http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
--- Comment #29 from Andrey Belevantsev 2011-04-07
07:04:09 UTC ---
Author: abel
Date: Thu Apr 7 07:04:02 2011
New Revision: 172088
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172088
Log:
Backport from mainline
2011-01
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
--- Comment #27 from Andrey Belevantsev 2011-01-13
09:29:13 UTC ---
Author: abel
Date: Thu Jan 13 09:29:09 2011
New Revision: 168742
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168742
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/45352
* se
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
--- Comment #26 from Zdenek Sojka 2011-01-10 16:39:43
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #25)
> Sigh, in this case I forgot that we now also stall when we have issued exactly
> issue_rate instructions, so in this case we also need to recheck the DFA, n
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
--- Comment #25 from Andrey Belevantsev 2010-12-24
08:23:07 UTC ---
Zdenek, please don't worry about the set of flags, it does not make fixing the
problem any harder, and your work on finding these is invaluable for us.
Sigh, in this case I forg
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
--- Comment #24 from Zdenek Sojka 2010-12-23 20:56:46
UTC ---
Created attachment 22848
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22848
testcase failing in r168214
Thank you for fixing all the problem so far, but there seems to be furth
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
--- Comment #23 from Andrey Belevantsev 2010-12-22
07:46:57 UTC ---
Author: abel
Date: Wed Dec 22 07:46:53 2010
New Revision: 168164
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168164
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/45352
PR rtl-optim
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
--- Comment #22 from Andrey Belevantsev 2010-12-21
12:10:32 UTC ---
Created attachment 22834
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22834
Another patch
This patch should fix the last attachment from this bug and also the tests from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
--- Comment #21 from Andrey Belevantsev 2010-11-17
16:47:00 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> Comment on attachment 22334 [details]
> testcase failing in r166433
>
> Opened PR46521 and PR46522 for the new two testcases. This one wasn't really
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
Zdenek Sojka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #22334|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
--- Comment #19 from Zdenek Sojka 2010-11-08 17:58:36
UTC ---
Created attachment 22334
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22334
testcase failing in r166433
Thanks for fixing this! It seems there is one further failing testcase:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
--- Comment #18 from Andrey Belevantsev 2010-11-08
08:11:43 UTC ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Nov 8 08:11:38 2010
New Revision: 166429
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166429
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/45352
* se
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #22050|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
--- Comment #16 from Zdenek Sojka 2010-10-22 11:17:55
UTC ---
I gave this patch a lot of testing (compiled ~800 packages) and it seems to
solve all crashes in reset_sched_cycles_in_current_ebb, without introducing any
new problems.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #21921|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
--- Comment #13 from Andrey Belevantsev 2010-10-05
12:45:21 UTC ---
Any updates on this? The last test still does not fail with the patch from
comment #11. I am about to submit the patch, so are there any new failing
tests or flag combinations?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
--- Comment #12 from Zdenek Sojka 2010-09-30 11:03:51
UTC ---
Yes, sorry, I applied correct patch, but pasted assert from unpatched r164716:
The correct assert is:
$ FLAGS="-O1 -freorder-blocks -fschedule-insns2 -funswitch-loops
-fselective-sch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
--- Comment #10 from Andrey Belevantsev 2010-09-30
08:50:14 UTC ---
Are you sure you have applied the right patch? With the patch from comment #7,
the test doesn't fail for me, and moreover there is no assert on line 7077.
I'm attaching the pat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
--- Comment #9 from Zdenek Sojka 2010-09-29 19:02:45
UTC ---
Sorry, forgot to mention command line:
$ gcc -O1 -freorder-blocks -fschedule-insns2 -funswitch-loops
-fselective-scheduling2 -fsel-sched-pipelining -funroll-all-loops pr45352-8.c
pr45
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
--- Comment #7 from Andrey Belevantsev 2010-09-28
11:47:33 UTC ---
Thanks for the test, it shows one more case of using issue_rate that I have
missed. We need to distinguish between the stalls caused by data dependencies
and by lack of functiona
--- Comment #6 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-09-22 21:54 ---
Created an attachment (id=21867)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21867&action=view)
another testcase
Thank you for having a look!
I tried your patch, it bootstrapped fine. It fixed uploaded testcases,
--- Comment #5 from abel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-22 15:34 ---
The remaining problem is another case where we don't try to issue more insns
because we believe from issue_rate that this is impossible. Full patch that
fixes all the tests with all the flags for me is below. What it
--- Comment #4 from abel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-22 14:29 ---
Confirmed.
All testcases except the first with the -O3 flags are fixed by the below patch.
The bug that the patch "fixes" is actually PR37360 all over again but in
sel-sched instead of haifa. We have the process of r
--- Comment #3 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-09-20 18:00 ---
Created an attachment (id=21849)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21849&action=view)
another testcase that doesn't need many flags to reproduce
$ gcc -fselective-scheduling2 -fsel-sched-pipelining -funro
--- Comment #2 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-08-22 17:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=21544)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21544&action=view)
different testcase
This one crashes with:
$ gcc -Os -fselective-scheduling2 -fsel-sched-pipelining -fprofile-generate
--- Comment #1 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-08-20 11:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=21528)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21528&action=view)
reduced testcase (from gcc.dg/vect/no-vfa-vect-43.c)
The first loop is not needed to reproduce the problem, it just ma
26 matches
Mail list logo
