[Bug tree-optimization/21831] [4.1 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-97.c fails

2005-05-30 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org


-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
   Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21831


[Bug tree-optimization/21831] [4.1 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-97.c fails

2005-06-06 Thread kbesaw at us dot ibm dot com

--- Additional Comments From kbesaw at us dot ibm dot com  2005-06-06 23:45 
---
I tried vect-97.c on power-pc and couldn't reproduce the problem.
I don't know if this means that the problem goes away with recent
patches or that it only occurs when vectorizing on ia64.  I don't
have the ability to build and test on ia64.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21831


[Bug tree-optimization/21831] [4.1 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-97.c fails

2005-06-07 Thread dorit at il dot ibm dot com

--- Additional Comments From dorit at il dot ibm dot com  2005-06-07 07:42 
---
> I tried vect-97.c on power-pc and couldn't reproduce the problem.
> I don't know if this means that the problem goes away with recent
> patches or that it only occurs when vectorizing on ia64.  I don't
> have the ability to build and test on ia64.

I don't see this failure anymore on i686-pc-linux-gnu and powerpc-apple-darwin.



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21831


[Bug tree-optimization/21831] [4.1 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-97.c fails

2005-06-07 Thread joseph at codesourcery dot com

--- Additional Comments From joseph at codesourcery dot com  2005-06-07 
17:10 ---
Subject: Re:  [4.1 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-97.c
 fails

On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, dorit at il dot ibm dot com wrote:

> 
> --- Additional Comments From dorit at il dot ibm dot com  2005-06-07 
> 07:42 ---
> > I tried vect-97.c on power-pc and couldn't reproduce the problem.
> > I don't know if this means that the problem goes away with recent
> > patches or that it only occurs when vectorizing on ia64.  I don't
> > have the ability to build and test on ia64.
> 
> I don't see this failure anymore on i686-pc-linux-gnu and 
> powerpc-apple-darwin.

When were you seeing it on those platforms?  My monitoring has never shown 
this as an i686-pc-linux-gnu failure, but it still fails on ia64-hpux, 
both -milp32 and -mlp64, as of today's mainline.



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21831


[Bug tree-optimization/21831] [4.1 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-97.c fails

2005-06-07 Thread dorit at il dot ibm dot com

--- Additional Comments From dorit at il dot ibm dot com  2005-06-07 19:49 
---
> When were you seeing it on those platforms?  My monitoring has never shown 
> this as an i686-pc-linux-gnu failure, but it still fails on ia64-hpux, 
> both -milp32 and -mlp64, as of today's mainline.

you're right, I might have never seen this failure on these platforms.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21831


[Bug tree-optimization/21831] [4.1 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-97.c fails

2005-09-15 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-09-16 
00:53 ---
Fixed so closing.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21831


[Bug tree-optimization/21831] [4.1 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-97.c fails

2005-09-15 Thread janis at gcc dot gnu dot org

--- Additional Comments From janis at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-09-16 00:45 
---
Test vect-97.c currently passes on ia64-linux and passed on alpha-dec-osf5.1b
on 20050805, and the submitter said it passes on ia64-hpux; this PR can
probably be closed.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21831


[Bug tree-optimization/21831] [4.1 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-97.c fails

2005-06-14 Thread jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org

--- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-06-14 16:12 
---
Appeared between 2005-05-29 13:00 UTC and 2005-05-29 14:30 UTC.  I.e., caused 
by:

Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-05-29 13:14:43

Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog tree-flow.h tree-optimize.c 
 tree-ssa-alias.c tree-vect-transform.c 

Log message:
2005-05-29  Keith Besaw  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

* tree-ssa-alias.c (new_type_alias): New procedure to
create a type memory tag for a pointer with a may-alias
set determined from a variable declaration.
* tree-flow.h: export declaration of new_type_alias
* tree-optimize.c (init_tree_optimization_passes): document
that pass_may_alias cannot be called after pass_vectorize.
* tree-vect-transform (vect_create_data_ref_ptr): Call
new_type_alias when an type memory tag isn't available
for a reference.
(vectorizable_store): Use copy_virtual_operands to update
virtual defs in place (so that loop_version can be called).
Call mark_for_renaming for the virtual defs in case peeling
is done and virtual uses outside the loop need to be updated.

The problem ought to be reproducible with a cross-compiler cc1.


-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||dorit at gcc dot gnu dot
   ||org, kbesaw at us dot ibm
   ||dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21831


[Bug tree-optimization/21831] [4.1 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-97.c fails

2005-06-28 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu dot org

--- Additional Comments From ro at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-06-28 20:39 
---
Also occurs on alpha-dec-osf5.1b as of 20050627:

FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-97.c (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
/vol/gnu/src/gcc/gcc-dist/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-97.c:11: error:
Definition in block 0 follows the use
for SSA_NAME: cb_137 in statement:
#   VUSE ;
vect_var_.51_89 = *vect_pcb.52_88;
/vol/gnu/src/gcc/gcc-dist/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-97.c:11: internal
compiler error: verify_ssa failed.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ro at techfak dot uni-
   ||bielefeld dot de


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21831


[Bug tree-optimization/21831] [4.1 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-97.c fails

2005-07-30 Thread jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org

--- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-30 19:50 
---
Started passing again on ia64-hpux between 20050708 and 20050711, I don't know
about on the other platforms discussed.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21831