--- Comment #18 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-04 20:54 ---
Subject: Bug 37889
Author: bonzini
Date: Wed Feb 4 20:54:36 2009
New Revision: 143939
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143939
Log:
2009-02-04 Paolo Bonzini
Hans-Peter Nilsson
--- Comment #17 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 17:57 ---
Thanks, I'll merge it with mine, bootstrap/regtest i686-pc-linux-gnu and submit
it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37889
--- Comment #16 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-03 17:54 ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> If you submit it, I'll happily take care of the conflicts.
I've put it in the PR, though it's not a proper submit yet.
Also, only regtested for cris-elf on the 4.3 branch and
x86_64-unknown-l
--- Comment #15 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 16:40 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression] SEGV,
conditional execution proactively executed the false arm.
> Yes, I found that out too ;) but haven't had time to follow up.
> FWIW, I have an overlapping patch for PR38921
--- Comment #14 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-03 16:34 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> No, the patch does not fix it.
Yes, I found that out too ;) but haven't had time to follow up.
FWIW, I have an overlapping patch for PR38921 that does fold the code as
suggested. It doesn't
--- Comment #13 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 15:48 ---
Created an attachment (id=17235)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17235&action=view)
patch to be tested
The patch fixes the bug. As a follow up (see PR38921 audit trail)
MTP_AFTER_MOVE and MTP_UNALIGNED
--- Comment #12 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 15:19 ---
But at least it gets cc1 to call rtx_addr_can_trap_p_1. Mine
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #11 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 15:15 ---
No, the patch does not fix it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37889
--- Comment #10 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-01 05:54 ---
Ok, I'm on it.
--
hp at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned
--
hp at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37889
--- Comment #9 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-31 22:25 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Can you check comment #6?
Sorry, I'm a bit busy right now, but will as soon as I can.
On the other hand, anyone can check it, so it's not necessary to keep this PR
"busy".
--
hp at gcc dot
--- Comment #8 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-01-31 15:32 ---
Can you check comment #6?
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-24 10:20 ---
GCC 4.3.3 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-21 03:53 ---
There's reason to believe the patch in PR38921, fixes this bug too, by divine
mockery. I haven't verified yet, though. It would destroy the suspense...
--
hp at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Remo
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37889
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-22 16:28 ---
If the array has known bounds, we could say that accesses above bounds trap
and likely it wouldn't hurt much. But for
extern const char *reg_names[];
where we don't know the bounds, we'd have to assume the worst, i.e.
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-22 14:28 ---
trunk is also broken the same way.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
17 matches
Mail list logo
