https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394
--- Comment #22 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Martin Jambor
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a9e64bb6d0801f29d65f357f90e6d7a2daeb6ca9
commit r10-8897-ga9e64bb6d0801f29d65f357f90e6d7a2daeb6ca9
Author: Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394
--- Comment #21 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Jambor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e089e43365f7f2a90979e2316aea25d44823f5a3
commit r11-3698-ge089e43365f7f2a90979e2316aea25d44823f5a3
Author: Martin Jambor
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394
--- Comment #20 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #18)
> I proposed the patch on the mailing list (I guess I should put Martin's name
> at least to the testsuite ChangeLog and probably to both):
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394
--- Comment #19 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #18)
> I proposed the patch on the mailing list (I guess I should put Martin's name
> at least to the testsuite ChangeLog and probably to both):
>
Don't worry about
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394
--- Comment #18 from Martin Jambor ---
I proposed the patch on the mailing list (I guess I should put Martin's name at
least to the testsuite ChangeLog and probably to both):
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/555284.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394
--- Comment #17 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 49283
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49283=edit
Single file test-case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394
--- Comment #15 from Martin Jambor ---
so after Martin asked some good questions, it turns out this should probably be
avoided in ipa-prop, after all, as with, for example (untested):
diff --git a/gcc/ipa-prop.c b/gcc/ipa-prop.c
index
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394
--- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor ---
I can confirm the analysis, except that I see the edge we're trying to
add to the heap as already inlined (as a speculative edge it got
inlined even its caller was). Also just not adding an edge with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.3
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394
Sergei Trofimovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #49263|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394
--- Comment #11 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Created attachment 49263
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49263=edit
b.tar.gz
Also attaching tiny example as b.tar.gz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394
--- Comment #10 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Finally managed to shrink it down to self-contained example. It has to be split
into two .c files (and one header) to prevent analyzer from inferring too much:
// node.h:
void bug(void);
void *
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394
--- Comment #9 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
(In reply to Sergei Trofimovich from comment #8)
> Might end up being caused by the same bug in PR96913: TOPN streaming
> from/for shared libraries is incorrect.
>
> Proposed patch:
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96394
--- Comment #8 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Might end up being caused by the same bug in PR96913: TOPN streaming from/for
shared libraries is incorrect.
Proposed patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-September/553320.html
16 matches
Mail list logo
