--- Comment #41 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-02-15 13:39 ---
*** Bug 34720 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #40 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-02-11 08:59 ---
Richi, thanks for the fix.
Fixed.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #39 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-11 08:27
---
Subject: Bug 33992
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Feb 11 08:27:00 2008
New Revision: 132234
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=132234
Log:
2008-02-11 Uros Bizjak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Richar
--- Comment #38 from dirtyepic at gentoo dot org 2008-02-11 01:34 ---
yep, profiledbootstrap w/ BOOT_CFLAGS="-O2" on x86_64 is working now. i'll try
to get it tested on ppc64 to see if it fixes PR34720 too.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33992
--- Comment #37 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-10 22:43
---
Created an attachment (id=15129)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15129&action=view)
patch
I'm bootstrapping and regtesting it (it fixes the testcase). Maybe someone
can do a profiledbootstrap
--- Comment #36 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-10 22:36
---
Actually the wrong types are caused by loop IM which replaces the bittest
D.1210_17 = D.1208_13 >> 63;
D.1211_2 = (int) D.1210_17;
if (D.1211_1 != 0)
by
shifttmp.48_12 = 0x8000;
shifttmp.48
--- Comment #35 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-10 22:08
---
The source is very likely a type mismatch in the IL (the foldings are correct,
but also strictly unneccessary). In principle it goes as follows. We have
a comparison
op0 OP op1
where op0 and op1 are required
--- Comment #34 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-02-10 14:32 ---
BTW: Although patch from Comment #31 is probably not correct, it fixes
profiledbootstrap.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33992
--- Comment #33 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-02-10 14:31 ---
(In reply to comment #32)
> Seriously this needs more thinking that patch. Since after your patch, we
> have
> a type mismatch.
I will leave this problem to tree expert then.
(BTW: There is another fold_convert in fo
--- Comment #32 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-10 13:49
---
- fold_convert (TREE_TYPE (op1), rhs0),
+ fold_convert (TREE_TYPE (rhs0),
rhs0),
op1, !sing
--- Comment #31 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-02-10 13:45 ---
Patch in testing:
Index: tree-ssa-forwprop.c
===
--- tree-ssa-forwprop.c (revision 132202)
+++ tree-ssa-forwprop.c (working copy)
@@ -376,7 +376,7 @@ forwar
--- Comment #30 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-02-10 12:31 ---
tree-optimization
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-en
12 matches
Mail list logo
