https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #36 from Yvan Roux yroux at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: yroux
Date: Thu Nov 13 14:00:48 2014
New Revision: 217497
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217497root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-11-13 Yvan Roux yvan.r...@linaro.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #35 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: pinskia
Date: Wed Oct 15 00:38:03 2014
New Revision: 216229
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216229root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-10-14 Andrew Pinski apin...@cavium.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #31 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I cannot reproduce the original bug with the patch in comment #26 reverted.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #32 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #31)
I cannot reproduce the original bug with the patch in comment #26 reverted.
The original bug only happened with -maddress-mode=long and it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #33 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 55142 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #28 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #27)
This patch breaks ILP32 with stack pointers.
For this function:
void f(int *a, int b, long long d) __attribute__((noinline,noclone));
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #29 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
This is related to PR 55142.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #30 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #29)
This is related to PR 55142.
The problem I reported is worked around in the i386 backend though:
(insn:TI 19 18 22 3 (set (mem:SI (plus:DI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #27 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This patch breaks ILP32 with stack pointers.
For this function:
void f(int *a, int b, long long d) __attribute__((noinline,noclone));
void f(int *a, int b, long long d)
{
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #26 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-19
21:18:06 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Aug 19 21:18:03 2011
New Revision: 177914
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=177914
Log:
Permute conversion and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #25 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-18 21:56:43
UTC ---
Another testcase:
[hjl@gnu-6 pr49721]$ cat foo.f
PARAMETER( LM=7 )
PARAMETER( NM=2+2**LM, NV=NM**3 )
PARAMETER( NR =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #23 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-09
13:22:10 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Tue Aug 9 13:22:05 2011
New Revision: 177591
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=177591
Log:
Revert fix for PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #24 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-09
13:24:07 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Tue Aug 9 13:24:04 2011
New Revision: 177592
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=177592
Log:
Also permute
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #20 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 13:56:05
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
H.J., I agree with what you write in comment 16. But unless we are sure that
the problematic composition will never be generated
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #21 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 14:05:06
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #20)
and it still has massive failures:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-08/msg00264.html
You broke exceptions. Similar
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #22 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 14:48:09
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
H.J., I agree with what you write in comment 16. But unless we are sure that
the problematic composition will never be generated
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #17 from Paolo Bonzini bonzini at gnu dot org 2011-08-03 06:32:42
UTC ---
H.J., I agree with what you write in comment 16. But unless we are sure that
the problematic composition will never be generated (e.g. by ivopts), we cannot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #18 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 06:40:45
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
H.J., I agree with what you write in comment 16. But unless we are sure that
the problematic composition will never be generated
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #19 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 06:47:30
UTC ---
Paolo,
FYI, problem in comment #11 can be seen on unpatched trunk by compiling the
testcase from comment #5.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-02 14:08:31
UTC ---
Another testcase:
[hjl@gnu-33 gcc]$ cat /export/gnu/import/delta-fortran/testcase-min.f
subroutine midbloc6(c,a2,a2i,q)
parameter (ndim2=6)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #6 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2011-08-02 15:39:55
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Another testcase:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
try_combine (i3=optimized out, i2=optimized out, i1=0x0,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-02 15:57:35
UTC ---
Created attachment 24893
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24893
A patch
With this patch, I got many ICEs in gcc testsuite. One of
them is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-02 15:58:56
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
(In reply to comment #5)
Another testcase:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
try_combine (i3=optimized out,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #9 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2011-08-02 18:36:33
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
#0 try_combine (i3=optimized out, i2=optimized out, i1=0x0,
i0=optimized
out, new_direct_jump_p=0x7fffdf54,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-02 19:17:43
UTC ---
Here is the problem:
(gdb)
Continuing.
Breakpoint 1, convert_memory_address_addr_space (to_mode=DImode,
x=0x707f73c0, as=0 '\000')
at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #11 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2011-08-02 19:19:06
UTC ---
So, we have:
(insn 129 128 131 2 (set (reg:DI 276)
(sign_extend:DI (reg:SI 277))) pr49721.f:10 123 {*extendsidi2_rex64}
(expr_list:REG_DEAD
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-02 19:29:12
UTC ---
combine.c has
/* Allocate array for insn info. */
max_uid_known = get_max_uid ();
uid_log_links = XCNEWVEC (struct insn_link *, max_uid_known + 1);
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #13 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2011-08-02 19:32:46
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
Here is the problem:
No, in your case new insn is rejected (twice):
Trying 434 - 435:
Failed to match this instruction:
(parallel [
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #14 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-02 19:42:30
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
(In reply to comment #10)
Here is the problem:
No, in your case new insn is rejected (twice):
Trying 434 - 435:
Failed to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #15 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2011-08-02 20:22:27
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
(In reply to comment #13)
(In reply to comment #10)
Here is the problem:
No, in your case new insn is rejected (twice):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #16 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 02:40:05
UTC ---
The fundamental question is what the actual address for
(symbol FOO + const_int Y), where the numerical value of
(symbol FOO + const_int Y) is outside of [0 - (2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ubizjak at gmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-07-28 21:27:33
UTC ---
The question is we have
(zero_extend:DI (plus:SI (FOO:SI) (const_int Y)))
Is is OK to transform it to
(plus:DI (zero_extend:DI (FOO:SI)) (const_int Y))
The
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-28
21:31:20 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
The question is we have
(zero_extend:DI (plus:SI (FOO:SI) (const_int Y)))
Is is OK to transform it to
(plus:DI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-07-28 21:39:47
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
(In reply to comment #2)
The question is we have
(zero_extend:DI (plus:SI (FOO:SI) (const_int Y)))
Is is OK to transform it
37 matches
Mail list logo
