On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 11:47:35AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 03/24/2017 07:35 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 02:04:42PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 06:37:10AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> > > > > 2017-03-21 Jakub Jelinek <[email protected]>
> > > > >
> > > > > PR target/80102
> > > > > * cfgcleanup.c (old_insns_match_p): Don't cross-jump in between
> > > > > /f
> > > > > and non-/f instructions. If both i1 and i2 are frame related,
> > > > > verify all CFA notes, their order and content.
> > > > >
> > > > > * g++.dg/opt/pr80102.C: New test.
> > > > Presumably this didn't ICE at some point in the past, so it's a
> > > > regression?
> > > > (it's not marked as such in the BZ).
> > >
> > > It doesn't ICE for me with r238210 and ICEs with current trunk, I don't
> > > have
> > > too many ppc64le compilers around though.
> >
> > GCC 4.8 doesn't ICE either.
> ISTM this isn't a regression (without doing deeper analysis). As a release
> manager, ISTM you can grant an exception if you want to push this forward
> for gcc-7.
It is a [7 Regression], started with r239866, so it is a P1.
Jakub
