http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55158
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55158
--- Comment #23 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-08
12:12:59 UTC ---
Author: steven
Date: Sat Dec 8 12:12:50 2012
New Revision: 194322
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=194322
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55158
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55158
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55158
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55158
--- Comment #16 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-04
09:27:54 UTC ---
So it's up to the only one in this discussion who does *not* have a paid
GCC hacking position to fix this? Has Itanium really sunk so deep?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55158
--- Comment #17 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-04
09:29:50 UTC ---
Created attachment 28871
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28871
Testsuite results with tentative fix
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55158
--- Comment #18 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-04
09:56:53 UTC ---
Created attachment 28872
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28872
Updated tentative fix
(In reply to comment #16)
I can provide
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55158
--- Comment #19 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-04
10:02:58 UTC ---
This line is of course supposed to compare bb_state_array and
old_bb_state_array:
for (int i = (bb_state != old_bb_state) ? 0 :
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55158
--- Comment #20 from Bernd Schmidt bernds at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-04
11:06:07 UTC ---
Created attachment 28873
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28873
Another patch
Here's another attempt, given that it seems to be
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55158
--- Comment #21 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-04
11:36:23 UTC ---
Sometimes you have to fix things you haven't broken. Especially trivial
bugs like this one. Look at all the REG_EQUAL stuff I've been trying
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55158
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55158
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-03
21:06:23 UTC ---
Someone needs to do something here because the C/C++/Fortran testsuite results
are abysmal at -O3.
And the tentative fix doesn't really help,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55158
--- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2012-12-03 23:24:13
UTC ---
Someone needs to do something here because the C/C++/Fortran testsuite
results
are abysmal at -O3.
And the tentative fix doesn't really help, it
14 matches
Mail list logo
