http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #30 from tejohnson at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-19 05:21:06 UTC ---
Author: tejohnson
Date: Mon Nov 19 05:20:59 2012
New Revision: 193612
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193612
Log:
This patch addresses t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #29 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-16 18:57:41
UTC ---
>
> I'm confused - that is essentially what it is doing today (although
> comparing against the first merged file instead of the last merged
> file). It isn't expecting all the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #28 from Teresa Johnson 2012-11-16
18:03:08 UTC ---
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 9:42 AM, hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
wrote:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
>
> --- Comment #27 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-16
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #27 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-16
17:42:26 UTC ---
/* Now merge each file. */
for (gi_ptr = gcov_list; gi_ptr; gi_ptr = gi_ptr->next)
{
// Open existing gcda file for gi_ptr
// Find program summary corr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #26 from Teresa Johnson 2012-11-15
22:42:12 UTC ---
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 6:33 AM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:56 AM, hubicka at ucw dot cz
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sho
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #25 from Teresa Johnson 2012-11-15
14:34:10 UTC ---
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:56 AM, hubicka at ucw dot cz <
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
>
> --- Comment #24 from J
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #24 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-15 10:56:53
UTC ---
> Note though that this is not an assert. It just emits a message to
> stderr. Do you think a better error message is appropriate? I'm not
> sure the "some data files may have be
> Note though that this is not an assert. It just emits a message to
> stderr. Do you think a better error message is appropriate? I'm not
> sure the "some data files may have been removed" is an accurate
> description of the issue. Perhaps something like "Profile data file
> mismatch may indicate
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #23 from Teresa Johnson 2012-11-15
06:44:00 UTC ---
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 5:17 PM, hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
wrote:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
>
> --- Comment #16 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-15
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #22 from Teresa Johnson 2012-11-15
02:46:20 UTC ---
Ok, will see if I can submit that one tomorrow then, after double
checking the performance.
Teresa
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 6:01 PM, hubicka at ucw dot cz
wrote:
>
> h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #21 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-15 02:01:01
UTC ---
> Ok, I can do that. I had tried that but didn't see any gain yet (need
> to take a look at my results again). I have been playing with teasing
> apart the various uses of this c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #20 from Teresa Johnson 2012-11-15
01:52:45 UTC ---
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 5:42 PM, hubicka at ucw dot cz
wrote:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
>
> --- Comment #19 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-15 01:42:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #19 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-15 01:42:55
UTC ---
> Oh got it - it is this one, right?:
>
> profiling:/home/tejohnson/extra/gcc_trunk_3_obj/libcpp/files.gcda:Invocation
> mismatch - some data files may have been removed
Yes
> Oh got it - it is this one, right?:
>
> profiling:/home/tejohnson/extra/gcc_trunk_3_obj/libcpp/files.gcda:Invocation
> mismatch - some data files may have been removed
Yes, it is this one.
>
> I think this one was there before, but I had to modify it after my
> histogram change. I will take a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #18 from Teresa Johnson 2012-11-15
01:33:43 UTC ---
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 5:17 PM, hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugz
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #17 from Teresa Johnson 2012-11-15
01:28:47 UTC ---
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 5:17 PM, hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org <
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
>
> --- Comment #16 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #16 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-15
01:17:43 UTC ---
Theresa: I am using gcc10 from compilation farm, but I think it is fairly
universal problem.
Also I think that gcc_assert should not be assert, but an user readable error
about
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-15
01:10:29 UTC ---
Note that profiledbootstrap still dies for me on
config.status: creating tests/rand/Makefile
../../libiberty/cp-demangle.c: In function 'd_print_cast.isra.8':
../../libiberty/cp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-15
01:07:04 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Nov 15 01:07:01 2012
New Revision: 193522
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193522
Log:
PR bootstrap/55051
* gcov-io.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-15
01:03:09 UTC ---
OK, the false positive is on quite sloppy code in gcov-io.c. I attached
testcase to PR55079 and will fix the gcc_assert specifying the loop bounds to
not allow out-of-bound read.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu 2012-11-15 00:30:51
UTC ---
Revision 193513 gave:
../../src-trunk/gcc/common/common-targhooks.c: In function
'default_target_handle_option(gcc_options*, gcc_options*, cl_decoded_option
const*, unsigned int)'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #11 from Teresa Johnson 2012-11-15
00:21:36 UTC ---
Sure, I will see if I can reproduce it.
Teresa
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 4:07 PM, hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org <
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tejohnson at google dot com
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-14
23:03:27 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Nov 14 23:03:22 2012
New Revision: 193512
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193512
Log:
PR bootstrap/55051
* ipa-inli
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #8 from Markus Trippelsdorf
2012-11-14 20:48:21 UTC ---
Created attachment 28688
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28688
testcase
The testcase is only reduced to 97K, but it gets reduced very slowly
and I'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-14 15:35:26 UTC
---
> --- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf
> 2012-11-14 15:13:08 UTC ---
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > There are
> >
> > badness = (relative_time_benefit (callee_info,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||markus at trippelsdorf dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu 2012-11-14 15:08:53
UTC ---
There are
badness = (relative_time_benefit (callee_info, edge, edge_time)
* (INT_MIN / 16 / RELATIVE_TIME_BENEFIT_RANGE));
badness /= (growth * MAX (1,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu 2012-11-14 15:06:44
UTC ---
With revision 193500, we got
libdecnumber -I../../src-trunk/gcc/../libdecnumber/bid -I../libdecnumber
-I../../src-trunk/gcc/../libbacktrace../../src-trunk/gcc/gimple-iterator.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #3 from Uros Bizjak 2012-10-25 06:51:45
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> LRA generates
This comment belongs to PR55049 (copied there).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu 2012-10-25 00:49:09
UTC ---
LRA generates
(gdb) call debug_rtx (insn)
(insn 6 20 7 2 (set (reg/f:SI 0 ax [orig:65 gomp_tls_data.ts.work_share ] [65])
(mem/f/j/c:SI (plus:SI (reg:SI 2 cx [68])
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
34 matches
Mail list logo
