,6 +3636,10 @@ declare_return_variable (copy_body_data
> && !DECL_GIMPLE_REG_P (result)
> && DECL_P (var))
> DECL_GIMPLE_REG
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92409
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #47195|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92409
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Ah sorry, looking at my bash history, yesterday I somehow lost the -m32 on my
command line :-( Will try again.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92409
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 47195
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47195&action=edit
Hopefully the fix
I have to leave the office now but I am testing the attached fix on an x86_64 -
I have lost c
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
Confirmed, at least on the i686, and mine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70929
--- Comment #15 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Thu Nov 7 10:55:43 2019
New Revision: 277920
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=277920&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Remove gimple_call_types_likely_match_p (PR 70929)
2019-11-07 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70929
--- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor ---
I sent a more detailed analysis of the behavior of
gimple_call_types_likely_match_p and the idea from comment #5 along
with a patch that mostly removes the predicate to the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92254
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92278
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
*** Bug 92254 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92278
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92278
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
See https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-10/msg02139.html for a possible
fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92278
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #3)
> Martin, do you have any idea?
Yes, the jump functions are thrown away at stream-in time because
e->possibly_call_in_translation_unit_p returns false in:
static v
||2019-10-10
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org,
||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60243
--- Comment #26 from Martin Jambor ---
With new IPA-SRA, the situation has improved quite a bit, see below
where old-ipa-sra is trunk r275981 and new-ipa-sra is trunk r275982
(arrival of new IPA-SRA):
$ /usr/bin/time -f 'real=%e user=%U' taskset
Priority: P3
Component: preprocessor
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org, nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-linux
Priority: P3
Component: gcov-profile
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-linux
Target: x86_64-linux
If you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91842
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91842
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Oct 2 15:09:37 2019
New Revision: 276465
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276465&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR testsuite/91842] Skip gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-sra-19.c on power
2019-10-02
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91853
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91853
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Sep 30 08:18:59 2019
New Revision: 276296
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276296&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 91853] Prevent IPA-SRA ICEs on type-mismatched calls
2019-09-30 Ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70929
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91894
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91853
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
*** Bug 91894 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91872
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
701 - 800 of 2265 matches
Mail list logo
