https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #21 from Alexandre Oliva aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I went back to r219641, just before the problem disappeared again, installed
the r220031 patch to fix the dwarf2out crash, and compilation completed
sucessfully in 36s.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sun Feb 1 17:32:18 2015
New Revision: 220322
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220322root=gccview=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2015-01-23 Jakub
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
-O3 -g testcase from PR64817 showing probably the same issue as #c0 with
reorder_operands reverted:
int a, b, d;
void
foo (void)
{
for (b = 0; b 9; b++)
{
int e;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jan 23 09:47:51 2015
New Revision: 220031
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220031root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR debug/64511
* dwarf2out.c (struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 34531
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34531action=edit
gcc5-pr64511.patch
The #c13 testcase can be fixed by the attached patch. Not including
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 34527
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34527action=edit
gcc5-ice-nobt.patch
Untested fix for the undesirable backtrace from driver.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Jan 21 21:59:34 2015
New Revision: 219974
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219974root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR debug/64511
* simplify-rtx.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Note the stack traces involving do_spec_1 are generally bogus (should be
fixed), those stack traces are from the gcc driver rather than cc1/cc1plus
etc., and are printed because
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #13 from Zhendong Su su at cs dot ucdavis.edu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
The #c0 issue is different (with the reorder_operands call commented out),
...
That said, I'd like to fix #c8 independently.
Jakub,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #15 from Zhendong Su su at cs dot ucdavis.edu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14)
Note the stack traces involving do_spec_1 are generally bogus (should be
fixed), those stack traces are from the gcc driver rather than
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The #c8 case can be easily fixed:
--- gcc/simplify-rtx.c.jj2015-01-19 09:31:25.0 +0100
+++ gcc/simplify-rtx.c2015-01-21 10:59:03.808280655 +0100
@@ -4589,7 +4589,8 @@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 20 Jan 2015, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Note, this problem went away with r219646. Shall we declare it as fixed or at
least turn into non-regression?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #8 from Zhendong Su su at cs dot ucdavis.edu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
Note, this problem went away with r219646. Shall we declare it as fixed or
at least turn into non-regression?
Jakub, the original
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 13 Jan 2015, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |debug
---
22 matches
Mail list logo
