https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #68 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #67)
> (In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #66)
> > Created attachment 57750 [details]
> > Patch comparing jump functions
> >
> > I'm testing this patch. (Not s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #67 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #66)
> Created attachment 57750 [details]
> Patch comparing jump functions
>
> I'm testing this patch. (Not sure how to best check that it does not
> inadvertently
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #66 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 57750
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57750&action=edit
Patch comparing jump functions
I'm testing this patch. (Not sure how to best check that it does not
inadvert
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #65 from Martin Jambor ---
I hope to have some jump-function comparison functions ready for testing later
today.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #64 from Jan Hubicka ---
> Are you going to apply this patch, even if it just helps partially with some
> tests and not others?
I think we should fix this completely, since it is source of very
suprising bugs. I discussed it with Ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #63 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #58)
> Created attachment 57702 [details]
> Compare value ranges in jump functions
s/functoins/functions/
Are you going to apply this patch, even if it just helps par
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #62 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9f255e4baac68fc3568820cdca9412f67ff07940
commit r13-8451-g9f255e4baac68fc3568820cdca9412f67ff07940
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #61 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The originally reported bug should be fixed for GCC 14 but the others like #c54
and #c58 are not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #60 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7580e39452b65ab5fb5a06f3f1ad7d59720269b5
commit r14-9476-g7580e39452b65ab5fb5a06f3f1ad7d59720269b5
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #59 from Jan Hubicka ---
just to explain what happens in the testcase. There is test and testb. They
are almost same:
int
testb(void)
{
struct bar *fp;
test2 ((void *)&fp);
fp = NULL;
(*ptr)++;
test3 ((void *)&fp);
}
the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #58 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 57702
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57702&action=edit
Compare value ranges in jump functions
This patch implements the jump function compare, however it is not good
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #57 from Jan Hubicka ---
> So, we can punt on differences there (that is desirable for backporting and
> maybe GCC 14 too), or we could at that point populate an int vector, which
> maps
Yep, that is what I do.
I had bug in that so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #56 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #55)
> It is however not hard to match the jump function while walking gimple
> bodies and comparing statements, which is backportable and localized. I am
> still waiti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #55 from Jan Hubicka ---
> Anyway, can we in the spot my patch changed just walk all
> source->node->callees > cgraph_edges, for each of them find the corresponding
> cgraph_edge in the alias > and for each walk all the jump_functi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
--- Comment #54 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Slightly adjusted #c41 testcase, which indeed still fails with my patch at -O2:
int d[100], c;
static __attribute__((noinline))
int foo (int x, unsigned int y)
{
if (y > 30)
++c;
return x + y;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lutztonineubert at gmail dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113907
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14 regression] ICU |[11/12/13/14 regression]
17 matches
Mail list logo
