https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #28 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sun Feb 1 21:56:03 2015
New Revision: 220336
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220336&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2015-01-27 Jakub Jelinek
PR rtl-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||shenhan at google dot com
--- Comment #27
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #26 from tejohnson at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: tejohnson
Date: Thu Feb 13 21:15:06 2014
New Revision: 207766
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207766&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-02-13 Teresa Johnson
For Google b/129715
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #28673|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #23 from Steven Bosscher 2013-04-03
20:29:58 UTC ---
Time for another attempt please? Now that stage1 is open?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||piotr5 at netscape dot net
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-12
09:56:28 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 12 09:56:22 2012
New Revision: 194442
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194442
Log:
PR target/55659
Revert
20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-11
10:41:55 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Dec 11 10:41:44 2012
New Revision: 194392
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194392
Log:
PR middle-end/43631
PR bootstr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #17 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-12-10
08:02:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> But, double checking dwarf2out.c reveals that we could indeed emit the notes
> after BARRIER instead if there is any. So I'm leaning towards this p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #14 from Steven Bosscher 2012-12-07
11:59:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> Please hold on with that, seems BB_END is BARRIER, which is wrong.
> Starting with distilling a testcase...
Perhaps Alex' is right that the rea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #12 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-12-07
10:24:04 UTC ---
Oh, right, in this case just more checks are needed for
distance_non_agu_define_in_bb in i386.c. I'll add them. Thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-07
10:22:05 UTC ---
Yeah, BLOCK_FOR_INSN is invalid on BARRIER, reproduced with a RTL checking
build now, where RTL checking fails. Looking into it.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #10 from stevenb.gcc at gmail dot com 2012-12-07 10:16:49 UTC ---
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 11:11 AM, izamyatin at gmail dot com wrote:
> Looks like there is some garbage in BLOCK_FOR_INSN field for barrier
> instruction...
A BA
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
Igor Zamyatin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-06
14:38:10 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 6 14:37:59 2012
New Revision: 194252
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194252
Log:
PR middle-end/43631
* var-track
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #6 from Steven Bosscher 2012-11-13
23:38:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Created attachment 28673 [details]
> gcc48-pr43631.patch
>
> Is this what you meant?
Yes, that's exactly what I meant, thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-11-13
10:50:17 UTC ---
Created attachment 28673
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28673
gcc48-pr43631.patch
Is this what you meant? make check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS=guality.exp doesn'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #4 from Steven Bosscher 2012-03-17
00:05:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Jakub, please do not forget about this one for stage1 GCC 4.7.
Jakub, please do not forget about this one for stage1 GCC 4.8.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #3 from Steven Bosscher 2011-03-28
17:18:25 UTC ---
Jakub, please do not forget about this one for stage1 GCC 4.7.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #2 from Steven Bosscher 2010-12-17
21:43:13 UTC ---
Jakub, ping?
--- Comment #1 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-17 22:56 ---
Jakub, please do not forget about this one for stage1 GCC 4.6.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
28 matches
Mail list logo
