https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65153
--- Comment #16 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Sat Mar 7 19:35:22 2015
New Revision: 221257
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221257&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/
PR target/65153
* gcc.c-torture/compile/pr65153.c:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65153
Kazumoto Kojima changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65153
--- Comment #14 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Author: kkojima
Date: Wed Feb 25 01:00:29 2015
New Revision: 220957
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220957&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/65153
Backport from mainline: [SH] Fix PR target/65153 with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65153
--- Comment #13 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Author: kkojima
Date: Mon Feb 23 23:24:59 2015
New Revision: 220922
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220922&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/65153
[SH] Fix PR target/65153 with removing movsicc_true+3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65153
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65153
--- Comment #12 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Created attachment 34840
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34840&action=edit
patch for 4_9-branch
I've noticed that that peephole is the last user of sh.c:replace_n_hard_rtx.
I'm testin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65153
--- Comment #11 from Oleg Endo ---
Sure. I was actually referring to trunk all the time :)
I agree to remove the problematic peephole on 4.9 branch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65153
--- Comment #10 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
The new peepholes are fine for trunk even in the stage4 but a bit
invasive to the release branch. For 4.9 branch, I'd like to simply
remove the problematic peephole.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65153
--- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #8)
>
> I've tried to disable the peephole on trunk and compared CSiBE results. It
> seems the peephole doesn't hit very often:
> sum: 3371887 -> 3371943+56 / +0.001661
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65153
--- Comment #8 from Oleg Endo ---
It seems that the problematic peephole is trying to wallpaper some unlucky
register allocation/reload choices like:
before peephole:
mov.w.L26,r1
addr8,r1
movr1,r8
mov#0,r1
mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65153
Kazumoto Kojima changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #34831|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65153
--- Comment #6 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Created attachment 34831
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34831&action=edit
a possible patch
I think the problem is latent on trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65153
--- Comment #5 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Created attachment 34828
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34828&action=edit
reduced testcase
Looks an interesting "why didn't we see it?" target bug.
The problem happens at peephole2 ph
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65153
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65153
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|sh: "insn does not satisfy |[SH][4.9 Regression] "insn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65153
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
16 matches
Mail list logo
