http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25130
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25130
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
CC|
--- Comment #22 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-29 22:41 ---
Closing this again. The partial revert was approved and committed as r161534.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #21 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-28 17:50 ---
The patch that was committed (especially the cse.c exp_equiv_p part) seems like
a big hammer, and it does cause missed optimization opportunities.
Reverting it on gcc-4.1-branch, and instead applying the patch for P
--- Comment #20 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-03 22:39 ---
One part of the problem is fixed, and the test cases now pass.
There is still the RTL alias analysis bug mentioned in the thread on gcc@
starting here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-01/msg8.html. But that is a
--- Comment #19 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-03 22:37 ---
Subject: Bug 25130
Author: steven
Date: Tue Jan 3 22:37:46 2006
New Revision: 109292
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=109292
Log:
2006-01-03 Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* fo
--- Comment #18 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-03 06:20 ---
Subject: Bug 25130
Author: steven
Date: Tue Jan 3 06:20:21 2006
New Revision: 109264
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=109264
Log:
* fold-const.c (operand_equal_p): Accept a NULL operan
--- Comment #17 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-01 17:37 ---
I posted a patch that addresses the gcse.c part of the problem.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #16 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-27 00:58 ---
Created an attachment (id=10557)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10557&action=view)
Make hash_rtx and exp_equiv_p take MEM_ATTRS into accoutn
The test cases don't fail with GCC 4.2 anymore, but w
--- Comment #15 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-21 15:45 ---
That's what you get for working on different GCSEs at the same time.
Those commits were for Bug 25196 :-(
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25130
--- Comment #14 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-21 15:32 ---
Subject: Bug 25130
Author: steven
Date: Wed Dec 21 15:32:09 2005
New Revision: 108907
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=108907
Log:
patch for PR rtl-optimization/25130, gcc 4.1 edition.
gcc/
--- Comment #13 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-21 15:28 ---
Subject: Bug 25130
Author: steven
Date: Wed Dec 21 15:28:16 2005
New Revision: 108906
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=108906
Log:
patch for PR rtl-optimization/25130
gcc/
* postreload
--- Comment #12 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-19 18:32
---
Serious wrong code problem: P1.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-18 01:38 ---
Punt for now.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-12/msg00504.html
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-18 00:49 ---
At -O1 (i.e. for my test case) CSE1 turns this...
(insn 24 22 25 0 (parallel [
(set (reg/f:SI 67)
(plus:SI (reg/f:SI 20 frame)
(const_int -16 [0xfff0])))
--- Comment #9 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-17 18:23 ---
Breakpoint 7, compute_transp (x=0x4021557c, indx=0, bmap=0x894e1b8, set_p=0) at
gcse.c:2500
2500rtx list_entry = canon_modify_mem_list[bb_index];
(gdb) p debug_rtx(x)
(mem/s/j:SI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI
--- Comment #8 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-17 15:14 ---
It looks like we're missing a memory modification. Yes, making this a load PRE
problem after all, despite it failing for me even with -fno-gcse-lm, but oh
well.
I have these expressions in the table:
Expression hash
--- Comment #7 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-17 15:09 ---
Created an attachment (id=10519)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10519&action=view)
Smaller test case
Fails for me when compiled with:
"g++ -O -fgcse t.C -fno-exceptions -fno-tree-dominator-opts"
--- Comment #6 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-17 11:31 ---
Also seen on powerpc
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
GCC host tripl
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-17 11:27 ---
Looking into this.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo
--- Comment #4 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-16 23:58 ---
Re. comment #3, I can reproduce the bug with -fno-gcse-lm too, so this may be
unrelated to load motion. I also tried with -O -fgcse and I'm seeing the bug
then, too. Finally, I tried with CPROP1, CPROP2 and load pre
--- Comment #3 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-29 06:10 ---
This is indeed a gcse problem. It is a problem with the load motion support.
There are some similarities to PR 24804 here. We have multiple overlapping
objects on the stack, that have mems with different MEM_EXPR f
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-28 02:00 ---
Loop optimizers don't do anything to this testcase as there are no loops.
-fno-gcse fixes it so I am going to assume it is GCSE bug. Anyways confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
Wha
23 matches
Mail list logo
