>From: Christophe Lyon [christophe.l...@linaro.org]
>Sent: Monday, October 03, 2016 11:23 AM
>To: Doug Gilmore
>Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
>Subject: Re: Fix PR tree-optimization/77808, ICE in
>duplicate_ssa_name_ptr_info, at tree-ssanames.c:630 starting with r240439
>
>On 3 October 2016 at 18:07, Doug Gilmore <doug.gilm...@imgtec.com> wrote:
>>>From: Christophe Lyon [christophe.l...@linaro.org]
>>>Sent: Monday, October 03, 2016 12:05 AM
>>>To: Doug Gilmore
>>>Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
>>>Subject: Re: Fix PR tree-optimization/77808, ICE in
>>>duplicate_ssa_name_ptr_info, at tree-ssanames.c:630 starting with r240439
>>>
>>>On 2 October 2016 at 23:05, Doug Gilmore <doug.gilm...@imgtec.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi Christophe,
>>>>
>>>>> From: Christophe Lyon [christophe.l...@linaro.org]
>>>>> Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2016 7:57 AM
>>>>> To: Doug Gilmore
>>>>> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: Fix PR tree-optimization/77808, ICE in
>>>>> duplicate_ssa_name_ptr_info, at tree-ssanames.c:630 starting with r240439
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Doug,
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>> I can confirm that your patch fixes the ICE I was seeing.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, the new testcase does not pass on low end
>>>>> architectures:
>>>>> cc1: warning: -fprefetch-loop-arrays not supported for this target
>>>>> (try -march switches)
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you add a guard?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Christophe
>>>> I updated the test to only run on X86, MIPS and AARCH64. Is that OK?
>>>>
>>>
>>>I'm afraid not.
>>>
>>>The ICE occurred on some arm targets. By "low end" I meant armv5t for
>>>example, as opposed to armv7t.
>>>Is there a suitable effective target?
>> I'll need to investigate that. BTW, gcc.dg/pr53550.c contains:
>> /* PR tree-optimization/53550 */
>> /* { dg-do compile } */
>> /* { dg-options "-O2 -fprefetch-loop-arrays -w" } */
>>
>> int *
>> foo (int *x)
>> {
>> int *a = x + 10, *b = x, *c = a;
>> while (b != c)
>> *--c = *b++;
>> return x;
>> }
>>
>> Is it also failing on armv5t? I suppose it would.
>>
>It doesn't, but that's probably thanks to -w
Sounds like we don't need add guards then, it is just a matter
of adding -w to the command line.
Does that work for you?
Thanks,
Doug
>
>Christophe
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Doug
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>
>>>Christophe
>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Doug
