--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-21
16:59 ---
Subject: Bug 21293
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-21 16:58:46
Modified files:
gcc: Change
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-21
16:58 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-21
16:57 ---
Subject: Bug 21293
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-21 16:57:25
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
Added files:
gcc/t
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-16
00:29 ---
Mine, patch posted.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |p
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
16:27 ---
*** Bug 21497 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-02
17:15 ---
Subject: Bug 21293
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: apple-local-200502-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-02 17:15:15
Modified files:
gcc
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-30
03:06 ---
because they are supposed to also be constant, because even though overflowed,
they do not change, ever. :)
constants are constants are constants are constants. If it's not a constant, it
shouldn't be a _
--- Additional Comments From dalej at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-30 02:45
---
Certainly. Presumably the expectation was that overflowed constants would not
get here.
But I confess I don't see why not.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21293
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-30
01:58 ---
This is also what i figured was the patch that fixed it
However, it *is* necessary for correctness because we need to consider constants
to be invariant, or else set_value_handle and friends will break.
We
--- Additional Comments From dalej at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-30 01:56
---
Yes, I figured out that allowing overflowed constants in
is_gimple_min_invariant would fix it. But
that doesn't seem like it should be necessary for correctness. Zdenek changed
it to improve
optimization,
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-30
01:29 ---
Reduced even further:
struct {
double x[1];
} g;
void k( double *, double*);
void h(int Tmp8)
{
int i;
for(i = 1;i <= Tmp8;i++)
k(&g.x[ + -1],&g.x[ Tmp8 + -1]);
}
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-30
01:17 ---
I just checked and a back porting of that patch fixes the ICE.
I might do the bootstrap/testing if I get some time tomorrow or later this week.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-30
01:10 ---
This works on the mainline but fails on the 4.0.0 branch.
I think this was fixed on the mainline by:
2005-03-14 Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* tree-cfg.c (find_taken_edge_cond_expr): Use zero
13 matches
Mail list logo
