--- Comment #8 from joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2006-07-25 17:08
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] MIssing debug info at -O0 for a local variable
in a C++ constructor
drow at false dot org wrote:
>--- Comment #7 from drow at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-25 13
--- Comment #6 from joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2006-07-06 19:59
---
Subject: Re: SuperH: Very unoptimal code generated for 64-bit ints
roger at eyesopen dot com wrote:
>--- Comment #5 from roger at eyesopen dot com 2006-07-06 19:47 ---
>No the rtx_costs for a
--- Comment #3 from joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2006-06-26 11:19
---
Subject: Re: floating point constant -> byte/char/short conversion is wrong
for java
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-26 09:45 ---
>
--- Comment #16 from joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2006-02-14 20:03
---
Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] reload leaves insns from earlier passes
around: fatal for postinc
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>--- Comment #15 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02
--- Comment #7 from joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2006-02-13 22:02
---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 regression] ICE in reload_cse_simplify_operands, at
postreload.c:391
Andrew Pinski wrote:
> Confirmed, fixed at least on the mainline, this might be too hard to fix on
> the
> 4
--- Comment #38 from joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-12-19 13:34
---
Subject: Re: [4.0 regression] Wrong code with REG_NO_CONFLICT notes (caused by
combine)
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>--- Comment #37 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-19 12
--- Comment #9 from joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-12-13 23:03
---
Subject: RFA: fix bootstrap/25397 part 2 (Was: Re: Bootstrap failed)
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
>
>/* Compile with -O2 -m32 -fPIC */
>
>
...
Thanks. I have attached a patch
--- Comment #7 from joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-12-13 22:39
---
Subject: Re: Bootstrap failed
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-13 21:40
>---
>I get a different error with 108482:
>./
--- Comment #7 from joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-11-10 14:11
---
Subject: Re: -d option changes generated code
rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>--- Comment #6 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-09 22:36
>---
>Yes, this is indeed the ca
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-09-22
17:37 ---
Subject: RFA: fix PR 23837 (Re: [4.0/4.1 regression] Wrong code with
-fschedule-insns)
I have regtested the attached patch on i686-pc-linux-gnu in mainline
from 2005-09-19 18:00 UTC.
2005-09-22 J&quo
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-09-22
17:14 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression]: Gcc failed to build on ia64
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>2005-09-21 J"orn Rennecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> * final.c (get_attr_length_
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-09-21
14:07 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression]: Gcc failed to build on ia64
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-21
>11:28 ---
>
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-08-04
12:13 ---
Subject: Re: unrolling does not take target register pressure into account.
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
>
>
>Could you give some specific examples of assesments that 3.4 ca
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-08-02
14:47 ---
Subject: Re: - RFA: fix PR middle-end/23135: synthetic testcase
I have attached a testcase that triggers the bug on mainline for sh-elf
-m4 -O2.
/* Based on execute/simd-1.c, modifed by [EMAIL
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-05-12
19:30 ---
Subject: Re: autoincrement generation is poor
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-12
>18:59 ---
>The only chan
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-04-11
13:16 ---
Subject: Re: VOIDmode LABEL_REFs are generated
giovannibajo at libero dot it wrote:
>--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-04-11
>12:48 ---
>I have a v
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-04-11
12:36 ---
Subject: Re: TRULY_NOOP_TRUNCATION ignored
echristo at redhat dot com wrote:
>--- Additional Comments From echristo at redhat dot com 2005-04-10 19:02
>---
>I think I'm ok with
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-03-29
11:54 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 regression] shared SH libgcc is exporting too many
symbols
kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>--- Additional Comments From kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-25
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-03-24
23:49 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 regression] shared SH libgcc is exporting too many
symbols
kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>--- Additional Comments From kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-24
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-03-24
21:25 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 regression] shared SH libgcc is exporting too many
symbols
zack at codesourcery dot com wrote:
> You may want to consider use of LIB1FUNCS_ST instead of LIB1FUNCS, so
>th
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-03-24
21:08 ---
Subject: Re: shared SH libgcc is exporting too many symbols
Mike Stump wrote:
>
> Could you add a reference to the PR in the code, as the next person
> to play with this will find
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-03-24
18:17 ---
Subject: Re: shared SH libgcc is exporting too many symbols
zack at codesourcery dot com wrote:
>--- Additional Comments From zack at codesourcery dot com 2005-03-24
>16:06 ---
>Su
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-03-24
18:06 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 regression] shared SH libgcc is exporting too many
symbols
schwab at suse dot de wrote:
>
>
>>! #define FUNC(X) .type X,@functio
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-03-24
16:30 ---
Subject: Re: shared SH libgcc is exporting too many symbols
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> What|Removed |Ad
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-03-10
18:18 ---
Subject: Re: [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] Wrong code generation for the argument
of the pure function in PIC
rth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-03-08
14:21 ---
Subject: Re: alias analysis doesn't take into account that variables that
haven't their address taken can't alias arbitrary MEMs
giovannibajo at libero dot it wrote:
>--- Additi
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-03-03
14:59 ---
Subject: Re: If-conversion can't match equivalent code, and cross-jumping only
works for literal matches
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-02-28
13:46 ---
Subject: Re: autoincrement generation is poor
giovannibajo at libero dot it wrote:
>--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-02-25
>18:59 ---
>What is the com
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-01-17
14:18 ---
Subject: Re: delete_trivially_dead_insns fails
to update the liveness information
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-15
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2004-12-01
18:37 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] gcc.c-torture/unsorted/SFset.c
fails with "-O2 -m4"
This patch is still waiting for review:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-11/msg01477.html
30 matches
Mail list logo
