On 30 September 2016 at 20:10, Doug Gilmore <doug.gilm...@imgtec.com> wrote: >> From: Christophe Lyon [christophe.l...@linaro.org] >> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 12:17 PM >> To: Matthew Fortune >> Cc: Doug Gilmore; Richard Biener; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; >> rgue...@gcc.gnu.org >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix PR tree-optimization/77654 >> >> On 23 September 2016 at 17:55, Matthew Fortune >> <matthew.fort...@imgtec.com> wrote: >> > Doug Gilmore <doug.gilm...@imgtec.com> writes: >> >> > From: Richard Biener [rguent...@suse.de] >> >> > Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 12:43 AM >> >> > To: Doug Gilmore >> >> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; rgue...@gcc.gnu.org >> >> > Subject: RE: [PATCH] Fix PR tree-optimization/77654 >> >> > >> >> > On Wed, 21 Sep 2016, Doug Gilmore wrote: >> >> > >> >> > ... >> >> > > Sorry I that missed point. I glossed your comment "addr_base should >> >> > > always be a pointer", causing me to go off into the weeds. >> >> > > >> >> > > New patch attached. >> >> > >> >> > Ok if successfully bootstrapped / tested. >> >> > >> >> > Thanks, >> >> > Richard. >> >> The change bootstrapped on X86_64 and the several "make check" errors >> >> also appeared in latest archived mail message to gcc-testresults. >> > >> > Committed as r240439. >> > >> >> Since this commit, I've noticed ICE on arm target: >> FAIL: gcc.dg/params/blocksort-part.c -O3 --param prefetch-latency=0 >> (internal compiler error) >> FAIL: gcc.dg/params/blocksort-part.c -O3 --param prefetch-latency=0 >> (test for excess errors) >> Excess errors: >> /aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dREMOTE_SNAPSHOTS=g/params/blocksort-part.c:116:6: >> internal compiler error: in duplicate >> _ssa_name_ptr_info, at tree-ssanames.c:630 >> ... > Hi Christophe, > > I filed PR77808, will send out a fix shortly. > Thanks
> BTW, I missed this in regression testing since -fprefetch-loop-arrays > is needed to expose the problem. Are you setting this as the default > in your compiler build? > No, I did not do anything special. I'm not sure to understand: this option is not in the command line of the offending test. Christophe > Thanks, > > Doug
