--- Comment #4 from tjvries at xs4all dot nl 2010-07-11 06:10 ---
submitted patch for review:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-07/msg00879.html
--
tjvries at xs4all dot nl changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from tjvries at xs4all dot nl 2010-06-25 20:06 ---
Created an attachment (id=21008)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21008&action=view)
partially redoing the fix for bug 20612
The problem is in this piece of code in lambda_loopnest_gcc_l
--- Comment #2 from tjvries at xs4all dot nl 2010-06-25 19:16 ---
Created an attachment (id=21007)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21007&action=view)
slightly more minimal testcase
reproduced on trunk revision 161295
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_
--- Comment #5 from tjvries at xs4all dot nl 2010-06-21 10:32 ---
Created an attachment (id=20954)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20954&action=view)
naive patch. run callbacks on hashtable entries exhaustively before deleting
Furthermore, I investigated w
--- Comment #4 from tjvries at xs4all dot nl 2010-06-21 10:20 ---
Created an attachment (id=20953)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20953&action=view)
minimal test case of 14 lines, cut down from varasm.i
I also ran into this bug, while building gcc 4.3.5 for
