http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55981
Jackie Rosen jackie.rosen at hushmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55981
--- Comment #11 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-17 16:25:04 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Jan 17 16:24:54 2013
New Revision: 195273
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195273
Log:
PR target/55981
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55981
--- Comment #12 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-17 22:51:07 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Jan 17 22:51:00 2013
New Revision: 195283
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195283
Log:
Backport from mainline
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55981
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55981
Paul E. McKenney paulmck at linux dot vnet.ibm.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55981
--- Comment #5 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2013-01-15 14:22:14
UTC ---
Obviously, not all DImode immediates are atomic. I have a patch that prohibits
moves of immediates that do not satisfy e constraints to volatile memories.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55981
--- Comment #6 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2013-01-15 14:25:33
UTC ---
Created attachment 29169
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29169
Patch that prevents non-atomic immediates in moves to volatile memory
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55981
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55981
--- Comment #8 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2013-01-15 19:37:55
UTC ---
Actually, the patch from comment(In reply to comment #6)
Created attachment 29169 [details]
Patch that prevents non-atomic immediates in moves to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55981
--- Comment #9 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2013-01-15 19:39:20
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
(In reply to comment #2)
Btw, the same happens if atomic is replaced with volatile unsigned long y
-
which does not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55981
--- Comment #10 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2013-01-15 20:01:41
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
(In reply to comment #4)
(In reply to comment #2)
Btw, the same happens if atomic is replaced with volatile unsigned long
11 matches
Mail list logo