http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54455
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-09-06
07:29:24 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Sep 6 07:29:12 2012
New Revision: 191013
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191013
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/54455
* sel-sched-ir.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54455
--- Comment #13 from Zdenek Sojka 2012-09-03 17:44:57
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> If I remember correctly, the original testcase ICEs the same way with -O.
> eg.
> $ gcc -fschedule-insns -fselective-scheduling --param
> max-sched-extend-r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54455
--- Comment #12 from Zdenek Sojka 2012-09-03 10:17:15
UTC ---
If I remember correctly, the original testcase ICEs the same way with -O.
eg.
$ gcc -fschedule-insns -fselective-scheduling --param
max-sched-extend-regions-iters=8 gcc.c-torture/compi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54455
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54455
--- Comment #10 from Andrey Belevantsev 2012-09-03
08:21:20 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Created attachment 28121 [details]
> gcc48-pr54455.patch
>
> Patch for 2). asm goto with fallthru labels is pretty hard case, handled in
> cfgrtl.c h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54455
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-09-03
08:03:45 UTC ---
Created attachment 28121
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28121
gcc48-pr54455.patch
Patch for 2). asm goto with fallthru labels is pretty hard case, handled in
cfg
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54455
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|steven at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54455
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steven at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54455
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
URL|http://gcc.gnu.org/m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54455
--- Comment #5 from Steven Bosscher 2012-09-02
12:27:27 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (jump_insn 30 29 31 3 (simple_return) pr54455.c:16 -1
> (nil)
> -> simple_return)
>
This should be BB_END(BASIC_BLOCK(3)). If it's not then someone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54455
--- Comment #4 from Uros Bizjak 2012-09-02 12:10:45
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> What does the insns list look like around the BARRIER? (From GDB do:
> "p debug_rtx_list(barrier_insn, -7)" and show the result here.)
(gdb) p debug_rtx_list
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54455
--- Comment #3 from Steven Bosscher 2012-09-02
11:47:18 UTC ---
The patch is incorrect. There can't be a BARRIER in the middle of a basic
block. This problem typically indicates that either a BARRIER was emitted in
the wrong place, or BB_END wasn
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54455
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54455
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
14 matches
Mail list logo