[Bug tree-optimization/36881] [4.4 Regression] Creating runtime relocations for code which does not need it

2008-10-15 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-15 06:48 --- Fixed. -- jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/36881] [4.4 Regression] Creating runtime relocations for code which does not need it

2008-10-15 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-15 06:44 --- Subject: Bug 36881 Author: jakub Date: Wed Oct 15 06:43:19 2008 New Revision: 141129 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141129 Log: PR tree-optimization/36881 *

[Bug tree-optimization/36881] [4.4 Regression] Creating runtime relocations for code which does not need it

2008-09-15 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-15 09:21 --- I'd prefer it just to call initializer_constant_valid_p (val, TREE_TYPE (val)) == null_pointer_node for flag_pic (and != NULL_TREE for !flag_pic). What is in #c4 would need at least some write after write barriers,

[Bug tree-optimization/36881] [4.4 Regression] Creating runtime relocations for code which does not need it

2008-09-11 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-11 11:42 --- I guess this is mine. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/36881] [4.4 Regression] Creating runtime relocations for code which does not need it

2008-09-04 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-04 10:52 --- Ugly -fPIC friendly workaround would be to add runtime initialization. I.E. if (!initialized) {populate my array; initialized = true;} that would still allow conversion to happen and generate better code than

[Bug tree-optimization/36881] [4.4 Regression] Creating runtime relocations for code which does not need it

2008-08-09 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-09 18:06 --- Well, the switch conversion pass should create a locally binding (and hidden) object to store the values. If it does not then this certainly is a bug. Though in this case it looks like it needs to build a table of

[Bug tree-optimization/36881] [4.4 Regression] Creating runtime relocations for code which does not need it

2008-08-08 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36881

[Bug tree-optimization/36881] [4.4 Regression] Creating runtime relocations for code which does not need it

2008-08-08 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-08 22:52 --- This effects more than SPU, for shared libaries, the more runtime relocations that happen, the slower the load time (usually). Just for SPU, runtime relocations are not supported which is why there is error here.

[Bug tree-optimization/36881] [4.4 Regression] Creating runtime relocations for code which does not need it

2008-08-08 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-08 23:44 --- Andrew -- If indeed this is an optimization regression on other platforms, then I agree that this should be a P2 defect. Is the optimization problem present on all platforms with -fPIC? If not, what's a

[Bug tree-optimization/36881] [4.4 Regression] Creating runtime relocations for code which does not need it

2008-07-20 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mjambor at suse dot cz Target Milestone|---