On 05/04/14 00:39, bin.cheng wrote:>
Hi,
I updated and rebased the patch against latest trunk. It passes bootstrap
and regression test on x86/x86_64. Also pr60363 is fixed on
logical_op_short_circuit targets. Is it OK?
Since ssa-dom-thread-4.c is fixed now, I also reverted the XFAIL test for
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 4:53 AM
> To: Bin.Cheng
> Cc: Bin Cheng; gcc-patches List
> Subject: Re: [PATCH GCC]Fix pr60363 by adding backtraced value of phi arg
> along jump threading path
&
On 04/17/14 04:07, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/18/14 04:13, bin.cheng wrote:
Hi,
After control flow graph change made by
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-02/msg01492.html, case
gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-dom-thread-4.c is broken on logical_op_short_c
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 03/18/14 04:13, bin.cheng wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>> After control flow graph change made by
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-02/msg01492.html, case
>> gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-dom-thread-4.c is broken on logical_op_short_circuit
>> targets includ
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 7:30 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 03/18/14 04:13, bin.cheng wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>> After control flow graph change made by
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-02/msg01492.html, case
>> gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-dom-thread-4.c is broken on logical_op_short_circuit
>> targets includ
On 03/18/14 04:13, bin.cheng wrote:
Hi,
After control flow graph change made by
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-02/msg01492.html, case
gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-dom-thread-4.c is broken on logical_op_short_circuit
targets including cortex-m3/cortex-m0.
The regression reveals a missed opportunity
