--- Comment #13 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 11:17
---
Fixed.
--
hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #14 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-11 23:38 ---
Subject: Bug 42110
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Dec 11 23:36:24 2009
New Revision: 155184
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=155184
Log:
Backport testcases from trunk.
2009-12-11 H.J. Lu
--- Comment #12 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-10 20:51
---
Subject: Bug 42110
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Dec 10 20:50:47 2009
New Revision: 155140
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=155140
Log:
PR middle-end/42228
PR middle-end/42110
--- Comment #8 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-08 15:57 ---
So we have new direct call appearing to function that has been previously
eliminated as unreachable (after inlining) as a result of devirtualization?
In general if function have address taken, we should not remove
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-08 16:01 ---
I assumed it is special vtable handling (that likely doesn't cause the
addressable flag to be set?) - I simply stopped debugging at the point
where I noticed the node gets removed even though there are still
--- Comment #10 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2009-12-08 16:35 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] ICE with inlining
I assumed it is special vtable handling (that likely doesn't cause the
addressable flag to be set?) - I simply stopped debugging at the point
where I noticed the node
--- Comment #11 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-08 16:36
---
Testing patch.
--
hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-04 12:03 ---
This also happens when I try to reproduce the tramp3d profile mismatch
(well, if checking is enabled only obviously).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42110
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-04 12:06 ---
The ICE goes away with -fno-ipa-cp.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-04 13:00 ---
So we come in
tree-inline.c:
1695 if (id-transform_call_graph_edges ==
CB_CGE_MOVE_CLONES)
1696cgraph_create_edge_including_clones
as we figure out a new direct call.
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-12-04 13:45 ---
It is caused by revision 154200:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-11/msg00421.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42110
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-27 11:25 ---
Re-confirmed. Might cause wrong-code, so P1 even if ice-checking.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-27 11:35 ---
*** Bug 42187 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-20 10:58 ---
Honza?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42110
15 matches
Mail list logo
