public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
@ 2004-05-02 13:01 ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-05-02 14:04 ` [Bug optimization/15248] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (19 more replies)
0 siblings, 20 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2004-05-02 13:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
Under certain circumstances, the reload pass may generate stores to read-only
memory, thus producing executables that will segfault at run time.
The pattern is the following: a REG_EQUAL note in a set of a pseudo containing a
MEM/u is promoted by local-alloc to a REG_EQUIV note; during reload, the pseudo
doesn't get a hard reg so is replaced by its equivalent memory location as the
destination of the set.
This had affected the 3.3 branch (PR opt/13634, opt/13472, opt/14529) and the
3.4 branch (PR opt/15112), and was fixed by not recording MEM/u as equivalent
memory locations for pseudos altogether.
More sophisticated solutions can probably be devised so as to avoid the
unnecessary spills to the frame that are currently produced.
--
Summary: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
Product: gcc
Version: 3.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: *-*-*
GCC host triplet: *-*-*
GCC target triplet: *-*-*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug optimization/15248] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2004-05-02 14:04 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-09-17 10:38 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] " steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (18 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2004-05-02 14:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-05-02 14:04 -------
Confirmed.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed| |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2004-05-02 14:04:36
date| |
Target Milestone|--- |3.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-05-02 14:04 ` [Bug optimization/15248] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2004-09-17 10:38 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-09-19 13:13 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (17 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: steven at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2004-09-17 10:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-09-17 10:38 -------
Does this bug still exist, now that RTX_UNCHANGING is gone?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-05-02 14:04 ` [Bug optimization/15248] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-09-17 10:38 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] " steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2004-09-19 13:13 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-01-31 6:52 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (16 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2004-09-19 13:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-09-19 13:13 -------
> Does this bug still exist, now that RTX_UNCHANGING is gone?
I think so. From the point of view of read-only memory, Richard's patch was
only a renaming, in particular in local-alloc.c, so I think the scenario I
described can still happen. Note that we don't have testcases for mainline though.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2004-09-19 13:13 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-01-31 6:52 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-04-19 6:54 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (15 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-01-31 6:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|4.0.0 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2005-01-31 6:52 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-04-19 6:54 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-04-19 10:04 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0/4.1 Regression] " giovannibajo at libero dot it
` (14 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-04-19 6:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-19 06:54 -------
The problem has resurfaced on mainline:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-04/msg01052.html
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |law at redhat dot com
Last reconfirmed|2004-08-01 00:24:37 |2005-04-19 06:54:12
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0/4.1 Regression] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2005-04-19 6:54 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-04-19 10:04 ` giovannibajo at libero dot it
2005-04-20 17:05 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (13 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: giovannibajo at libero dot it @ 2005-04-19 10:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-04-19 10:03 -------
Eric, if you confirm that this bug is fixed in 3.3 and 3.4, then this is a
(latent) regression on mainline and 4.0.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Known to work| |3.4.4 3.3.5
Summary|Reload may generate stores |[4.0/4.1 Regression] Reload
|to read-only memory |may generate stores to read-
| |only memory
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0/4.1 Regression] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2005-04-19 10:04 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0/4.1 Regression] " giovannibajo at libero dot it
@ 2005-04-20 17:05 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-04-30 22:10 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0 " ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-04-20 17:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-20 17:04 -------
> Eric, if you confirm that this bug is fixed in 3.3 and 3.4, then this is a
> (latent) regression on mainline and 4.0.
It is indeed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0 Regression] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2005-04-20 17:05 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-04-30 22:10 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-05-03 19:25 ` law at redhat dot com
` (11 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-04-30 22:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-30 22:10 -------
The same fix was applied to mainline. Jeff, please consider backporting your
patch to 4.0 branch so that we be definitely done with this nasty problem.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|[4.0/4.1 Regression] Reload |[4.0 Regression] Reload may
|may generate stores to read-|generate stores to read-only
|only memory |memory
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0 Regression] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2005-04-30 22:10 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0 " ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-05-03 19:25 ` law at redhat dot com
2005-05-03 19:35 ` mark at codesourcery dot com
` (10 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: law at redhat dot com @ 2005-05-03 19:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-05-03 19:25 -------
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] Reload may
generate stores to read-only memory
On Sat, 2005-04-30 at 22:10 +0000, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
wrote:
> ------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-30 22:10 -------
> The same fix was applied to mainline. Jeff, please consider backporting your
> patch to 4.0 branch so that we be definitely done with this nasty problem.
No strong opinions here -- it's certainly a latent bug, but triggering
it is relatively difficult with 4.0.
Basically we need to evaluate the risk/reward. We can fix this with the
exact same patch that we're using in mainline right now which hasn't
caused us any problems yet. That patch is also very similar to what was
done for one or more of the 3.x release branches. I consider the patch
relatively safe.
What's the reward -- a latent code generation bug is fixed.
So is the reward worth the small risk the patch poses?
[ Note that if we had a bug report with 4.0 which was traceable to
this problem, then I'd clearly land on the side of installing the
patch. ]
Jeff
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0 Regression] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2005-05-03 19:25 ` law at redhat dot com
@ 2005-05-03 19:35 ` mark at codesourcery dot com
2005-05-07 16:52 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: mark at codesourcery dot com @ 2005-05-03 19:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-05-03 19:35 -------
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] Reload may generate
stores to read-only memory
Jeffrey A Law wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-04-30 at 22:10 +0000, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
> wrote:
>
>>------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-30 22:10 -------
>>The same fix was applied to mainline. Jeff, please consider backporting your
>>patch to 4.0 branch so that we be definitely done with this nasty problem.
>
> No strong opinions here -- it's certainly a latent bug, but triggering
> it is relatively difficult with 4.0.
>
> Basically we need to evaluate the risk/reward. We can fix this with the
> exact same patch that we're using in mainline right now which hasn't
> caused us any problems yet. That patch is also very similar to what was
> done for one or more of the 3.x release branches. I consider the patch
> relatively safe.
>
> What's the reward -- a latent code generation bug is fixed.
>
> So is the reward worth the small risk the patch poses?
>
> [ Note that if we had a bug report with 4.0 which was traceable to
> this problem, then I'd clearly land on the side of installing the
> patch. ]
I don't know that I'm in a position to make a good decision here, but I
do agree with Jeff -- it would be a lot more compelling to make the
change if there was actually a demonstrable problem -- especially coming
from non-synthetic code.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0 Regression] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2005-05-03 19:35 ` mark at codesourcery dot com
@ 2005-05-07 16:52 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-05-09 0:20 ` mark at codesourcery dot com
` (8 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-05-07 16:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-07 16:52 -------
> I don't know that I'm in a position to make a good decision here, but I
> do agree with Jeff -- it would be a lot more compelling to make the
> change if there was actually a demonstrable problem -- especially coming
> from non-synthetic code.
I presume you'd like to have a testcase that fails with 4.0.x? Because I can
hardly think of a more demonstrable problem than this one: Jeff's analysis for
4.1.x was exactly the same as mine for 3.3.x and nothing has changed in the code.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mark at codesourcery dot com
Known to work|3.4.4 3.3.5 |3.4.4 3.3.5 4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0 Regression] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2005-05-07 16:52 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-05-09 0:20 ` mark at codesourcery dot com
2005-05-17 17:04 ` law at redhat dot com
` (7 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: mark at codesourcery dot com @ 2005-05-09 0:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-05-09 00:20 -------
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] Reload may generate
stores to read-only memory
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> ------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-07 16:52 -------
>
>>I don't know that I'm in a position to make a good decision here, but I
>>do agree with Jeff -- it would be a lot more compelling to make the
>>change if there was actually a demonstrable problem -- especially coming
>>from non-synthetic code.
>
>
> I presume you'd like to have a testcase that fails with 4.0.x? Because I can
> hardly think of a more demonstrable problem than this one: Jeff's analysis for
> 4.1.x was exactly the same as mine for 3.3.x and nothing has changed in the code.
Yes, a 4.0 testcase was what I had in mind. If you don't think it's
easy to come up with one, but you are sure that people are likely to run
into this bug, let me know.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0 Regression] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2005-05-09 0:20 ` mark at codesourcery dot com
@ 2005-05-17 17:04 ` law at redhat dot com
2005-07-06 16:41 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: law at redhat dot com @ 2005-05-17 17:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-05-17 17:03 -------
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] Reload may
generate stores to read-only memory
On Sat, 2005-05-07 at 16:52 +0000, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
wrote:
> ------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-07 16:52 -------
> > I don't know that I'm in a position to make a good decision here, but I
> > do agree with Jeff -- it would be a lot more compelling to make the
> > change if there was actually a demonstrable problem -- especially coming
> > from non-synthetic code.
>
> I presume you'd like to have a testcase that fails with 4.0.x? Because I can
> hardly think of a more demonstrable problem than this one: Jeff's analysis for
> 4.1.x was exactly the same as mine for 3.3.x and nothing has changed in the code.
It's still a relatively difficult bug to tickle. It only appeared in
the mainline as a side effect of improvements to the jump threading code
Block duplication followed by redundancy elimination resulted in having
a pseudo-pseudo copy where the source pseudo was equivalent to a
readonly mem and the RTL optimizers did not eliminate the pseudo-pseudo
copy.
Bernd has done some additional work on this problem and we may be
converging on a better solution than simply ignoring these problematical
equivalences.
Jeff
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0 Regression] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2005-05-17 17:04 ` law at redhat dot com
@ 2005-07-06 16:41 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-07-06 16:48 ` law at redhat dot com
` (5 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-07-06 16:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-06 16:41 -------
Postponed until 4.0.2.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|4.0.1 |4.0.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0 Regression] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2005-07-06 16:41 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-07-06 16:48 ` law at redhat dot com
2005-07-07 10:19 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: law at redhat dot com @ 2005-07-06 16:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-07-06 16:47 -------
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] Reload may
generate stores to read-only memory
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 16:41 +0000, mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
wrote:
> ------- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-06 16:41 -------
> Postponed until 4.0.2.
Probably wise. I know Bernd had to go through a couple iterations on
the fixes. Hopefully they've settled down enough that we can consider
the final fix for 4.0.2.
jeff
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0 Regression] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2005-07-06 16:48 ` law at redhat dot com
@ 2005-07-07 10:19 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-18 9:51 ` bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-07-07 10:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-07 10:19 -------
> Probably wise. I know Bernd had to go through a couple iterations on
> the fixes. Hopefully they've settled down enough that we can consider
> the final fix for 4.0.2.
Or we could simply put the "quick fix" on the 4.0 branch, like on 3.3 and 3.4.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0 Regression] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (15 preceding siblings ...)
2005-07-07 10:19 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-08-18 9:51 ` bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-22 16:47 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-08-18 9:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-18 09:45 -------
The "quick fix", for the record, is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-04/txt00083.txt
It makes sense to apply this to 4.0.2, and be done with this bug, since Jeff and
others decided on mainline that this problem is rare enough to care about the
pessimization.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
URL| |http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
| |patches/2005-04/txt00083.txt
Keywords| |patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0 Regression] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (16 preceding siblings ...)
2005-08-18 9:51 ` bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-08-22 16:47 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-29 15:05 ` bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-29 15:16 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-08-22 16:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-22 16:31 -------
Let's go with the quick fix, for 4.0.2, for now. If we get a better fix, fine;
but let's not have this bug in 4.0.2.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0 Regression] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (17 preceding siblings ...)
2005-08-22 16:47 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-08-29 15:05 ` bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-29 15:16 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-08-29 15:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-29 14:41 -------
All branches now have the "quick fix".
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0 Regression] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (18 preceding siblings ...)
2005-08-29 15:05 ` bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-08-29 15:16 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-08-29 15:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-29 14:58 -------
Subject: Bug 15248
CVSROOT: /cvs/gcc
Module name: gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: bonzini@gcc.gnu.org 2005-08-29 14:41:20
Modified files:
gcc : reload1.c ChangeLog
Log message:
2005-08-29 Paolo Bonzini <bonzini@gnu.org>
PR rtl-optimization/15248
* reload1.c (reload): Ignore equivalences between pseudos and
read only memory.
Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/reload1.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.461.6.3&r2=1.461.6.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=2.7592.2.400&r2=2.7592.2.401
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-08-29 15:07 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-05-02 13:01 [Bug optimization/15248] New: Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-05-02 14:04 ` [Bug optimization/15248] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-09-17 10:38 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] " steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-09-19 13:13 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-01-31 6:52 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-04-19 6:54 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-04-19 10:04 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0/4.1 Regression] " giovannibajo at libero dot it
2005-04-20 17:05 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-04-30 22:10 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0 " ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-05-03 19:25 ` law at redhat dot com
2005-05-03 19:35 ` mark at codesourcery dot com
2005-05-07 16:52 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-05-09 0:20 ` mark at codesourcery dot com
2005-05-17 17:04 ` law at redhat dot com
2005-07-06 16:41 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-07-06 16:48 ` law at redhat dot com
2005-07-07 10:19 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-18 9:51 ` bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-22 16:47 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-29 15:05 ` bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-08-29 15:16 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).