On 8/24/19 4:55 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
On 8/23/19 4:27 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 8/15/19 10:06 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
Hey Aldy,
After enabling EVRP for the strlen pass (as part of the sprintf
integration) I get a SEGV in the return statement in the function
below. Backing out
On 8/23/19 4:27 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 8/15/19 10:06 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
Hey Aldy,
After enabling EVRP for the strlen pass (as part of the sprintf
integration) I get a SEGV in the return statement in the function
below. Backing out this change gets rid of the ICE and lets my
On 8/15/19 10:06 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
Hey Aldy,
After enabling EVRP for the strlen pass (as part of the sprintf
integration) I get a SEGV in the return statement in the function
below. Backing out this change gets rid of the ICE and lets my
tests pass, but I have no idea what the root
e for an object because the
>>>> statement is something we don't handle or just doesn't produce anythign
>>>> useful, then the right result is VR_VARYING.
>>>>
>>>> This may be worth commenting at the definition site for VR_*.
>>>>
>>>>
Here too.
Hmmm, the problem with setting VR_VARYING for unsupported types is that
we have no min/max to use. Even though min/max will not be used in any
calculation, it's nice to have it set so type() will work consistently.
May I suggest this generic approach while we disassociate the lattice
e have an unsupported type (structs, void, etc), there
+ is nothing we'll be able to do with this entry.
+ Initialize it to UNDEFINED as a sanity measure, just in
+ case. */
+ vr->set_undefined ();
Here too.
Hmmm, the problem with setting VR_VARYING for unsuppo
e have an unsupported type (structs, void, etc), there
+ is nothing we'll be able to do with this entry.
+ Initialize it to UNDEFINED as a sanity measure, just in
+ case. */
+ vr->set_undefined ();
Here too.
Hmmm, the problem with setting VR_VARYING for unsuppo
> >
> >
> >> diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-threadedge.c b/gcc/tree-ssa-threadedge.c
> >> index 39ea22f0554..663dd6e2398 100644
> >> --- a/gcc/tree-ssa-threadedge.c
> >> +++ b/gcc/tree-ssa-threadedge.c
> >> @@ -182,8 +182,10 @@ record_temporary_equivalences_from_phis (edge
with this entry.
+Initialize it to UNDEFINED as a sanity measure, just in
+case. */
+ vr->set_undefined ();
Here too.
Hmmm, the problem with setting VR_VARYING for unsupported types is that
we have no min/max to use. Even though min/max will not be used in any
c
On 8/13/19 6:39 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>
>
> On 8/12/19 7:46 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 8/12/19 12:43 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>>> This is a fresh re-post of:
>>>
>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-07/msg6.html
>>>
>>> Andrew gave me some feedback a week ago, and I obviously
On 8/14/19 8:15 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>
>
> On 8/14/19 9:50 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>> On 8/13/19 8:39 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, it was 2X.
>>>
>>> I noticed that Richi made some changes to the lattice handling for
>>> VARYING while the discussion was on-going. I missed
On 8/14/19 9:50 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 8/13/19 8:39 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
Yes, it was 2X.
I noticed that Richi made some changes to the lattice handling for
VARYING while the discussion was on-going. I missed these, and had
failed to adapt the patch for it. I would
On 8/13/19 8:39 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
Yes, it was 2X.
I noticed that Richi made some changes to the lattice handling for
VARYING while the discussion was on-going. I missed these, and had
failed to adapt the patch for it. I would appreciate a final review
of the attached patch,
On 8/12/19 7:46 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 8/12/19 12:43 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
This is a fresh re-post of:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-07/msg6.html
Andrew gave me some feedback a week ago, and I obviously don't remember
what it was because I was about to leave on PTO.
On 8/12/19 12:43 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> This is a fresh re-post of:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-07/msg6.html
>
> Andrew gave me some feedback a week ago, and I obviously don't remember
> what it was because I was about to leave on PTO. However, I do remember
> I
This is a fresh re-post of:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-07/msg6.html
Andrew gave me some feedback a week ago, and I obviously don't remember
what it was because I was about to leave on PTO. However, I do remember
I addressed his concerns before getting drunk on rum in
16 matches
Mail list logo
