--- Comment #16 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-23 04:36
---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #15 from sayle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-23 01:20 ---
Subject: Bug 27531
Author: sayle
Date: Fri Jun 23 01:19:57 2006
New Revision: 114921
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=114921
Log:
2006-06-22 Roger Sayle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Steven
--- Comment #14 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-11 09:55 ---
This hacks around this particular problem.
Not a fix, you know, but it explains what is going wrong here.
Index: reload1.c
===
--- reload1.c (revisi
--- Comment #13 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-11 09:34 ---
I spoke too soon. The code_label that is removed for me is code_label 123,
which disappears after flow2. Calling rebuild_jump_labels at the end of
rest_of_handle_flow2 makes the problem disappear for me, but that i
--- Comment #12 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-11 09:21 ---
The offending insns for me are (using -dAP):
!(insn 315 243 316 (set (reg/f:SI 19 %l3 [167])
!(high:SI (label_ref:SI 123))) 40 {*movsi_high} (nil)
!(nil))
sethi %hi(.LL20), %l3 ! 315 *movsi_h
--- Comment #11 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-11 08:54 ---
This problem may be in some other place than expand. rebuild_jump_labels for
example can also add REG_LABEL notes.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27531
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27531
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-13 22:06
---
Here is the reduced testcase as I could get it (LL20 is not recorded here as
being used):
typedef struct _IO_FILE FILE;
extern char const *RCSname;
extern struct rcslock *Locks;
extern struct hshentry * Head;
struc
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-13 22:05 ---
Hmmm, it seems like it is an expand bug, as REG_LABEL is not added at expand
time:
(insn 36 35 37 (set (reg:SI 134)
(high:SI (label_ref:SI 42))) -1 (nil)
(nil))
(insn 37 36 38 (set (reg/f:SI 133)
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-13 21:59 ---
(insn 317 243 301 (set (reg/f:SI 19 %l3 [167])
(lo_sum:SI (reg/f:SI 19 %l3 [167])
(label_ref:SI 123))) 39 {*movsi_lo_sum} (nil)
(nil))
There is no REG_LABEL on that instruction which causes u
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-13 21:56 ---
We are losing a REG_LABEL somewhere.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27531
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-13 19:44 ---
Hmm, there are two switch tables in main which is causing the problem. Right
now I have 139 line testcase and I am still reducing it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27531
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-13 04:59 ---
The label comes from a switch table.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27531
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-13 04:08 ---
I can confirm this, trying to figure out to reduce this.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27531
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||link-failure
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0
--- Comment #3 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-05-10 13:52 ---
Created an attachment (id=11433)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11433&action=view)
assembler with -O2 (fails) - .LL226 is not defined
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27531
--- Comment #2 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-05-10 13:52 ---
Created an attachment (id=11432)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11432&action=view)
assembler with -O1 (works)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27531
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-05-10 13:51 ---
Created an attachment (id=11431)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11431&action=view)
preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27531
18 matches
Mail list logo
