https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99104
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99104
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:decd8fb0128870d0d768ba53dae626913d6d9c54
commit r11-7274-gdecd8fb0128870d0d768ba53dae626913d6d9c54
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99104
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #50186|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99104
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uros at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99104
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Well, at least if split() does not maintain DF then split patterns may not use
DF. It's as simple as that ;) Note you need DF analyze anyway since even
if present, the DF problem might be out-of-date.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99104
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 50186
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50186=edit
gcc11-pr99104.patch
What a mess! Can we finally get rid of sel-sched?
The x86 backend uses DF inside of the splitter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99104
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
