On 04.05.20 09:27, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 8:14 AM Andreas Krebbel wrote:
>>
>> On 30.04.20 18:33, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 5:14 PM Andreas Krebbel
>>> wrote:
On 30.04.20 08:25, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29,
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 8:14 AM Andreas Krebbel wrote:
>
> On 30.04.20 18:33, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 5:14 PM Andreas Krebbel
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 30.04.20 08:25, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 5:56 PM Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
On 30.04.20 18:33, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 5:14 PM Andreas Krebbel wrote:
>>
>> On 30.04.20 08:25, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 5:56 PM Jeff Law wrote:
On Tue, 2020-04-28 at 11:44 +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 5:14 PM Andreas Krebbel wrote:
>
> On 30.04.20 08:25, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 5:56 PM Jeff Law wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, 2020-04-28 at 11:44 +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Btw, does s390 have different
On 30.04.20 08:25, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 5:56 PM Jeff Law wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 2020-04-28 at 11:44 +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
>>>
>>> Btw, does s390 have different inlining parameters somehow?
>> I think so. We saw a ton of backend
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 5:56 PM Jeff Law wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2020-04-28 at 11:44 +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
> >
> > Btw, does s390 have different inlining parameters somehow?
> I think so. We saw a ton of backend warnings that were specific to the s390
> builds in Fedora that
On Tue, 2020-04-28 at 11:44 +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> Btw, does s390 have different inlining parameters somehow?
I think so. We saw a ton of backend warnings that were specific to the s390
builds in Fedora that appeared to be triggered by different inlining decisions.
It
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 11:44:58AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 11:28 AM Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus via
> Gcc-patches wrote:
> >
> > While bootstrapping GCC on S/390 the following warning/error is raised:
> >
> > gcc/var-tracking.c:10239:34: error: 'pre' may be used
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 11:28 AM Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus via
Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> While bootstrapping GCC on S/390 the following warning/error is raised:
>
> gcc/var-tracking.c:10239:34: error: 'pre' may be used uninitialized in this
> function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
> 10239 |
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus via Gcc-patches writes:
> While bootstrapping GCC on S/390 the following warning/error is raised:
>
> gcc/var-tracking.c:10239:34: error: 'pre' may be used uninitialized in this
> function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
> 10239 | VTI (bb)->out.stack_adjust +=
While bootstrapping GCC on S/390 the following warning/error is raised:
gcc/var-tracking.c:10239:34: error: 'pre' may be used uninitialized in this
function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
10239 | VTI (bb)->out.stack_adjust += pre;
| ^
The lines of
11 matches
Mail list logo
