https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88652
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> (In reply to Andrey Belevantsev from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> > > Any progress on this please?
> >
> > Maybe a stupid q
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88652
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85528
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85412
--- Comment #10 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #9)
> (In reply to Andrey Belevantsev from comment #8)
> > trunk doesn't
> > ICE for me.
>
> I don't have a good testcase at hand (it's just a matter of time, t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85876
--- Comment #1 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
This is caused by the overeager fix of PR 48235. We're unwinding the
first_insn variable (the border to which we step backwards in code motion) too
far so it gets beyond the original fence, which happen
||2019-03-21
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org,
||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85412
--- Comment #8 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Sigh. We set reset_sched_cycles_p to pipelining_p after the conditional, but
we have missed that in sel_sched_region_1 pipelining_p will be set to false.
So that initial patch should have the following
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86928
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Andrey Belevantsev from comment #2)
> We're not somehow updating liveness information at all times when we change
> control flow. E.g. we do update liveness in sel_split_edge, but not in
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86928
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #17 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Created attachment 45991
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45991&action=edit
tentative patch
This is a rather complex situation. The assert checks that we have co
||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
The code that fails here tries to skip the inner loop's body to get to the next
blocks in the outer loop. The failing asse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87273
--- Comment #5 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
In this PR we're pipelining a loop with a conditional that has lots of code on
the left arm and just a few blocks on the right arm. In this situation it is
natural for the right scheduling fence to end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89676
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Mar 18 07:51:06 2019
New Revision: 269751
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269751&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/89676
* sel-sched.c (compute_av_set_at_b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86979
--- Comment #17 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #16)
> Andrey: Can you please send a patch for it into gcc-patches mailing list?
Sure, I've sent the patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86979
--- Comment #13 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
So now I understand, finally. We move up an sp decrement and are supposed to
check that sp is available on the paths that are not touched by the move. There
are several successors of the move target blo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86979
--- Comment #12 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
> Any progress on this?
I know what happens but am not fully sure as of why. The sp register should not
be available for the problematic move, so I'm figuri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88879
--- Comment #6 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #4)
> Thanks. This broke when the patch for PR 85458 was applied, and Andreas
> raised it on the gcc-patches thread:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86979
--- Comment #9 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Eric, thanks for pointing me out to the old PR. From that and what I could
understand here from the sched logs, it's not clear to me how to correctly
clone REG_ARGS_SIZE insns, so the safest patch of fo
|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Sure. I have somewhat free month now so I'm going over sel-sched bugs.
|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Looks like mine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84842
--- Comment #12 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #11)
> Thanks, I managed to reproduce it. The unusual thing here is hardreg 63
> being considered call-clobbered in its reg_raw_mode=TImode but not narrower
>
||2018-04-24
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org,
||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org,
||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85423
--- Comment #5 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Apr 23 15:19:06 2018
New Revision: 259563
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259563&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/85423
* sel-sched-ir.c (has_depen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85423
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85409
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
This one is cool. We hit an assert saying we cannot hold of successor info
anymore. The succs vector size is of max_ws (maximum lookahead) + 1, but guess
what, there's a lot of debug insns and these ar
||2018-04-16
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org,
||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
We fail when trying to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83852
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Fri Apr 13 10:24:02 2018
New Revision: 259373
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259373&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/83852
* gcc.dg/pr83852.c: New test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84842
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83852
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85306
--- Comment #1 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Jakub has added -w to the test options in r259249. I'm sorry I have missed
this one when committing. If this works for you now, I think you can close the
PR.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83972
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Known to fail|8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85099
Bug 85099 depends on bug 83480, which changed state.
Bug 83480 Summary: ICE in create_block_for_bookkeeping, at sel-sched.c:4557
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83480
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83480
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83972
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Apr 9 10:19:50 2018
New Revision: 259231
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259231&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/80463
PR rtl-optimization/83972
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83480
--- Comment #14 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Apr 9 10:19:50 2018
New Revision: 259231
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259231&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/80463
PR rtl-optimization/83972
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80463
--- Comment #15 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Apr 9 10:19:50 2018
New Revision: 259231
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259231&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/80463
PR rtl-optimization/83972
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83913
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Apr 9 09:42:25 2018
New Revision: 259230
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259230&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/83913
* sel-sched-ir.c (merge_expr_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83962
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Apr 9 09:16:34 2018
New Revision: 259229
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259229&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/83962
* sel-sched-ir.c (tidy_contro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83530
--- Comment #12 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Apr 9 09:08:28 2018
New Revision: 259228
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259228&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/83530
* sel-sched.c (force_next_in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84872
--- Comment #2 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Nothing to do with sel-sched as is :) We're just asking to make loop
preheaders that will be fallthrough blocks. The loop has blocks 5 and 6 (6->5
is a loop latch), and the pred block is block 7 but th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83530
--- Comment #11 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
I've made a deeper comparison with what the Haifa does. We diverge because the
loop in reset_sched_cycles only models resource stalls and relies on the
information from the earlier scheduling pass for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83530
--- Comment #8 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Pat Haugen from comment #7)
> Assuming this is a latent selective scheduling bug since I can reproduce
> with r243865 by adding -fsched-pressure --param sched-pressure-algorithm=2.
> Looking
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83962
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Here we're trying remove a jump to the next block but fail to adjust the
barrier. This is something that tidy_fallthru_edge would do for us, but we
don't get to the point we can call it, before that the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83480
--- Comment #12 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
> Not fully fixed yet, the testcase still ICEs with:
> -O2 -g -gstatement-frontiers -fselective-scheduling2 -fsel-sched-pipelining
> -fgcse-sm -floop-paralle
||2018-01-30
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Thank you for the test. This is another variant of PR80463 c#3. I have a
hackish patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83913
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80463
--- Comment #13 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Andrey Belevantsev from comment #12)
> (In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #11)
> > How about this one? It makes only trunk gcc ICE, though.
> >
> > short int t2;
> > int cd, aa, ft;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80463
--- Comment #12 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #11)
> How about this one? It makes only trunk gcc ICE, though.
>
> short int t2;
> int cd, aa, ft;
>
> void
> dh (void)
> {
> int qs = 0;
>
> if (t2 < 1)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83513
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #2)
> Thanks. So the fix for PR 82398 was incomplete. Here we have insns:
>
> i1: uid: 43 prio: 0 usefulness: 100%
> i2: uid: 20 prio: 3 usefulness: 0%
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82398
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Andrey, any progress on this?
Sorry, I have somehow missed this PR. The second hunk of Alexander's patch
looks fine. In the first I would rather rewrite t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80463
--- Comment #6 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Any progress with this?
I can make a patch for the dependency problem. I'm not sure what happened to
the hot/cold block partitioning verification code -- I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80463
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79985
--- Comment #5 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Well, we can special case this in sel-sched either along the lines of
df-scan.c, or even easier, just forbid any asm reordering given the DF hunk.
Generally speaking, we've been bitten a couple of times
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79570
--- Comment #11 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> Fixed on the trunk so far.
FWIW I stared at the code for some time but couldn't devise anything better
than your patch. The hunk itself is somewhat suspi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64411
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69307
--- Comment #10 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Thu Mar 31 14:50:57 2016
New Revision: 234629
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234629&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-03-12 Andrey Belevantsev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69032
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70292
--- Comment #2 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Thu Mar 31 14:37:08 2016
New Revision: 234627
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234627&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/70292
* gcc.c-torture/pr70292.c: New test.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70292
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64411
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tarasevich at cs dot
uni-saarland.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69102
--- Comment #7 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Thu Mar 31 14:16:18 2016
New Revision: 234625
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234625&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-03-21 Andrey Belevantsev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69032
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Thu Mar 31 14:01:22 2016
New Revision: 234624
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234624&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-03-15 Andrey Belevantsev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=0
--- Comment #11 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Thu Mar 31 13:55:36 2016
New Revision: 234622
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234622&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-03-15 Andrey Belevantse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64411
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Thu Mar 31 13:50:15 2016
New Revision: 234620
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234620&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-03-15 Andrey Belevantsev
||2016-03-31
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Andrey Tarasevich from comment #0)
> Created attachment 38016 [details]
> tes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69307
--- Comment #9 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Mar 21 07:54:36 2016
New Revision: 234360
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234360&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/69307
* gcc.target/arm/pr69307.c:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69102
--- Comment #6 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Mon Mar 21 07:52:05 2016
New Revision: 234359
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234359&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR rtl-optimization/69102
* sched-deps.c (sched_a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69032
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Mar 15 15:42:07 2016
New Revision: 234219
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234219&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR rtl-optimization/69032
* sel-sched-ir.c (get_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=0
--- Comment #9 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Mar 15 15:36:44 2016
New Revision: 234218
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234218&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/0
* sel-sched-ir.c (merge_expr): Avoid c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63384
--- Comment #6 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Mar 15 15:25:41 2016
New Revision: 234217
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234217&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR rtl-optimization/63384
* sel-sched.c (invoke_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64411
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Mar 15 15:13:29 2016
New Revision: 234216
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234216&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/64411
* sched-deps.c (get_implicit_reg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69307
--- Comment #6 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Created attachment 37551
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37551&action=edit
proposed patch
Here before reload we're trying to rename a hard register. At the very final
point of choo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69102
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Created attachment 37550
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37550&action=edit
proposed patch
The problem here is readonly dependence contexts in selective scheduler. We're
trying to c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69032
--- Comment #2 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Created attachment 37490
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37490&action=edit
proposed patch
We fail to find the proper seqno for the fresh bookkeeping copy here. The
problem is that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=0
--- Comment #6 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
I've debugged it on gcc-5.1.0 since the picture on trunk is different. Thanks
Jakub for great explanations, it was not easy to get to the root problem.
We speculate an insn (the load in your listing) b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=0
--- Comment #5 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Created attachment 37464
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37464&action=edit
patch for gcc trunk (applies to gcc-5 too)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63384
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64411
--- Comment #2 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Created attachment 37432
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37432&action=edit
patch
In this case, we get an inconsistency between the sched-deps interface, saying
we can't move an insn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54472
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52203
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #5 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Fixed since 5.0 and works for 4.9 (no offending code there).
||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=0
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Sorry, I've got swamped by work and never got around to this. I will try
harder now :)
||2015-06-25
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
I will take a look in a week or so when I'll be back in office.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60866
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60866
--- Comment #8 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Jun 3 10:08:58 2014
New Revision: 211169
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211169&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2014-05-14 Andrey Belevantsev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60901
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60901
--- Comment #10 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Jun 3 10:06:39 2014
New Revision: 211168
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211168&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2014-05-14 Andrey Belevantsev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60866
--- Comment #7 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Jun 3 09:25:39 2014
New Revision: 211165
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211165&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2014-05-14 Andrey Belevantsev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60901
--- Comment #9 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Jun 3 09:20:36 2014
New Revision: 211164
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211164&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2014-05-14 Andrey Belevantsev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60901
--- Comment #8 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Sorry, Uros asked me to wait a bit while the patch is on trunk and at the time
the 4.8 branch got freezed, so I've postponed backporting. I will take care of
it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60866
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60866
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Wed May 14 12:09:02 2014
New Revision: 210420
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210420&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/60866
* sel-sched-ir (sel_init_new_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60901
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60901
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Wed May 14 09:46:26 2014
New Revision: 210414
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210414&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/60901
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_dependenci
|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
The ix86_dependencies_evaluation_hook has the following code:
26230 /* Assume that region is SCC, i.e. all immediate
predecessors
26231of non-head block are in the
|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Created attachment 32692
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32692&action=edit
draft patch
An interesting case so I'd leave more detailed notes. We are scheduling a
regio
1 - 100 of 323 matches
Mail list logo
