* [Bug tree-optimization/24146] Optimizes away FPU control word store
2005-09-30 13:42 [Bug tree-optimization/24146] New: Optimizes away FPU control word store rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-09-30 13:46 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-30 13:58 ` rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-09-30 13:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30 13:46 -------
volatile is needed here.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24146
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/24146] Optimizes away FPU control word store
2005-09-30 13:42 [Bug tree-optimization/24146] New: Optimizes away FPU control word store rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-30 13:46 ` [Bug tree-optimization/24146] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-09-30 13:58 ` rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-30 14:07 ` Daniel Berlin
2005-09-30 14:00 ` [Bug tree-optimization/24146] [4.0 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-09-30 13:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30 13:58 -------
(In reply to comment #1)
> volatile is needed here.
No, the manual says:
An @code{asm} instruction without any output operands will be treated
identically to a volatile @code{asm} instruction.
So this insn should be kept even though it isn't explicitly volatile.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24146
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug tree-optimization/24146] Optimizes away FPU control word store
2005-09-30 13:58 ` rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-09-30 14:07 ` Daniel Berlin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Berlin @ 2005-09-30 14:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugzilla; +Cc: gcc-bugs
On Fri, 2005-09-30 at 13:58 +0000, rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org
wrote:
> ------- Additional Comments From rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30 13:58 -------
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > volatile is needed here.
>
> No, the manual says:
> An @code{asm} instruction without any output operands will be treated
> identically to a volatile @code{asm} instruction.
>
> So this insn should be kept even though it isn't explicitly volatile.
>
Then i guess we should teach the FE to just mark them volatile, so we
don't have to worry about this in the middle end.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/24146] [4.0 Regression] Optimizes away FPU control word store
2005-09-30 13:42 [Bug tree-optimization/24146] New: Optimizes away FPU control word store rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-30 13:46 ` [Bug tree-optimization/24146] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-30 13:58 ` rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-09-30 14:00 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-30 14:04 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-09-30 14:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|Optimizes away FPU control |[4.0 Regression] Optimizes
|word store |away FPU control word store
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24146
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/24146] [4.0 Regression] Optimizes away FPU control word store
2005-09-30 13:42 [Bug tree-optimization/24146] New: Optimizes away FPU control word store rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2005-09-30 14:00 ` [Bug tree-optimization/24146] [4.0 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-09-30 14:04 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-30 14:07 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-09-30 14:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30 14:04 -------
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19341 ***
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |DUPLICATE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24146
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/24146] [4.0 Regression] Optimizes away FPU control word store
2005-09-30 13:42 [Bug tree-optimization/24146] New: Optimizes away FPU control word store rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2005-09-30 14:04 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-09-30 14:07 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-30 14:18 ` Daniel Berlin
2005-09-30 14:07 ` dberlin at dberlin dot org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-09-30 14:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30 14:07 -------
I still say this is invalid.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|DUPLICATE |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24146
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/24146] [4.0 Regression] Optimizes away FPU control word store
2005-09-30 13:42 [Bug tree-optimization/24146] New: Optimizes away FPU control word store rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2005-09-30 14:07 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-09-30 14:07 ` dberlin at dberlin dot org
2005-09-30 14:11 ` bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: dberlin at dberlin dot org @ 2005-09-30 14:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30 14:07 -------
Subject: Re: Optimizes away FPU control word
store
On Fri, 2005-09-30 at 13:58 +0000, rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org
wrote:
> ------- Additional Comments From rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30 13:58 -------
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > volatile is needed here.
>
> No, the manual says:
> An @code{asm} instruction without any output operands will be treated
> identically to a volatile @code{asm} instruction.
>
> So this insn should be kept even though it isn't explicitly volatile.
>
Then i guess we should teach the FE to just mark them volatile, so we
don't have to worry about this in the middle end.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24146
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/24146] [4.0 Regression] Optimizes away FPU control word store
2005-09-30 13:42 [Bug tree-optimization/24146] New: Optimizes away FPU control word store rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2005-09-30 14:07 ` dberlin at dberlin dot org
@ 2005-09-30 14:11 ` bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-30 14:11 ` bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-09-30 14:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever Confirmed| |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-09-30 14:11:11
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24146
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/24146] [4.0 Regression] Optimizes away FPU control word store
2005-09-30 13:42 [Bug tree-optimization/24146] New: Optimizes away FPU control word store rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2005-09-30 14:11 ` bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-09-30 14:11 ` bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-30 14:17 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-09-30 14:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30 14:10 -------
Richard Earnshaw is right; this is not a dup of PR19341.
volatile-ness is about optimizing away the asm statement itself; PR19341 is
about optimizing away code needed by the asm.
Reopening.
rth, should this be fixed in the front-end or in the gimplifier?
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24146
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/24146] [4.0 Regression] Optimizes away FPU control word store
2005-09-30 13:42 [Bug tree-optimization/24146] New: Optimizes away FPU control word store rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2005-09-30 14:11 ` bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-09-30 14:17 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-30 14:19 ` dberlin at dberlin dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-09-30 14:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30 14:17 -------
Hmm, the comment in c-typeck.c:
/* Build an asm-expr, whose components are a STRING, some OUTPUTS,
some INPUTS, and some CLOBBERS. The latter three may be NULL.
SIMPLE indicates whether there was anything at all after the
string in the asm expression -- asm("blah") and asm("blah" : )
are subtly different. We use a ASM_EXPR node to represent this. */
so maybe this is invalid after all.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24146
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/24146] [4.0 Regression] Optimizes away FPU control word store
2005-09-30 13:42 [Bug tree-optimization/24146] New: Optimizes away FPU control word store rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2005-09-30 14:17 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-09-30 14:19 ` dberlin at dberlin dot org
2005-09-30 14:36 ` [Bug middle-end/24146] [4.0/4.1 Regression] ASMs with no output are not marked as volatile pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-30 19:52 ` rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
11 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: dberlin at dberlin dot org @ 2005-09-30 14:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30 14:18 -------
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] Optimizes away
FPU control word store
On Fri, 2005-09-30 at 14:07 +0000, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> ------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30 14:07 -------
> I still say this is invalid.
>
well, that just makes you wrong.
the docs clearly say it's supposed to be treated as volatile.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24146
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/24146] [4.0/4.1 Regression] ASMs with no output are not marked as volatile
2005-09-30 13:42 [Bug tree-optimization/24146] New: Optimizes away FPU control word store rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2005-09-30 14:19 ` dberlin at dberlin dot org
@ 2005-09-30 14:36 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-30 19:52 ` rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
11 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-09-30 14:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30 14:35 -------
4.0 has also the latent bug.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component|tree-optimization |middle-end
Summary|[4.0 Regression] Optimizes |[4.0/4.1 Regression] ASMs
|away FPU control word store |with no output are not
| |marked as volatile
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24146
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/24146] [4.0/4.1 Regression] ASMs with no output are not marked as volatile
2005-09-30 13:42 [Bug tree-optimization/24146] New: Optimizes away FPU control word store rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2005-09-30 14:36 ` [Bug middle-end/24146] [4.0/4.1 Regression] ASMs with no output are not marked as volatile pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-09-30 19:52 ` rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
11 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: rth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-09-30 19:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30 19:52 -------
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] Optimizes away FPU control word store
On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 02:10:48PM -0000, bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> rth, should this be fixed in the front-end or in the gimplifier?
Front end. It's a one liner in build_asm_expr.
r~
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24146
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread