https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
--- Comment #15 from Peter Bergner ---
Author: bergner
Date: Fri Nov 8 00:34:09 2019
New Revision: 277942
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=277942=gcc=rev
Log:
Add another test case to exercise the previous MODE_PARTIAL_INT change.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
--- Comment #13 from Peter Bergner ---
Author: bergner
Date: Thu Nov 7 18:48:45 2019
New Revision: 277928
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=277928=gcc=rev
Log:
Allow MODE_PARTIAL_INT modes for integer constant input operands.
gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
--- Comment #12 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #11)
> I've been working on allowing in the rs6000 patterns.
This fixes the ICE for me. I have not regtested the patch though:
Index:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
--- Comment #11 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Xiong Hu XS Luo from comment #10)
> This could fix the ICE, but I am not sure whether it is reasonable:
>
> diff --git a/gcc/lra-constraints.c b/gcc/lra-constraints.c
> index
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
--- Comment #10 from Xiong Hu XS Luo ---
(In reply to Xiong Hu XS Luo from comment #9)
> (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #7)
> > LRA creates
> >
> > ;; Insn is not within a basic block
> > (insn 7037 0 0 (set (reg:PTI 3703)
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
Xiong Hu XS Luo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
LRA creates
;; Insn is not within a basic block
(insn 7037 0 0 (set (reg:PTI 3703)
(const_wide_int 0x3ff0)) -1
(nil))
but that is not a valid insn.
This
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
It also fails on GCC 9 (which needs additional -finline-functions --param
max-inline-insns-single=20), but not on GCC 8.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
--- Comment #4 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I retested and the ICE part only occurs on a BE system.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
Xiong Hu XS Luo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
--- Comment #2 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Also
gcc.target/powerpc/vsx-builtin-7.c
FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/vsx-builtin-7.c scan-assembler-times \\mrldic\\M 64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
--- Comment #1 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
It also causes these assembler instruction count tests to fail.
> FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/pr79439-1.c scan-assembler-times \\mbl f\\M 1
> FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/pr79439-1.c
17 matches
Mail list logo
