http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36143
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36143
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
AssignedTo|pinskia at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36143
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.4.6 |4.4.7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36143
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.4.5 |4.4.6
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.4.4 |4.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36143
--- Comment #16 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-30 17:25 ---
PASSes on 4.5 trunk, but still XFAILs on 4.4 branch. Since it's a 4.4
regression, should the patch be backported to 4.4 ?
--
ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.4.3 |4.4.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36143
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.4.2 |4.4.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36143
--- Comment #15 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-24 13:49
---
Fixed on the trunk.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDepe
--- Comment #13 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-03 15:33
---
We should be able to go via a VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR when propagating (struct Foo *)
&i
into the LHS dereference D.2279_5->i[0]. That is, convert that to
VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR (i)->i[0]
and further fold that by noting
--- Comment #12 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-03 15:20 ---
Created an attachment (id=16813)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16813&action=view)
gcc44-pr36143.patch
I've tried to implement what Richi suggested in #c6, unfortunately that didn't
fix the failu
--- Comment #11 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-21 02:38 ---
Subject: Bug 36143
Author: hp
Date: Mon Jul 21 02:37:36 2008
New Revision: 138020
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=138020
Log:
PR middle-end/36143
* g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr19637.C: XFAIL
--- Comment #10 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-25 18:13 ---
Failure also occurs on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu and i686-unknown-linux-gnu,
see:
x86_64: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-05/msg02221.html
i686: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-05/msg01800.html
--- Comment #9 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-21 11:14 ---
If the patch is ready and tested, fine: post it.
Do you need help testing? If something else needs done, please be explicit.
Otherwise, it seems this PR is ripe for being marked as an xfail.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bu
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36143
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-07 17:21 ---
Fix it:
[andrew-pinskis-computer:local/gcc/gcc] apinski% svn diff
Index: tree-ssa-forwprop.c
===
--- tree-ssa-forwprop.c (revision 135021)
+++ tree-ssa-
--- Comment #7 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-07 17:08 ---
Also seen on cris-elf with the revision as mentioned and still there as late as
r135041. Pinskia, are you going to revert it, fix it or should we xfail the
test?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36143
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de 2008-05-06 10:22 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression]: FAIL: g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr19637.C
On Tue, 6 May 2008, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-06 04:15
> ---
> Oh we don'
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-06 04:15 ---
Oh we don't handle VCE On the left hand side for many different reasons. One
is because if we set only part of the variable, we could get possible invalid
gimple as we are only setting part of a SSA_NAME. I am un-a
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-06 04:09 ---
So for &i[0], we don't convert it to VCE but the others we convert it but we
don't get to the point convert to VCE for the placement new case for some
reason ...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-06 03:56 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> FWIW, noticed on cris-elf as well, where additionally, for the record,
> gfortran.dg/transfer_assumed_size_1.f90 regressed. From gfortran.log:
I just checked on i686-darwin and there is n
--- Comment #2 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-06 01:05 ---
FWIW, noticed on cris-elf as well, where additionally, for the record,
gfortran.dg/transfer_assumed_size_1.f90 regressed. From gfortran.log:
PASS: gfortran.dg/transfer_assumed_size_1.f90 -O2 (test for excess errors)
c
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-05 21:30 ---
Yes I saw this, this is because we are not creating a VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR for the
first indirect reference, I think it has something to do with the placement
new. I will look at it when I get home tonight.
--
pins
23 matches
Mail list logo
