https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116340
--- Comment #3 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 58907
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58907&action=edit
patch to split up test
effective_target_hard_float configurations of esirisc can do the optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116340
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
The test should be broken up into separate tests for single and double
precision.
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
gcc.dg/tree-ssa/abs-4.c mixes single and double precision computations and then
tests for the tallies of scans over all the functions.
That means that we got a combinatorial
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30957
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108357
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91940
--- Comment #12 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
But the condition I quoted rejects the recognition of a bswap16 with
non-promoted
arguments.
vectorizable_bswap doesn't do anything for processors that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91940
--- Comment #10 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Even if you add support for V2HI bswap, it won't help vectorization without
support for V4QI vectors and permutations, because vectorizable_bswap won't
recognize the bswap capability of the target a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91940
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116271
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 58861
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58861&action=edit
proposed patch
Does this patch work for you?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116271
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
I have overlooked that, in the inner loop of s176, the array index i+m-j-1
turns negativeat for higher iterations of the middle loop for small m.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115278
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98289
--- Comment #7 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 58719
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58719&action=edit
patch to fix internal compiler errors in shrink-wrap.cc on EDGE_CROSSING edges
I'm currently using thi
-optimization
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
#define LENGTH 4
typedef unsigned uint32v_t __attribute ((vector_size (LENGTH
|FIXED |---
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> --- gcc/shrink-wrap.c.jj 2020-07-28 15:39:09.983756571 +0200
> +++ gcc/shrink-wrap.c 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112728
--- Comment #3 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #0)
> The gcc.dg/scantest-lto.c FAILs on quite a number of targets:
...
> * On Darwin, the __TEXT,__eh_frame contains .ascii because the assembler
> lacks su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112651
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112537
--- Comment #13 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Before we can consider any costs, we first have to know what they are. Is
there any manual for a hardware implementation that specifies costs?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112537
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111298
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
When you use check-function-bodies with a function that has a single-letter
name, the start regexp set by configure_check
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110951
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111566
--- Comment #5 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
I had a look at riscv_legitimize_move. It doesn't seem to suffer from quite
the same problem as legitimize_move does, but it could if another problem was
fixed: riscv_legitimize_move changes the rt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111566
--- Comment #4 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Also, the GET_MODE_BITSIZE (mode).to_constant () <= MAX_BITS_PER_WORD
in the *mov_mem_to_mem splitter can generate unaligned accesses, yet it
is not guarded by a check that the target supports them.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111566
--- Comment #3 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
riscv-v.cc:legitimize_move has:
if (MEM_P (dest) && !REG_P (src))
src = force_reg (mode, src);
return false;
since src is passed by value, this is pointless. The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111566
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111020
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100361
--- Comment #8 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100361
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #50837|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100361
--- Comment #5 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #3)
> Btw, we already disable the floating-point to_chars on targets without a
> binary64 double. So is our test for detecting binary64 not accurate enough,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100361
--- Comment #4 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 50837
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50837&action=edit
Proposed patch
This patch fixes the problem for eSi-RISC and bootstraps on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
, with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100361
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84877
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #46574|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84877
--- Comment #15 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 46574
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46574&action=edit
patch for the case that the stack is sufficiently aligned
(In reply to dave.anglin from comment #11)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84877
--- Comment #13 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #12)
> (In reply to Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke from comment #10)
> > Created attachment 46567 [details]
> > Fix for targets that pass the argument by invisib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40073
--- Comment #16 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Going from gcc 8.2 to gcc 9.1, I find the following two test cases are now
autovectorized:
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options "-O3" } */
/* Test auto-vectorization */
#include "vector-types.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84877
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91065
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91065
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Wed Jul 3 00:22:53 2019
New Revision: 272954
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272954&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR testsuite/91065
* testsuite/gcc.dg/plugin/st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91062
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91065
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #1 from Jorn
: GC
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu (probably doesn't really matter)
T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91062
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Similarly, gcc.dg/torture/ipa-pta-1.c fails four scan tests because
ipa-pta-1.c.083i.pta2 gets corrupted in the ENABLE_GC_ALWAYS_COLLECT scenario.
Keywords: GC
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66726
--- Comment #21 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Mon Jul 1 21:48:55 2019
New Revision: 272911
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272911&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/66726
* tree-ssa-phiopt.c (facto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40073
--- Comment #14 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke from comment #12)
> If we are right shifting a signed type, we could apply a MAX operation to the
> shift count.
Oops, I mean MIN of course. So that we can guar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40073
--- Comment #13 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
If the shifted value is 16 bit and int is 32 bit wide, then, depending
on target costs, instead of a vector compare, we might decide to use
a sign extract of bit 4 of the shift count instead.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40073
--- Comment #12 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
If we are left shifting a narrow signed type for the result, and no defined
overflow semantics are in place, it should be OK to just vectorize the code
using the result type.
If we are right shifti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40073
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44976
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39363
Bug 39363 depends on bug 39302, which changed state.
Bug 39302 Summary: [meta-bug] bugs waiting for Copyright Assignment
acknowledgemt for ARC International (UK) Ltd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39302
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39302
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55531
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #1)
> so this is... what, wrong-code? ice-on-valid-code? build?
>
> (I should go to bed instead of trying to figure this out...)
ice-on-valid-code, and cons
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85993
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44032
--- Comment #4 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #3)
> Is this fixed in the same way that bug 44035 was fixed?
No. 44035 was about the inability to fix, 44032 is about the
actual licensing state of the docum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44035
--- Comment #7 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #6)
> Since we have docstring relicensing maintainers, I don't think this is an
> issue now.
Oops, that slipped my mind. Indeed, we can consider t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44035
--- Comment #5 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #4)
> Does this really need to have "blocker" importance? It has gone several
> years without actually blocking any releases.
The license issue has blocked a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38785
--- Comment #50 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
It certainly is the case that the merit of an optimization can often not be
evaluated until forther optimization passes are done. In fact, as an assembly
programmer, evaluating potential alternativ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29854
--- Comment #8 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
revision 149282:
2009-07-06 J"orn Rennecke
Kaz Kojima
PR rtl-optimization/30807
* postreload.c (reload_combine): For every new use of REG_SUM,
record the us
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28144
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29842
Bug 29842 depends on bug 28144, which changed state.
Bug 28144 Summary: floating point constant -> byte/char/short conversion is
wrong for java
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28144
What|Removed |A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27394
Bug 27394 depends on bug 28144, which changed state.
Bug 28144 Summary: floating point constant -> byte/char/short conversion is
wrong for java
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28144
What|Removed |A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68767
--- Comment #11 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> Of course, the question is if the warning isn't really desirable, the user
> should really just choose some non-NULL magic value to pass in the
> impo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68767
--- Comment #3 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #2)
> I don't understand. It is indeed passing NULL to a non-null function. What
> is wrong with the warning?
When you look at the original testcase clo
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
This test, compiled with g++ -c -Werror -Wall:
// { dg-do compile }
// { dg-options "-Werror -Wall"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66883
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Oct 23 11:57:26 2015
New Revision: 229236
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229236&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libgcc/66883
* config/epiphany/udivsi3-float
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39374
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 35012
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35012&action=edit
gcc14:/home/amylaar/pr39374/pr39374-r14476
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39374
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 35011
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35011&action=edit
gcc14:/home/amylaar/pr39374/pr39374-diff
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64003
--- Comment #18 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Ilya Enkovich from comment #17)
> If I understand the problem correctly the root is in attempt to get length
> of following instructions computing length for forwrad jump instruction.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64003
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64003
--- Comment #13 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #6)
> If I'm reading things right, this loop in shorten_branches populates
> insn_lengths[uid] in order of the NEXT_INSN () iteration:
>
> int (*length_fun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39363
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on|39347, 39348|
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39346
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
target/39346, other/39347 and other/39348 are no longer relevant to
other/39363,
because the Successor of ARC International (UK) Ltd, Synopsys, does not offer
an mxp option in its DesignWare ARC Proc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31634
--- Comment #4 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
31634 used to be relevant for ARC, but that port has since ceased to
support changing the name if TEXT_SECTION_ASM_OP etc. by command line
option, and uses now a string literal, precisely in order to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39363
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on|31634 |
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63223
--- Comment #10 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 33768
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33768&action=edit
patch for dtor direction
I have this patch for fixing the direction of the dtor execution,
but I got
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63223
--- Comment #9 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #8)
> (In reply to Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke from comment #4)
> > (In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #1)
> > do_global_dtors is supposed to start at th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63223
--- Comment #7 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke from comment #5)
> I also observe that the cpi/cpc/brne idiom that is used throughout -
> before and after your patch - is nonsentical.
Oops, I drew conclusions f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63223
--- Comment #6 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke from comment #4)
> However, you now made it all the way use an incorrect order - starting at the
> end and incrementing from there.
Oops, I mean decrementing from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63223
--- Comment #5 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
I also observe that the cpi/cpc/brne idiom that is used throughout -
before and after your patch - is nonsentical.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63223
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61017
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 32717
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32717&action=edit
preprocessed libgcc file
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
lra is still not able to compile libgcc2 for ARC:
./cc1 libgcc2.i -O2 -mlra
../../../../unisrc-209293-arc/libgcc/libgcc2.c:2105:1: internal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60824
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60811
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60824
Bug 60824 depends on bug 60811, which changed state.
Bug 60811 Summary: arc/arc.c:2135: possible bad argument to abs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60811
What|Removed |Added
-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60824
Bug 60824 depends on bug 60651, which changed state.
Bug 60651 Summary: Mode switching instructions are sometimes emitted in the
wrong order
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60651
What|Removed |Added
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60651
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60651
--- Comment #5 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Apr 11 18:27:45 2014
New Revision: 209318
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209318&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite:
PR rtl-optimization/60651
* gcc.ta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60651
--- Comment #4 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Apr 11 18:12:53 2014
New Revision: 209312
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209312&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc:
PR rtl-optimization/60651
* mode-switching.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60811
--- Comment #3 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Apr 11 18:04:43 2014
New Revision: 209311
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209311&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/60811
* config/arc/arc.c (arc_save_rest
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59049
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60651
--- Comment #3 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
This patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg00091.html
has been approved for gcc4.10, modulo one spelling fix:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg00263.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60811
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60757
--- Comment #4 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke from comment #3)
> Created attachment 32544 [details]
> typescript with backtrace
>
> It appears that some other epiphany patches I had in my tree I thought were
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60757
--- Comment #3 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 32544
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32544&action=edit
typescript with backtrace
It appears that some other epiphany patches I had in my tree I thought were
un
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60757
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 32541
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32541&action=edit
epiphany cost fix that triggers combine exponential behaviour
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
Created attachment 32540
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32540&action=edit
pruned down testcase
With a small fix to the rtx_co
-optimization
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 53938
Curtesy of volatile_ok / init_recog_no_volatile, combine will
reject any
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60651
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 32526
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32526&action=edit
preprocessed libjava file
With the latest proposed patch, we get an assertion failure building libjava
d
1 - 100 of 622 matches
Mail list logo
