[Bug debug/50317] [4.7 Regression] missing DW_OP_GNU_implicit_pointer

2011-12-03 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317 --- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-03 16:40:05 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Sat Dec 3 16:39:56 2011 New Revision: 181971 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181971 Log: PR debug/50317 * tree-ssa.c (target_for_de

[Bug debug/50317] [4.7 Regression] missing DW_OP_GNU_implicit_pointer

2011-12-01 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug debug/50317] [4.7 Regression] missing DW_OP_GNU_implicit_pointer

2011-12-01 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317 --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-01 19:12:58 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Thu Dec 1 19:12:54 2011 New Revision: 181890 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181890 Log: PR debug/50317 * tree-ssa-dce.c (remove_de

[Bug debug/50317] [4.7 Regression] missing DW_OP_GNU_implicit_pointer

2011-11-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317 --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28 21:04:49 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Mon Nov 28 21:04:45 2011 New Revision: 181788 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181788 Log: PR debug/50317 * tree-ssa.c (execute_updat

[Bug debug/50317] [4.7 Regression] missing DW_OP_GNU_implicit_pointer

2011-11-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28 15:32:18 UTC --- (In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #8) > > Perhaps we could drop the var ={v} {CLOBBER} stmts when renaming the var > > into SSA instead. > > I think your current patch

[Bug debug/50317] [4.7 Regression] missing DW_OP_GNU_implicit_pointer

2011-11-28 Thread matz at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317 --- Comment #10 from Michael Matz 2011-11-28 14:52:50 UTC --- (In reply to comment #8) > Perhaps we could drop the var ={v} {CLOBBER} stmts when renaming the var > into SSA instead. I think your current patch is better, no use in slowing down th

[Bug debug/50317] [4.7 Regression] missing DW_OP_GNU_implicit_pointer

2011-11-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28 14:36:53 UTC --- Created attachment 25936 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25936 gcc47-pr50317-3.patch Alternative to gcc47-pr50317-3.patch (everything untested), which adds some ha

[Bug debug/50317] [4.7 Regression] missing DW_OP_GNU_implicit_pointer

2011-11-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28 14:10:40 UTC --- Perhaps we could drop the var ={v} {CLOBBER} stmts when renaming the var into SSA instead. As for gcc47-pr50317-1.patch, the another walk isn't because of the CLOBBERs, what it tries

[Bug debug/50317] [4.7 Regression] missing DW_OP_GNU_implicit_pointer

2011-11-28 Thread matz at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317 --- Comment #7 from Michael Matz 2011-11-28 13:46:45 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > Patch to drop ={v} {CLOBBER} stmts when the lhs lost TREE_ADDRESSABLE bit > during execute_update_addresses_taken. Actually it's not only the loss of TREE_AD

[Bug debug/50317] [4.7 Regression] missing DW_OP_GNU_implicit_pointer

2011-11-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28 13:17:02 UTC --- Created attachment 25934 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25934 gcc47-pr50317-2.patch Patch to drop ={v} {CLOBBER} stmts when the lhs lost TREE_ADDRESSABLE bit duri

[Bug debug/50317] [4.7 Regression] missing DW_OP_GNU_implicit_pointer

2011-11-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28 13:11:49 UTC --- Created attachment 25933 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25933 gcc47-pr50317-1.patch One way to fix this regression is schedule another update_addresses_taken befo

[Bug debug/50317] [4.7 Regression] missing DW_OP_GNU_implicit_pointer

2011-10-27 Thread jan.kratochvil at redhat dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317 --- Comment #4 from Jan Kratochvil 2011-10-27 13:57:22 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > not sure if that is a gdb bug though ('p' is optimized out - does the > debug info say that 'p' is zero?). Jan, can you investigate that at > the gdb side?

[Bug debug/50317] [4.7 Regression] missing DW_OP_GNU_implicit_pointer

2011-10-27 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 --- Comment #3 from Richard Guenthe

[Bug debug/50317] [4.7 Regression] missing DW_OP_GNU_implicit_pointer

2011-09-07 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-09-07 14:21:51 UTC --- The first difference is in fre1, just a better optimization: @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ foo (int i) p$1_9 = &j; # DEBUG p$1 => p$1_9 D.2704_2 = p$0_10; - D.2705_3 = *D.2704_2; + D.27

[Bug debug/50317] [4.7 Regression] missing DW_OP_GNU_implicit_pointer

2011-09-07 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|