Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rth at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
(1) Case 1:
void doit(void);
void test(unsigned long a, unsigned long l)
{
if (!__builtin_add_overflow(a, 8 - 1, &a) && a <= l)
doit();
}
currently generates a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94174
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|__builtin_add_overflow vs |Missed ccmp optimizations
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94174
--- Comment #2 from Richard Henderson ---
Case 3:
void test3(__int128 a, unsigned long l)
{
if ((__int128_t)a - l <= 1)
doit();
}
currently generates as
subsx0, x0, x2
sbc x1, x1, xzr
cmp x1, 0
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rth at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
unsigned f(unsigned short x) { return (x > 0xff ? 0xff : x) & 0xff; }
cmpw$255, %di
movl$25
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68543
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92902
--- Comment #14 from Richard Henderson ---
The only reason I can think for jump tables to be put into the text
section is the old aout format, which didn't have a separate read
only data section. There should be no reason to do that these days.
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rth at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
We should pattern-match multiple logical operations
into the ternary logical operator. While there are
lots of obscure combinations available, probably the
most useful
|unassigned at gcc dot |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson 2013-02-14
20:40:34 UTC ---
Mine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55941
--- Comment #4 from Richard Henderson 2013-02-15
01:41:33 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Fri Feb 15 01:41:29 2013
New Revision: 196071
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=196071
Log:
PR target/55941
* lower-subre
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55941
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56858
--- Comment #5 from Richard Henderson 2013-04-08
14:35:03 UTC ---
They did used to exist during mach_reorg; they used to exist at rtl creation
time. You cannot simply delete the code either, that produces wrong-code wrt
fp exceptions. Of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56858
--- Comment #7 from Richard Henderson 2013-04-08
15:52:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Do you recall when that was? Must have been long, long ago...
> I've tried to find where it happened, and the rewrite was done before
> at least
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56858
--- Comment #9 from Richard Henderson 2013-04-08
19:27:03 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> The part of alpha EH that depends on the notes must have been been
> broken since than, more than 12 years. Without anyone noticing...
Sure.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56858
--- Comment #11 from Richard Henderson 2013-04-08
20:09:47 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Removing the notes entirely is the goal eventually, but I'd settle for
> making them local to final.c for now.
Hmm.
Well, assuming we want
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54188
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53823
--- Comment #23 from Richard Henderson 2012-08-13
15:51:37 UTC ---
On 08/12/2012 07:30 AM, danglin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53823
>
> --- Comment #22 from John David Anglin
> 2012-08-12 14:30:12 U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54172
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54172
--- Comment #11 from Richard Henderson 2012-09-06
18:53:25 UTC ---
The combined patch set also looks ok.
Talking with bkoz, he would like to see more comments added,
since a reasonable testcase seems unlikely.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54571
Bug #: 54571
Summary: Missed optimization converting between bit sets
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54571
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Severit
|unassigned at gcc dot |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47311
--- Comment #15 from Richard Henderson 2011-01-17
16:03:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> But it never checks the buffer end. It looks bogus to me.
Read the comment at the beginning of the section. This is an aligned
read before END, and t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47311
--- Comment #17 from Richard Henderson 2011-01-17
18:40:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> ==5267== Invalid read of size 8
> ==5267==at 0x11E4E24: search_line_sse42(unsigned char const*, unsigned
It's fine. (1) Note that we've already
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47290
--- Comment #11 from Richard Henderson 2011-01-18
16:45:09 UTC ---
Jakub, I'm fine with your second patch to detect infinite loops, with
the proviso that you break out the test into a separate function.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47290
--- Comment #13 from Richard Henderson 2011-01-18
18:20:49 UTC ---
Looks good. Ok if it passes tests.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45381
--- Comment #9 from Richard Henderson 2011-02-08
16:17:10 UTC ---
I don't think we really want to pursue this further.
I had hoped to find a solution that satisfied the older apple compiler -- it
is supposed to support altivec after all -- but i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45381
--- Comment #11 from Richard Henderson 2011-02-08
16:52:41 UTC ---
Yes, a patch like in #1 would be fine.
||2011.02.09 17:36:18
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Richard Henderson 2011-02-09
17:36:18 UTC ---
Mine.
We aren&#
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47530
--- Comment #2 from Richard Henderson 2011-02-09
20:24:02 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Wed Feb 9 20:23:56 2011
New Revision: 169984
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169984
Log:
PR 47530
* trans-mem.c (expand_block_edge
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47530
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17994
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17994
--- Comment #9 from Richard Henderson 2011-02-16
18:04:08 UTC ---
> Going by the internals document, INCOMING_FRAME_SP_OFFSET is already defined
> but it is not used anywhere (in my patch).
Certainly it's going to be used by the generic code in
||2013-05-16
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49146
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.2
--- Comment #8 from Richard Hen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56742
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
Target
|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 from Richard Henderson ---
Mine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56742
--- Comment #9 from Richard Henderson ---
Created attachment 30168
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30168&action=edit
proposed patch
Kudos to Kai for finally figuring out what was going wrong inside the
system unwinder, and why
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56742
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #30168|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49146
--- Comment #10 from Richard Henderson ---
(In reply to Ben Woodard from comment #9)
> Created attachment 30177 [details]
> updated patch that includes __builtin_expect
The patch in #8 is better, and indeed has a bug fix relative to this
in that
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56742
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49146
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57363
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50006
--- Comment #11 from Richard Henderson 2011-08-15
17:39:52 UTC ---
Created attachment 25020
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25020
second patch
Two similar, but not really identical, problems.
S390x should be able to reproduc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50006
--- Comment #12 from Richard Henderson 2011-08-15
17:44:19 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Mon Aug 15 17:44:11 2011
New Revision: 177764
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177764
Log:
PR middle-end/50006
* explow.c (allocate
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50006
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #13 from Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49864
--- Comment #9 from Richard Henderson 2011-08-24
19:35:31 UTC ---
Created attachment 25091
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25091
followup patch
I think you'd have been better off opening a new bug.
That said, the cross-jumpi
|unassigned at gcc dot |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #2 from Richard Henderson 2011-08-25
03:03:11 UTC ---
Mine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50132
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson 2011-08-25
18:57:53 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Thu Aug 25 18:57:48 2011
New Revision: 178084
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178084
Log:
PR 50132
PR 49864
* cfgcleanup.c (old_ins
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49864
--- Comment #10 from Richard Henderson 2011-08-25
18:57:53 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Thu Aug 25 18:57:48 2011
New Revision: 178084
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178084
Log:
PR 50132
PR 49864
* cfgcleanup.c (old_in
||2011-10-06
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Richard Henderson
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50632
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson 2011-10-06
19:15:48 UTC ---
Created attachment 25433
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25433
proposed patch
Testing this patch now.
||2011-10-06
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #6 from Richard Henderson 2011-10-06
21:37:29 UTC ---
Confirmed for 4.7 as well.
||
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #7 from Richard Henderson 2011-10-06
21:59:22 UTC ---
Created attachment 25435
--> h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50632
--- Comment #4 from Richard Henderson 2011-10-06
22:22:15 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Thu Oct 6 22:22:11 2011
New Revision: 179637
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179637
Log:
PR 50632
* combine-stack-adjust.c (maybe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50132
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50632
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50006
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
||2011-10-07
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49752
--- Comment #2 from Richard Henderson 2011-10-07
15:35:56 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Fri Oct 7 15:35:49 2011
New Revision: 179663
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179663
Log:
PR 49752
* fold-const.c (fold_checksum_tr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49752
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34888
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50674
--- Comment #2 from Richard Henderson 2011-10-10
16:51:19 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Git bisect points to Rev179701:
...
> Rename vshuffle/vec_shuffle to vec_perm.
>
> * doc/extend.texi (__builtin_shuffle): Improve the de
||2011-10-14
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson 2011-10-14
18:10:07 UTC ---
The problem is that the ABI was designed with the scalar operations
in mind
|unassigned at gcc dot |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson 2011-10-17
16:45:51 UTC ---
The pr37482.c problem, at least, is a buffer overrun.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50746
--- Comment #4 from Richard Henderson 2011-10-17
17:02:12 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Mon Oct 17 17:02:05 2011
New Revision: 180100
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180100
Log:
PR 50746
* optabs.c (expand_vec_perm_expr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50746
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #5 from Richard H
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51065
Bug #: 51065
Summary: Forwarding functions can be optimized to aliases
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47972
--- Comment #6 from Richard Henderson 2011-11-09
18:09:45 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Wed Nov 9 18:09:42 2011
New Revision: 181223
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181223
Log:
PR libfortran/47972
* runtime/error.c (gf
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51031
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53188
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53200
--- Comment #1 from Richard Henderson 2012-05-02
20:44:51 UTC ---
Please attach the generated auto-config.h file.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53200
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson 2012-05-03
16:36:17 UTC ---
Hmm. I see nothing amiss in that generated config file.
But see if by chance it isn't the same problem as fixed by r187102.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53284
--- Comment #1 from Richard Henderson 2012-05-08
22:39:35 UTC ---
Can you investigate why configure decides that __atomic_compare_exchange_8
is implemented inline? That it isn't inline is obvious from the recursion.
Was the configure change to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53284
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52727
--- Comment #17 from Richard Henderson 2012-05-16
17:49:48 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Wed May 16 17:49:38 2012
New Revision: 187603
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187603
Log:
PR debug/52727
* combine-stack-adj.c (prev_a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52727
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
|unassigned at gcc dot |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #9 from Richard Henderson 2012-06-08
14:10:29 UTC ---
Mine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53602
--- Comment #10 from Richard Henderson 2012-06-09
06:14:34 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Sat Jun 9 06:14:27 2012
New Revision: 188356
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=188356
Log:
PR c++/53602
* combine-stack-adj.c (forc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53602
--- Comment #11 from Richard Henderson 2012-06-09
06:17:27 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Sat Jun 9 06:17:12 2012
New Revision: 188357
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=188357
Log:
PR c++/53602
* combine-stack-adj.c (forc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53602
--- Comment #12 from Richard Henderson 2012-06-09
06:18:53 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Sat Jun 9 06:18:38 2012
New Revision: 188358
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=188358
Log:
PR c++/53602
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53602
--- Comment #13 from Richard Henderson 2012-06-09
16:27:59 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Sat Jun 9 16:27:52 2012
New Revision: 188360
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=188360
Log:
PR c++/53602
* cfgcleanup.c (execute_jum
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53602
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53533
--- Comment #12 from Richard Henderson 2012-06-12
18:54:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> But maybe allowing const_vector in (some of) the define_insn_and_split would
> be the way to go ...
Maybe. It certainly would ease some of the simpli
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53533
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53533
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #16 from Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53533
--- Comment #18 from Richard Henderson 2012-06-15
21:04:49 UTC ---
See comments in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-06/msg01081.html
It's not the vectorization costing, as previously suggested.
|unassigned at gcc dot |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #2 from Richard Henderson 2012-06-22
16:47:00 UTC ---
Mine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53749
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson 2012-06-23
16:42:26 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Sat Jun 23 16:42:19 2012
New Revision: 188909
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=188909
Log:
PR target/53749
* config/i386/i386.c (ix8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53749
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53749
--- Comment #5 from Richard Henderson 2012-06-27
21:30:45 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Wed Jun 27 21:30:41 2012
New Revision: 189026
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=189026
Log:
i386: Fix logic error in r188785
PR target/53749
|ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed||2012-07-25
Host|x86_64-apple-darwin10 |
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54092
--- Comment #2 from Richard Henderson 2012-07-25
15:10:53 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Wed Jul 25 15:10:44 2012
New Revision: 189853
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=189853
Log:
PR bootstrap/54092
* libfuncs.h: Don't i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54092
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54095
Bug #: 54095
Summary: Unnecessary static variable renaming
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priori
||2012-07-27
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53823
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
|unassigned at gcc dot |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #11 from Richard Henderson 2012-07-31
19:58:49 UTC ---
Mine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53823
--- Comment #13 from Richard Henderson 2012-07-31
21:29:52 UTC ---
Created attachment 27914
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27914
Cross-compile output
Hmm. I can't seem to reproduce this via a cross-compiler.
I tried CC='gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53823
--- Comment #18 from Richard Henderson 2012-08-01
02:25:03 UTC ---
But this is what you get when cross-compiling from i686.
3267 rtx temp = expand_mult_const (mode, op0, -coeff, NULL_RTX,
(gdb) p algorithm
$1 = {cost = {cost = 24, latency =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34548
--- Comment #5 from Richard Henderson 2012-08-01
20:41:25 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Wed Aug 1 20:41:16 2012
New Revision: 190051
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=190051
Log:
PR 34548
* function.h (struct rtl_data): Add
1 - 100 of 782 matches
Mail list logo
