https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338
--- Comment #26 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:62125ef043e19c58780bc06d0e2f2221bbbf28f6
commit r10-9401-g62125ef043e19c58780bc06d0e2f2221bbbf28f6
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338
--- Comment #24 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:150bde36c119eff4b8a74667c9d728d6a8a5e8a1
commit r11-7440-g150bde36c119eff4b8a74667c9d728d6a8a5e8a1
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date: Mon M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338
--- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The make check results also looked ok on all 3 arches.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338
--- Comment #22 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Yes. https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/2451/62722451/build.log
is the failed i686 bootstrap and
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/2553/62722553/build.log is one
with your patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338
--- Comment #21 from Jan Hubicka ---
> FYI, I have today bootstrapped it as well in rpm build on
> {x86_64,i686,powerpc64le}-linux, both your patch and just trunk without the
> workaround I've been using before. The latter failed to bootstrap on
> FYI, I have today bootstrapped it as well in rpm build on
> {x86_64,i686,powerpc64le}-linux, both your patch and just trunk without the
> workaround I've been using before. The latter failed to bootstrap on i686
> and passed it on x86_64 and powerpc64le, the former passed bootstrap on all
> arch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek ---
FYI, I have today bootstrapped it as well in rpm build on
{x86_64,i686,powerpc64le}-linux, both your patch and just trunk without the
workaround I've been using before. The latter failed to bootstrap on i68
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338
--- Comment #19 from Jan Hubicka ---
> Honza, any progress with this?
> If you want, I can test the patch too...
Sorry, it bootstrapped, so I will commit it.
Honza
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Honza, any progress with this?
If you want, I can test the patch too...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338
--- Comment #17 from Jan Hubicka ---
I am testing
diff --git a/gcc/ipa-fnsummary.c b/gcc/ipa-fnsummary.c
index e32e69cd3ad..612880240dc 100644
--- a/gcc/ipa-fnsummary.c
+++ b/gcc/ipa-fnsummary.c
@@ -3137,11 +3137,18 @@ compute_fn_summary (struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11 Regression] |[10/11 Regression]
|pro
12 matches
Mail list logo
