https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90978
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I doubt -O3 would help much, a significant amount of tests is already with -O3.
As Martin's pages show, the less covered areas is e.g. old reload (you need
some target that doesn't use LRA), driver (say for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90978
--- Comment #10 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #9)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #8)
> > I'm running that once a week:
> > https://users.suse.com/~mliska/lcov/
>
> Great !
>
> I'll have a go at dupli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90978
--- Comment #9 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #8)
> I'm running that once a week:
> https://users.suse.com/~mliska/lcov/
Great !
I'll have a go at duplicating your results, then have a go at extending
the test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90978
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
> I am guessing that a gcc build with "-ftest-coverage -fprofile-arcs"
> would help. Then find unvisited code, then write a test case that gets
> there etc
I'm running that once a week:
https://users.suse.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90978
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90978
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90978
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Tue Jun 25 11:50:12 2019
New Revision: 272651
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272651&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Remove dead code in df-scan.c (PR tree-optimization/90978).
2019-06-25 M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90978
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90978
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
> Guess this is https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-06/msg00410.html but the
> gcc_unreachable () calls weren't in the patch posted to gcc-patches.
It indeed seems like debugging session leftover. Given we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90978
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90978
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
The same can be seen here:
3615else
3616 {
3617struct df_scan_problem_data *problem_data
3618 = (struct df_scan_problem_data *) df_scan->problem_data;
3619 gcc_unr
11 matches
Mail list logo
