From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26829 invoked by alias); 12 Oct 2008 21:20:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 23366 invoked by alias); 12 Oct 2008 21:19:14 -0000 Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2008 21:20:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20081012211914.23365.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug target/37808] [4.4 Regression]: Revision 141067 breaks Linux/x86 In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "zadeck at naturalbridge dot com" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2008-10/txt/msg00816.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #11 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2008-10-12 21:19 ------- Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression]: Revision 141067 breaks Linux/x86 Richard Guenther wrote: > On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Kenneth Zadeck > wrote: > >> andreast at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: >> >>> ------- Comment #7 from andreast at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-12 20:31 ------- >>> I see a failure on sparc-solaris8/10 too. Configury of stage2 fails. >>> Applying the mentioned patch cures compilation. >>> My sparc config is with multilib. 32-bit/64-bit. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> The problem is that the bb is no longer kept in the df-ref, and is >> instead extracted from the insn. >> This particular problem was caused by insns being deleted in a pass that >> defers rescanning but that also changes register numbers. The fix >> checks to make sure the insn is still in a basic block before trying to >> mark the block as being dirty. >> > > Ok. I think it's odd that we keep refs to deleted insns - but that's probably > because of the deferred re-scan, right? > > Thanks, > Richard. > yes, this only is because of the deferred rescan. committed as revision 14178. kenny > >> 2008-10-12 Kenneth Zadeck >> >> PR middle-end/37808 >> * df-scan.c (df_ref_change_reg_with_loc_1): Added test to make >> sure that ref has valid bb. >> >> Tested by me on both x86-32 and x86-64. Also tested by andreast on >> spark-solaris and by keating. >> >> OK to commit? >> >> kenny >> >> -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37808