https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Oct 17 10:50:16 2014
New Revision: 216391
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216391root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/63302
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #24 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Oct 17 10:53:36 2014
New Revision: 216392
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216392root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/63302
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #26 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 17-Oct-14, at 7:10 AM, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Should be fixed now.
Thanks, Jakub.
Dave
--
John David Anglindave.ang...@bell.net
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #21 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com ---
John, I know those PA boxes are slow, but if you could try Jakub's patch, it'd
be appreciated.
BTW, are you using strictly PA 2.0 (PA8000+) hardware? I was pondering doing a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #22 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 10/15/2014 12:19 PM, law at redhat dot com wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #21 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com ---
John, I know those PA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #19 from Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.chen at arm dot com ---
(In reply to John David Anglin from comment #18)
Hi Zhenqiang,
Do you plan to submit patch to gcc-patches soon?
Yes. It is in internal review process. I hope to send out
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #18 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi Zhenqiang,
Do you plan to submit patch to gcc-patches soon?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
Mikael Pettersson mikpelinux at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #16 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 9/29/2014 9:02 AM, dave.anglin at bell dot net wrote:
I've started a full build and
check
with 4.9 branch. I'll also test it on hpux starting this evening.
I see no regressions with the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #14 from Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.chen at arm dot com ---
Created attachment 33608
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33608action=edit
patch
After investigation, I found I mis-use tree_log2.
Please try the attached
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #15 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 29-Sep-14, at 2:43 AM, zhenqiang.chen at arm dot com wrote:
Please try the attached patch. If it works, I will run all tests and
send it
for community review.
The patch appears to fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #7 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 28-Sep-14, at 1:30 AM, zhenqiang.chen at arm dot com wrote:
I double checked the function optimize_range_tests_diff. Overall, I
think it
does the right thing. X86 and ARM work
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #8 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 28-Sep-14, at 10:34 AM, dave.anglin at bell dot net wrote:
This is what I see on the trunk, but 4.9 is wrong. Possibly, there is
a transformation
after optimize_range_tests_diff where
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #9 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 28-Sep-14, at 1:30 AM, zhenqiang.chen at arm dot com wrote:
X86 and ARM work correctly.
I suspect this is because both have need_64bit_hwint=yes in
config.gcc.
--
John David Anglin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #10 from Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.chen at arm dot com ---
(In reply to dave.anglin from comment #8)
On 28-Sep-14, at 10:34 AM, dave.anglin at bell dot net wrote:
This is what I see on the trunk, but 4.9 is wrong. Possibly, there
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #11 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 28-Sep-14, at 9:17 PM, zhenqiang.chen at arm dot com wrote:
Can you show more detail dumps with -fdump-tree-reassoc1-details?
Attached is 4.9 dump with more details.
Dave
--
John David
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #12 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 28-Sep-14, at 9:17 PM, zhenqiang.chen at arm dot com wrote:
Can you show more detail dumps with -fdump-tree-reassoc1-details?
Same for trunk.
Dave
--
John David Anglin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #13 from Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.chen at arm dot com ---
For 4.9, some function optimizes the code as:
Optimizing range tests x_2 -[-2147483648, -2147483648] and -[0, 0]
into (x_2 2147483647) != 0
For trunk,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #6 from Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.chen at arm dot com ---
I double checked the function optimize_range_tests_diff. Overall, I think it
does the right thing. X86 and ARM work correctly. The ldil.c.169t.optimized is
bb 2:
x_2 =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com ---
Have you tried with the current 4.9.2 bits? I get the following with a 32bit
host cross to hppa64-unknown-linux-gnu:
depdi 0,52,20,%r26
depdi,z 1,32,4,%r28
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #5 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 26-Sep-14, at 3:46 PM, law at redhat dot com wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com ---
Have you tried with
26 matches
Mail list logo
