http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58377
Neil Vachharajani changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nvachhar at google dot com
--- Comment #1 from nvachhar at google dot com 2009-10-10 00:36 ---
Author: nvachhar
Date: Sat Oct 10 00:34:21 2009
New Revision: 152612
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=152612
Log:
2009-10-09 Neil Vachharajani
* libcpp/directives.c (DIRECTI
Component: preprocessor
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: nvachhar at google dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41632
--- Comment #7 from nvachhar at google dot com 2009-07-24 17:47 ---
Subject: Re: ICE in iv_analyze_def caused by
stale REG_UNUSED note
This looks reasonable to me. Given the caveats you mention in the
comment, this would need to be tested for correctness (esp. w.r.t. the
--- Comment #5 from nvachhar at google dot com 2009-07-24 15:39 ---
Subject: Re: ICE in iv_analyze_def caused by
stale REG_UNUSED note
loop-iv does need notes, albeit indirectly through the single_set
function. single_set looks at the REG_UNUSED note, and if all but one
set
--- Comment #1 from nvachhar at google dot com 2009-05-20 18:48 ---
Created an attachment (id=17896)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17896&action=view)
Test case that causes an ICE
Compile with:
gcc -c -O2 -Wall -fprofile-use test.c
--
http://gcc.
tale REG_UNUSED note
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: nvachhar at google dot com
GCC hos
--- Comment #1 from nvachhar at google dot com 2009-01-21 19:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=17158)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17158&action=view)
Test case to trigger the segfault.
To generate the segfault, use the following command line:
g++ -mtune=
q_attr "type"
"!alu1,negnot,ishift1,
imov,imovx,icmp,test,bitmanip,
fmov,fcmp,fsgn,
sse,ssemov,ssecmp,ssecomi,ssecvt,ssecvt1,sseicvt,sselog1,
sseiadd1,mmx,mmxmov,mmxcmp,mmxcvt")
--- Comment #3 from nvachhar at google dot com 2009-01-14 21:30 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I think this code is invalid as the call to Max is not going to be dependent
> as
> the arguments are not dependent and can be looked up at the time the function
> is defined.
--- Comment #1 from nvachhar at google dot com 2009-01-14 21:05 ---
Created an attachment (id=17104)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17104&action=view)
Test case program
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38851
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: nvachhar at google dot com
GCC build triplet: i686-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38851
--- Comment #1 from nvachhar at google dot com 2009-01-14 20:53 ---
Created an attachment (id=17103)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17103&action=view)
Test case program
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38850
omponent: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: nvachhar at google dot com
GCC build triplet: i686-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38850
14 matches
Mail list logo
