From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28232 invoked by alias); 28 Jan 2010 15:11:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 28181 invoked by uid 48); 28 Jan 2010 15:11:18 -0000 Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 15:11:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100128151118.28180.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/42889] [4.5 Regression] "-fcompare-debug failure (length)" with "-O1 -fgcse" In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org" 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: 2010-01/txt/msg03234.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #12 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-28 15:11 ------- So not call df_set_bb_dirty in df_insn_rescan if DEBUG_INSN_P (insn), or not mark dirty only certain problems? I believe DEBUG_INSNs aren't meant to extend lifetime of pseudos, so perhaps lr/live problems don't need to be marked dirty, what about others? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42889