--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de 2010-01-08 11:09 ---
Subject: Re: Random code-generation differences
with GRAPHITE
On Thu, 7 Jan 2010, sebpop at gmail dot com wrote:
>
>
> --- Comment #6 from sebpop at gmail dot com 2010-01-07 17:58 ---
> Subject: Re: Random
--- Comment #9 from sebpop at gmail dot com 2010-01-07 21:30 ---
Subject: Re: Random code-generation differences
with GRAPHITE
> htab_hash_pointer is fine if a hash table is never traversed, or such
> traversal
> can't affect code generation. Â E.g. graphite has some debug_*
> htab_hash_pointer is fine if a hash table is never traversed, or such
> traversal
> can't affect code generation. E.g. graphite has some debug_* routines that
> traverse such hash tables, that's fine, they aren't called at all during
> compilation except for debugging sessions.
Ok, thanks for
--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-07 21:10 ---
htab_hash_pointer is fine if a hash table is never traversed, or such traversal
can't affect code generation. E.g. graphite has some debug_* routines that
traverse such hash tables, that's fine, they aren't called at
--- Comment #7 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-07 18:01 ---
Subject: Bug 42641
Author: spop
Date: Thu Jan 7 18:01:28 2010
New Revision: 155700
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155700
Log:
Do not hash pointers.
2010-01-07 Richard Guenther
PR t
--- Comment #6 from sebpop at gmail dot com 2010-01-07 17:58 ---
Subject: Re: Random code-generation differences
with GRAPHITE
After your change, there remains three users of htab_hash_pointer in graphite:
In if_region_set_false_region, there is a use of htab_hash_pointer,
bu
--- Comment #5 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-01-07 17:53 ---
Patch from comment #0 works for me too (sorry for the delay, it took some time
to recompile after realising where is the typo in that patch).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42641
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-07 16:09 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-07 16:07 ---
Subject: Bug 42641
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 7 16:07:17 2010
New Revision: 155695
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155695
Log:
2010-01-07 Richard Guenther
PR tree-optimization/
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-07 14:13 ---
I can reproduce the problem with the testcase and the patch seems to fix it
(with the typo fixed and as far as you can test for fixed random behavior...).
I'm going to bootstrap, test and install it.
--
rguenth
--- Comment #1 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-01-07 12:43 ---
Created an attachment (id=19496)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19496&action=view)
testcase (not reduced)
While reducing this testcase with delta, different -fcompare-debug problem
appeared (with non-r
11 matches
Mail list logo
