On 28 August 2015 at 09:48, Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> wrote: > On Fri, 28 Aug 2015, Christophe Lyon wrote: > >> On 27 August 2015 at 17:43, Alan Lawrence <alan.lawre...@arm.com> wrote: >> > Martin Jambor wrote: >> >> >> >> First, I would be much >> >> happier if you added a proper comment to scalarize_elem function which >> >> you forgot completely. The name is not very descriptive and it has >> >> quite few parameters too. >> >> >> >> Second, this patch should also fix PR 67283. It would be great if you >> >> could verify that and add it to the changelog when committing if that >> >> is indeed the case. >> > >> > Thanks for pointing both of those out. I've added a comment to >> > scalarize_elem, >> > deleted the bogus comment in the new test, and yes I can confirm that the >> > patch >> > fixes PR 67283 on x86_64, and also AArch64 if >> > --param sra-max-scalarization-size-Ospeed is passed. (I've not added any >> > testcase specifically taken from that PR, however.) >> > >> > Pushed as r277265. >> >> Actually, is r227265. >> >> Since since commit I've noticed that >> g++.dg/torture/pr64312.C >> fails at -O1 in my config, saying "virtual memory exhaustion" (arm* targets) >> I run my validations under ulimit -v 10GB, which seems already large enough. >> >> Do we consider this a bug? > > Sure we do. You have to investigate this (I guess we run into some > endless looping/recursing that eats memory somewhere). >
I asked because I assumed that Alan saw it pass in his configuration. > Richard.
