||law at redhat dot com
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Tracking this via the older 59595
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 59595 ***
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42536
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #5
--- Comment #18 from law at redhat dot com 2010-02-24 21:49 ---
Fixed by:
2007-09-18 Roman Zippel
* config/m68k/m68k.md (beq, bne, bgt, blt, bge, ble, bordered,
bunordered, buneq, bunge, bungt, bunle, bunlt, bltgt, beq_rev,
bne_rev, bgt_rev, blt_rev, bge_rev
--- Comment #10 from law at redhat dot com 2006-04-18 17:24 ---
Patch installed on 4.1 branch too.
--
law at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
law at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|law at redhat dot com |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27087
--- You are
--- Comment #8 from law at redhat dot com 2006-04-13 17:05 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 regression] ICE in
merge_alias_info
On Thu, 2006-04-13 at 16:51 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> --- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-13
--- Comment #6 from law at redhat dot com 2006-04-13 16:38 ---
Fixed a couple days ago.
--
law at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #4 from law at redhat dot com 2006-04-11 05:56 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 regression] ICE in
merge_alias_info
On Sat, 2006-04-08 at 23:16 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> --- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-08
--- Comment #3 from law at redhat dot com 2006-04-11 05:41 ---
The problem is that may_propagate_copy and merge_alias_info are inconsistent.
ie, DOM properly calls may_propagate_copy to determine if a particular copy
propagation is valid. may_propagate_copy returns true indicating the
--- Comment #6 from law at redhat dot com 2005-12-21 04:44 ---
Definitely a type problem. The Obj-C front-end is playing it too lose with
types.
main (argc, argv)
{
char msg[100];
int status;
const unsigned char D.1189;
char * msg.0;
# BLOCK 0
# PRED: ENTRY (fallthru
--- Comment #5 from law at redhat dot com 2005-12-21 04:33 ---
Was able to reproduce with gcc-4.0 branch sources. Investigating, looks like
we might have a type botch somewhere...
Jeff
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25328
--- You are receiving this mail
--- Comment #4 from law at redhat dot com 2005-12-20 21:33 ---
I've been unable to reproduce this with the gcc-4.1 branch sources. IT's going
to be awful difficult to fix if I can't reproduce the problem.
At the very least I'll need the before-dom dumps and some
--
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO|1 |
nThis||
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18694
---
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn|18241 |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18694
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You a
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-13 20:36 ---
Should be fixed with today's checkin to tree-ssa-dom.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18694
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, o
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-10 21:42 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 regression] loop
miscompilation at -O1 (-ftree-ch)
On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 21:31 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote:
> Can you come up with a hypothetical scenario?
No need. I
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-10 20:52 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 regression] loop
miscompilation at -O1 (-ftree-ch)
On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 19:08 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-10 20:12 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 regression] loop
miscompilation at -O1 (-ftree-ch)
On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 19:57 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-10 20:00 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 regression] loop
miscompilation at -O1 (-ftree-ch)
On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 19:08 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-10 19:44 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 regression] loop
miscompilation at -O1 (-ftree-ch)
On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 19:08 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote:
> By the way, I am now wondering how many times we succeed
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-10 19:18 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 regression] loop
miscompilation at -O1 (-ftree-ch)
On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 19:08 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote:
> I think so. :-)
I don't. :( I think it'll
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-10 18:24 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 regression] loop
miscompilation at -O1 (-ftree-ch)
On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 00:28 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-10 18:11 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 regression] loop
miscompilation at -O1 (-ftree-ch)
On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 05:24 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-10 18:10 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 regression] loop
miscompilation at -O1 (-ftree-ch)
On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 20:02 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-09 23:23 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 regression] loop
miscompilation at -O1 (-ftree-ch)
On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 20:02 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-09 19:52 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 regression] loop
miscompilation at -O1 (-ftree-ch)
On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 19:22 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-09 18:12 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 regression] loop
miscompilation at -O1 (-ftree-ch)
On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 16:57 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-09 17:38 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 regression] loop
miscompilation at -O1 (-ftree-ch)
On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 16:58 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-09 16:47 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 regression] loop
miscompilation at -O1 (-ftree-ch)
On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 14:19 +, schwab at suse dot de wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From schwab at suse dot de 2004-12-09
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-09 16:20 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 regression] loop
miscompilation at -O1 (-ftree-ch)
On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 02:51 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-02 04:53 ---
I haven't done a ton of analysis on this PR, but from the looks of it,
I would hazard a guess the problem is in the reload inheritance code
inside choose_reload_regs. Which happens to be code I'm no
31 matches
Mail list logo
