subject:"\[Bug middle\-end\/53093\] \[4.8 Regression\]\: tls\/alias\-1.c ICE, emutls"

[Bug middle-end/53093] [4.8 Regression]: tls/alias-1.c ICE, emutls

2012-05-31 Thread hp at gcc dot gnu.org

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53093 Hans-Peter Nilsson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/53093] [4.8 Regression]: tls/alias-1.c ICE, emutls

2012-05-03 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53093 --- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka 2012-05-03 19:22:07 UTC --- Author: hubicka Date: Thu May 3 19:22:03 2012 New Revision: 187115 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187115 Log: PR middle-end/53093 * tree-emutls.c (new_e

[Bug middle-end/53093] [4.8 Regression]: tls/alias-1.c ICE, emutls

2012-05-02 Thread hubicka at ucw dot cz

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53093 --- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka 2012-05-02 14:34:02 UTC --- > > > > Does the aliases behave sanely with emutls? > > > How do I tell? > > Honestly I hoped you will know. Emutls is not my area. > > I should have mentioned that the other tests cove

[Bug middle-end/53093] [4.8 Regression]: tls/alias-1.c ICE, emutls

2012-04-27 Thread hp at gcc dot gnu.org

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53093 --- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2012-04-27 13:15:51 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > > > Does the aliases behave sanely with emutls? > > How do I tell? > Honestly I hoped you will know. Emutls is not my area. I should have mentioned tha

[Bug middle-end/53093] [4.8 Regression]: tls/alias-1.c ICE, emutls

2012-04-27 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53093 --- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka 2012-04-27 12:03:00 UTC --- > > Does the aliases behave sanely with emutls? > > How do I tell? Honestly I hoped you will know. Emutls is not my area. I will try to play with it on i386 target. Should not be too

[Bug middle-end/53093] [4.8 Regression]: tls/alias-1.c ICE, emutls

2012-04-26 Thread hp at gcc dot gnu.org

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53093 --- Comment #5 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2012-04-26 23:43:39 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > Can you, please try once again the attached patch? It should restore the > original behavior. In progress. Considering the amount of gcc work you do,

[Bug middle-end/53093] [4.8 Regression]: tls/alias-1.c ICE, emutls

2012-04-26 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53093 --- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka 2012-04-26 21:13:35 UTC --- Created attachment 27250 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27250 proposed fix. Thank you. I actually found why the numbers does not match. I was wrong with my previous

[Bug middle-end/53093] [4.8 Regression]: tls/alias-1.c ICE, emutls

2012-04-26 Thread hp at gcc dot gnu.org

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53093 --- Comment #3 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2012-04-26 14:20:44 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > Can you, please, test the following patch? I will try to work out why this > did not ICE before. Works for me; fixes the regression, x to cris-elf at

[Bug middle-end/53093] [4.8 Regression]: tls/alias-1.c ICE, emutls

2012-04-25 Thread hubicka at ucw dot cz

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53093 --- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka 2012-04-25 17:06:41 UTC --- Hi, the problem seems to be quite easy. We have variable and alias. The code first counts number of variables and allocated vectors, then it inserts aliases, too, and the length of vect