https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87525
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89330
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=89330
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 45730
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45730&action=edit
Untested fix
I'm testing the attached fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89330
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
Priority: P3
Component: hsa
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
I can see the following two libgomp failures when the testsuite is run
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
I have posted a WIP patch as:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-12/msg01765.html
I am in the process of cleaning it up for final submission once stage 1 opens
again.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85762
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
My apologies, I forgot about this bug. I will have a look this week.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89209
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
HWell, no. We create a special default-def SSA to insert into the IL
the information that an uninitialized value is being loaded but now
the SSA has aggregate type, which should not happen, I guess (even
tho
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89209
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
For the record, the following is the most likely fix, but let me think
about it a bit more tomorrow before I submit it.
diff --git a/gcc/tree-sra.c b/gcc/tree-sra.c
index e4851daaa3f..7efd0a62ebb 100644
---
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Which I suppose means it is mine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87863
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87863
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Feb 1 16:22:13 2019
New Revision: 268452
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268452&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR hsa/87863] Set assembler name of group and global variables early
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88933
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88933
--- Comment #18 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Sat Jan 26 22:19:17 2019
New Revision: 268305
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268305&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR ipa/88933] Careful CFG cleanup in IPA-CP function transformation
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88933
--- Comment #17 from Martin Jambor ---
OK, I did that too and proposed a patch in
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-01/msg01525.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88933
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #45504|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88933
--- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #11)
> Actually, looking at Martin's patch, I guess ipcp transfrom should do
> the same as inliner - do not cleanup cfg but call
> delete_unreachable_blocks_update_callg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88933
--- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 45511
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45511&action=edit
Untested fix
I'm currently testing this fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88933
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87615
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|jamborm at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87615
--- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Sun Jan 20 20:17:02 2019
New Revision: 268107
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268107&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Limit AA walking in IPA summary generation
2019-01-20 Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84481
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
And even my own measurements show 6% slowdown at both -O2 and -Ofast with
generic march/tuning against GCC 7 and now also 5% slowdown at -Ofast and
native march/tuning against GCC 8.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88214
--- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Jan 16 15:41:07 2019
New Revision: 267975
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267975&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 88214] Check that an argument is a pointer
2019-01-16 Martin Jamb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88214
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Jan 16 15:37:33 2019
New Revision: 267974
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267974&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 88214] Check that an argument is a pointer
2019-01-16 Martin Jamb
||2018-12-21
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
Mine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88214
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Thu Dec 20 14:14:22 2018
New Revision: 267298
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267298&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 88214] Assert that ptr is a pointer
2018-12-20 Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84490
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor ---
I should have my own numbers only in January, but according to
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/spec_report/branch there
is a 7% regression at -Ofast and generic march/mtune on Zen.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84481
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> What's the state on trunk?
I should have my own measurements only in January but according to
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/spec_report/branch the
||2018-12-10
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Sure.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88214
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88214
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Dec 10 12:45:47 2018
New Revision: 266953
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266953&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 88214] Check that an argument is a pointer
2018-12-10 Martin Jambo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88214
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
I have posted the patch to the mailing list for review:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-12/msg00460.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87615
--- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor ---
I have just posted the patch for review in:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-12/msg00456.html
With it the compile time of the testcase goes down from approximately
340 seconds to about 160 seconds (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88214
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
I'm going to test the following fix:
diff --git a/gcc/ipa-prop.c b/gcc/ipa-prop.c
index 7405235..4dbe268 100644
--- a/gcc/ipa-prop.c
+++ b/gcc/ipa-prop.c
@@ -1569,7 +1569,8 @@ determine_locally_known_aggrega
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88214
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
OK, I take it all back. SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO and SSA_NAME_PTR_INFO
share storage by design, the latter should not be accessed because the
SSA_NAME is an integer but it still happens to be a base in a MEM_REF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88214
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
I don't think this has much to do with IPA-CP per se. What is
happening is that call_may_clobber_ref_p_1 extracts SSA_NAME_PTR_INFO
of an SSA_NAME that is a base of a MEM_REF and runs
pt_solutions_intersect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87615
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
It's actually, ipa_polymorphic_call_context::get_dynamic_type that causes
problems here. I'll prepare a patch.
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
OK
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
>
> Can any of you fix that please?
If doing that only in stage 3 is fine, I can.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87528
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Can you point me to the source for which we generate the popcount call(s)?
> It might be not final value replacement but instead code-generating a niter
> analy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||87528
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87528
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kugan at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
According to my repeated measurements, r262486 and r262864 caused ~14%
regression (roughly 7% and 7% each) in run-time of SPEC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87347
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87347
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Sep 26 11:58:18 2018
New Revision: 264640
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264640&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 87347] Prevent segfaults if TYPE_ARG_TYPES is NULL
2018-09-26 Mart
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87339
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87339
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Sep 25 16:28:40 2018
New Revision: 264579
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264579&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 87339] Fix failure of gcc.dg/warn-abs-1.c on some targets
2018-09-2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87339
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Well, I did not quite manage on Friday, but I have submitted the patch now:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-09/msg01374.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87347
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
So I did not manage to do so last week but I have submitted it today:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-09/msg01373.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87339
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
My intention is to move the _Float128 bits a to a special test for x86_64... on
Friday.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87347
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
Bah, I should have thought about this. The following will fix it, I'll
properly test it and submit a patch later this week.
diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
index 1766a256633..a96d15fef1d 10
||2018-09-18
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
Confirmed and mine. Sorry about that, I only tested a previous iteration of
the patch on non
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87188
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to dave.anglin from comment #7)
> On 2018-09-05 4:55 AM, jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87188
> >
> > --- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87188
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
gcc61.fsffrance.org unfortunately seems inaccessible, can you post
-fdump-tree-esra-details dump here together with the preceeding tree
dump file?
I cannot see anything wrong with the dump excerpt that you p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86948
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
Priority: P3
Component: hsa
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 44535
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzi
,
||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
On AMD Zen CPUs at least, we found that the number of iterations executed by
the hottest loop is considerably higher with -ffast-math (just patch the
benchmark and see for yourself). The reason
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86371
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86371
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Jul 4 12:22:29 2018
New Revision: 262400
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262400&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Remove spurious $HOME include from BRIG FE Makefile
2018-07-04 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86371
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Jul 4 12:20:26 2018
New Revision: 262399
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262399&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Remove spurious $HOME include from BRIG FE Makefile
2018-07-04 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86371
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Jul 4 12:08:16 2018
New Revision: 262398
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262398&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Remove spurious $HOME include from BRIG FE Makefile
2018-07-04 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86274
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor ---
And in the previous dump (fixup_cfg1), we have
:
__len = D.127713;
__builtin_va_end (&__args);
std::allocator::allocator (&D.122645);
_1 = (sizetype) __len;
_2 = __s + _1;
std::__cxx11::basic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86274
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
As early as the ssa dump we have, in the same function,
:
__len_13 = _12;
__builtin_va_end (&__args);
std::allocator::allocator (&D.122645);
_1 = (sizetype) __len_13;
_2 = __s_7 + _1;
std::__c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86274
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
After a more careful look: The testcase from comment #5 calls
__builtin_alloca(1) and then tries to vnsprintf into that memory, so I
decided I'd go back to the original testcase.
It indeed does segfaults whe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86274
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
The IPA (and first tree) dumps look all normal. But even when I patch IPA-CP
to create a clone but not to modify it in any way, I still get the segfault.
I'll look where we start diverging next.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84481
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
Regarding the generic tuning issue, the difference comes down to the
order of the three instructions at offset 46 in the hottest loop below
(left is fast, right is slow, both along with their perf samples):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86270
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-linux
CC|
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Compiling the following simple example with GCC 8 on an x86_64 with
just -O2 -S:
int *a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82805
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 82805, which changed state.
Bug 82805 Summary: [7/8/9 Regression] SPEC CPU2006 454.calculix ~6% performance
deviation in between 6.3 and 7.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82805
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84613
Bug 84613 depends on bug 82805, which changed state.
Bug 82805 Summary: [7/8/9 Regression] SPEC CPU2006 454.calculix ~6% performance
deviation in between 6.3 and 7.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82805
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84613
Bug 84613 depends on bug 82804, which changed state.
Bug 82804 Summary: [7/8/9 Regression] SPEC CPU2006 470.lbm ~5% performance
deviation with r237185
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82804
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 82804, which changed state.
Bug 82804 Summary: [7/8/9 Regression] SPEC CPU2006 470.lbm ~5% performance
deviation with r237185
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82804
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82804
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85655
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85655
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Thu May 17 12:23:34 2018
New Revision: 260320
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260320&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Check is_single_const in intersect_with_plats
2018-05-17 Martin Jambo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85655
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Thu May 17 12:18:06 2018
New Revision: 260319
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260319&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Check is_single_const in intersect_with_plats
2018-05-17 Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85655
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
The bug is latent on gcc7 and gcc6, I plan to commit the fix there at the end
of this week.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85655
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri May 11 15:58:29 2018
New Revision: 260166
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260166&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Check is_single_const in intersect_with_plats
2018-05-11 Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85655
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri May 11 15:55:15 2018
New Revision: 260165
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260165&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Check is_single_const in intersect_with_plats
2018-05-11 Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84201
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
When benchmarking GCC 8 on an older Ivy Bridge Xeon, I also got 549.fotonik3d_r
verification error just with -Ofast -g -march=native -mtune=native
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85655
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
I have posted a proposed fix to the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-05/msg00468.html
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
Mine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85549
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
I have posted the fix to the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-04/msg01236.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85549
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
This is another stupid omission, I forgot that for by-reference aggregate
values, one has to check the agg_preserved of the jump function.
diff --git a/gcc/ipa-cp.c b/gcc/ipa-cp.c
index 1b8f335fd32..4f28a55b
||2018-04-27
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Mine
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82805
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
According to my latest numbers. 454.alculix compiled with gcc 7 is 3% slower
than gcc 6 at -O2 but trunk (r259234) is as fast as gcc 6.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85449
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85447
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85449
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
I have posted the following fix to the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-04/msg00996.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85447
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
Eventually, we have decided to go for a more limited fix which I have posted to
the mailing list: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-04/msg00995.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85449
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 43990
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43990&action=edit
Simple testcase
This is a simple testcase. Let me prepare the final patch then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85447
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #43981|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85449
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
I believe I understand the issue and will prepare a testcase from scratch.
Possibly after I test/submit the patch if it takes too long. Thanks for your
effort!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85449
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
I believe I understand the issue and will prepare a testcase from scratch.
Possibly after I test/submit the patch if it takes too long. Thanks for your
effort!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85449
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
All right, this is a different bug, the description in the summary describes it
fairly precisely. To the extent to which I am still awake, I believe the fix
is the patch below. I will test it properly tomor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85447
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Thinking about this a bit more, there can be cases where only a subset
(potentially empty) of clones of self-recursive edges of the cloned edges are
to be redirected... I will adjust the patch accordingly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85449
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
OK, I can see a failure with trunk but not with my fix for PR 85447. Looking
into IPA-CP dumps of both, I guess that although the mechanism of this bug
might be slightly different, the fix will be the same.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85447
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #43979|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85447
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 43979
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43979&action=edit
Untested WIP fix
I have to leave office for a few hours, I'm attaching an untested fix I have so
far. I will c
901 - 1000 of 2265 matches
Mail list logo
