What about liveness? No hard reg, pseudo, mem will live avross the
unspec volatile. Right?
Wrong. A volatile unspec may use/change machine state not directly accessible
by gcc. Any use of or changes to the machine state modelled by gcc should be
explicit in the pattern.
i.e. if your pattern
On Thu, 11 Nov 2010, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
roy rosen roy.1ro...@gmail.com writes:
If I have two insns:
r2 = r3
r3 = r4
It seems to me that the dependency analysis creates a dependency
between the two and prevent parallelization. Although there is a
dependency (because of r3) I
Bingfeng Mei b...@broadcom.com writes:
In our port, I created a new NOTE to preserve pragma info. The
note is generated as follows in expanding builtins.
rtx note = emit_note(NOTE_INSN_LOOPCOUNT_PRAGMA_BEG);
rtx vector = gen_rtx_PARALLEL (VOIDmode,
Hi -
2010/11/12 Bingfeng Mei b...@broadcom.com:
Hello,
In our port, I created a new NOTE to preserve pragma info. The
note is generated as follows in expanding builtins.
rtx note = emit_note(NOTE_INSN_LOOPCOUNT_PRAGMA_BEG);
rtx vector = gen_rtx_PARALLEL (VOIDmode,
I am not aware of that. Thank you very much.
Cheers,
Bingfeng
-Original Message-
From: Andreas Schwab [mailto:sch...@redhat.com]
Sent: 12 November 2010 11:24
To: Bingfeng Mei
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: How to debug when some rtx are wrongly reclaimed by
garbage collector?
Hi,
Can anybody give me a hint on where (perhaps some branch) I can find
functionality
which allows during scheduling to un-schedule an instruction? I basically need
a function that does the oposite of schedule_insn.
During scheduling I want o schedule_insn(INSN), then check the ready_list
Alexander is right. Perhaps you can implement the TARGET_SCHED_ADJUST_COST
, then catch in the debugger the two instructions that you expect to be
scheduled together and see what the default latency is or if needed you
may just adjust it to the proper value.
Alex
--- On Fri, 11/12/10,
Hi,
For a private target that i am porting in GCC 4.5 I have the following
pattern in my md file for call value:
(define_insn call_value_op
[(set (match_operand 0 register_operand =da)
(call (mem:QI (match_operand:QI 1 call_operand Wd))
(match_operand:QI 2 )))]
Quoting Mohamed Shafi shafi...@gmail.com:
So i have the following questions:
1. Why is that constraints are not matched here?
Please read the node Register Classes in doc/tm.texi .
On 12 November 2010 18:39, Joern Rennecke amyl...@spamcop.net wrote:
Quoting Mohamed Shafi shafi...@gmail.com:
So i have the following questions:
1. Why is that constraints are not matched here?
Please read the node Register Classes in doc/tm.texi .
I am sorry , could you please highlight
Quoting Mohamed Shafi shafi...@gmail.com:
On 12 November 2010 18:39, Joern Rennecke amyl...@spamcop.net wrote:
Quoting Mohamed Shafi shafi...@gmail.com:
So i have the following questions:
1. Why is that constraints are not matched here?
Please read the node Register Classes in doc/tm.texi
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 10:56 PM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
Georg Johann Lay a...@gjlay.de writes:
Suppose an backend implements some unspec_volatile (UV) and has a
destinct understanding of what it should be.
If other parts of the compiler don't know exactly what to do, it's a
Georg Johann Lay a...@gjlay.de writes:
What about liveness? No hard reg, pseudo, mem will live avross the
unspec volatile. Right?
As Paul noted, this is incorrect.
Might debug info cross unspec volatiles?
Can the back end take the decision?
I don't understand what you mean here. It is
On 12/11/2010 12:51, Mohamed Shafi wrote:
All the constraints are one letter constraints for my target. Here 'W'
is for symbol_ref and all others are register constraints. So for a
particular combination when operand 0 is 'a' and operand 1 is 'W' i
got the following ICE :
I get this ICE
Quoting Dave Korn dave.korn.cyg...@gmail.com:
By combine constraints, you mean Omit all the commas between
alternatives, mash them together in a single string, and expect GCC
to permute
all the possible combinations?
I didn't know that was possible at all. I thought GCC would
Georg Johann Lay a...@gjlay.de writes:
Implementation as outlined as in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-11/msg00222.html
That message describes an implementation rather than a language change.
What is the corresponding language change?
(My personal answer is almost certainly going to be no.
Georg Johann Lay a...@gjlay.de writes:
Hook in and discuss
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-11/msg00232.html
Discuss what? I see at least three different ideas in that message.
Ian
Alex Turjan atur...@yahoo.com writes:
Can anybody give me a hint on where (perhaps some branch) I can find
functionality
which allows during scheduling to un-schedule an instruction? I basically
need
a function that does the oposite of schedule_insn.
During scheduling I want o
On 12/11/2010 15:32, Joern Rennecke wrote:
Quoting Dave Korn dave.korn.cyg...@gmail.com:
By combine constraints, you mean Omit all the commas between
alternatives, mash them together in a single string, and expect GCC
to permute
all the possible combinations?
I didn't know that was
Quoting Dave Korn dave.korn.cyg...@gmail.com:
Is that documented anywhere? I couldn't find it in the
constraints chapters
of the internals manual.
It's in the reload source code...
And there are subtle register priority implications of having merged or
separate alternatives.
On 12/11/2010 16:06, Joern Rennecke wrote:
Quoting Dave Korn:
Is that documented anywhere? I couldn't find it in the constraints
chapters of the internals manual.
It's in the reload source code...
Had a good look through and still couldn't find it, would you mind giving me
a pointer to
Quoting Dave Korn dave.korn.cyg...@gmail.com:
Had a good look through and still couldn't find it, would you mind
giving me
a pointer to where should I start reading?
reload.c line 4094 (as of revision 18)
This is the beta release of binutils 2.21.51.0.1 for Linux, which is
based on binutils 2010 1110 in CVS on sourceware.org plus various
changes. It is purely for Linux.
All relevant patches in patches have been applied to the source tree.
You can take a look at patches/README to see what have been
2010/11/13 Витя Истомин :
Hi, guys. I've got stuck about using dynamic_cast across .so boundaries and
I've investigated this question. So I'm surprised that when I'm not using
RTLD_GLOBAL, your new ABI realization f*cked out dynamic_cast, typeid, and
(!) throw/catch.
Are you in mind, at
Using the new CLooG.org support in gcc trunk, I was able to benchmark the
performance
of gcc trunk built against ppl 0.11 and either legacy cloog support (built
against ppl 0.10.2)
or cloog-isl support. The benchmarks were done on x86_64-apple-darwin10 with...
Compile Command : gfortran
A quick check with...
gfortran -ffast-math -funroll-loops -msse3 -O3 -fgraphite-identity
-ftree-vectorizer-verbose=2 air.f90 -o air air_cloog_legacy.txt
grep LOOP VECTORIZED air_cloog_legacy.txt | wc -l
5
gfortran -ffast-math -funroll-loops -msse3 -O3 -fgraphite-identity
Hello,
* Joseph S. Myers wrote on Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 11:41:17PM CET:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
There is also the libgo directory. The contents of libgo/go are a copy
of the standard Go library and I don't think a review of that would be
useful. But it would be
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45074
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43706
--- Comment #24 from Johannes Singler singler at kit dot edu 2010-11-12
08:15:56 UTC ---
If only one out of 35 tests becomes slower, I would rather blame it to this one
(probably badly parallelized) application, not the OpenMP runtime system. So
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45074
Steffen Schmidt steffen-schmidt at siemens dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43814
Maxim Kuvyrkov mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46376
--- Comment #2 from Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12 09:06:40
UTC ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Fri Nov 12 09:06:37 2010
New Revision: 166645
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=166645
Log:
2010-11-11 Rodrigo Rivas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46165
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression]|[4.3/4.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46448
Summary: [4.6 Regression] [OOP] symbol `__copy_...' is already
defined
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46376
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gordon.magnusson at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46376
Ozkan Sezer sezeroz at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sezeroz at gmail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45343
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46376
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||t7 at gmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46376
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45759
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46449
Summary: Class in a CPP override a class from another CPP
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46375
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
09:57:23 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri Nov 12 09:57:20 2010
New Revision: 166646
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=166646
Log:
PR debug/46375
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46375
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46448
Salvatore Filippone sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45722
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46430
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-11-12 10:09:42 UTC ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Nov 12 10:09:39 2010
New Revision: 166647
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=166647
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46430
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46449
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46165
--- Comment #7 from Zdenek Sojka zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-11-12 10:25:06
UTC ---
I can reproduce it with 4.4 r166509 as follows:
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: /mnt/svn/gcc-4_4/configure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45722
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #22376|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45722
--- Comment #27 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
10:48:47 UTC ---
The reduced testcase compiled with -O generates a SIGBUS at run time:
Program terminated with signal 10, Bus error.
#0 testE () at pr45722.c:50
50
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46312
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46312
--- Comment #9 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
10:51:58 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
So this gets fixed by moving the testcase to a different directory for x86_32
?
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-scal-opt.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46449
--- Comment #2 from charles.gorand.dev at gmail dot com 2010-11-12 11:12:36 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #1)
this is not valid C++,
A warning or an error message should be generated so ?
you can't have two globally-visible classes with the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43814
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de
2010-11-12 11:23:51 UTC ---
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010, mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43814
Maxim Kuvyrkov mkuvyrkov at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43690
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
11:30:29 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Nov 12 11:30:27 2010
New Revision: 166650
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=166650
Log:
Backport from mainline
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45722
--- Comment #28 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
11:20:12 UTC ---
AFAICS Dave's analysis still holds. The problematic insn is
(insn 88 87 89 5 (set (reg:DI 134 [ x$l ])
(mem/c:DI (reg/f:SI 185) [0 MEM[(struct E
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46449
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46107
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
11:28:35 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Nov 12 11:28:32 2010
New Revision: 166649
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=166649
Log:
Backport from mainline
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43706
--- Comment #25 from Alexander Peslyak solar-gcc at openwall dot com
2010-11-12 11:19:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #24)
If only one out of 35 tests becomes slower,
You might have misread what I wrote. I did not mention 35 tests; I mentioned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46312
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
11:50:53 UTC ---
No, it isn't unfortunately fixed anywhere.
vect.exp unfortunately only puts the correct options as default options (if no
dg-options is provided).
I guess
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45997
--- Comment #5 from Dodji Seketeli dodji at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
11:54:42 UTC ---
Hmmh, finally that patch wasn't good enough. I modified it and posted
another one to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-11/msg01277.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46441
Alexander Monakov amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44691
--- Comment #8 from Alexander Monakov amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
11:58:25 UTC ---
*** Bug 46441 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45997
--- Comment #6 from Dodji Seketeli dodji at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
12:04:52 UTC ---
dodji at gcc dot gnu.org gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org writes:
--- Comment #5 from Dodji Seketeli dodji at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
11:54:42 UTC ---
Hmmh,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46446
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46432
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-11-12 12:10:44 UTC ---
FWIW, following the GNU coding standard advice on 'swallowing the semicolon'
avoids the warning:
Index: config/v850/v850.h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45088
--- Comment #7 from Dodji Seketeli dodji at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
12:05:55 UTC ---
Finally the patch I pasted earlier wasn't good enough. I modified it
and proposed it to
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-11/msg01277.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46449
--- Comment #4 from charles.gorand.dev at gmail dot com 2010-11-12 12:17:02 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #3)
Is it a warning/error impossible? It seems a pretty easy error to make.
How you tried compiling with other C++ compiler, like Clang
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46440
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46439
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i?86-*-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46442
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45722
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46450
Summary: xstormy16-elf --enable-werror-always build fails
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46448
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45722
--- Comment #30 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
13:01:56 UTC ---
(insn 88 87 89 5 (set (reg:DI 134 [ x$l ])
(mem/c:DI (reg/f:SI 185) [0 MEM[(struct E *)sE]+0 S8 A8]))
pr45722.c:50 -1
(nil))
The memory has
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46449
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
13:00:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Is it a warning/error impossible? It seems a pretty easy error to make.
How can the compiler know that some other file, which it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45722
--- Comment #31 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
13:09:42 UTC ---
The patch in comment #16 makes sense (it's similar to what we do in
memcpy folding to avoid the situation - and to avoid re-writing of
strict-alignment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45722
--- Comment #32 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
13:14:06 UTC ---
In the long term (read: 4.7) I like to resurrect the lowering of bitfield
accesses from the (old) mem-ref branch and eventually treat unaligned
loads on
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46433
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-11-12 13:20:36 UTC ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Nov 12 13:20:28 2010
New Revision: 166651
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=166651
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46433
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46449
--- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
13:26:40 UTC ---
From the user point of view, linker and assembler are part of the compiler. So
the question is whether the linker could detect this case. But I guess the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46165
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
13:48:51 UTC ---
That is a very different issue then. I don't have yes,rtl,df checking trunk,
wonder if it would ICE with additional -fno-tree-fre -fno-tree-pre.
In both cases
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40974
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45813
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45074
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45967
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45074
--- Comment #5 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12
14:09:12 UTC ---
operand_subword = simplify_gen_subreg = simplify_subreg / validate_subreg:
simplify_gen_subreg (outermode=SImode, op=0x20617000, innermode=DFmode,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46188
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45872
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46191
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46058
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45705
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46452
Summary: Apparently invalid optimization of bitfield access
(4.5 regression?)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45886
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.5.2 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46159
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45983
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46080
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46168
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46165
--- Comment #9 from Zdenek Sojka zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-11-12 14:09:39
UTC ---
trunk r166509 compiles fine, even with -fno-tree-fre -fno-tree-pre:
$ gcc -O -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-copy-prop -fno-tree-dce -fno-tree-fre
-fno-tree-pre
1 - 100 of 192 matches
Mail list logo
