http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alain.hebert at polymtl dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
--- Comment #12 from Jan Hubicka 2012-05-02 13:05:42
UTC ---
I am surprised that this does not happen already at PRE :)
Without volatile attribute there is really nothing that prevents GCC from doing
this optimization
and unfortunately I don't th
I am surprised that this does not happen already at PRE :)
Without volatile attribute there is really nothing that prevents GCC from doing
this optimization
and unfortunately I don't think we provide way to prevent it without this big
hammer.
We have fpcr register defined for the control word th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
Oliver changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||godeezy at gmail dot com
--- Comment #9 from Oli
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
--- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl
2011-11-25 15:58:34 UTC ---
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 09:37:15AM +, priv123 at hotmail dot fr wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
>
> --- Comment #7 from Mathieu 2011-11-25 09:37:15
> UT
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
--- Comment #7 from Mathieu 2011-11-25 09:37:15 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #6)
> This does not "fix" the problem. (Note, I initialized
> tab=42 and ius=1; otherwise, you reference an undefined
> variables.)
Steve, I can't reproduce that you o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
--- Comment #6 from Steve Kargl
2011-11-23 17:56:17 UTC ---
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 09:33:37AM +, priv123 at hotmail dot fr wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
>
> > -fno-tree-ds seems to do the trick: from the C manua
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
--- Comment #5 from Mathieu 2011-11-23 09:33:37 UTC
---
> -fno-tree-ds seems to do the trick: from the C manual
with -fno-tree-dse it works as I expect. Thanks.
Because reading the manual I didn't see this option (or more exactly I didn't
unde
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-11-22
21:03:51 UTC ---
> -fno-tree-ds seems to do the trick:
sorry, it is -fno-tree-dse and
> -ftree-dse
> Perform dead store elimination (DSE) on trees. A dead store is a store into a
> memory loc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-11-22
20:56:43 UTC ---
According my archived builds
r165415 (20101013) gives the result you expect
r165758 (20101021) does not.
> Any option to tune the behavior ?
-fno-tree-ds seems to do the trick
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
--- Comment #2 from Mathieu 2011-11-22 20:22:15 UTC
---
Sure, and we are especially fans of -fbound-checks but we can not use it on
half of the code because of this usage.
For the story :
{
I reproduced here with this small code a part of the 1.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
14 matches
Mail list logo
