public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug debug/43552] FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr41353-1.c with -flto and -fwhopr
[not found] <bug-43552-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2011-02-24 13:45 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-02-24 13:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43552
Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-02-24 13:41:55 UTC ---
Dup (and "fixed").
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 47801 ***
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [Bug debug/43552] FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr41353-1.c with -flto and -fwhopr
2010-03-28 0:22 [Bug debug/43552] New: " danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-03-28 12:41 ` [Bug debug/43552] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-03-28 12:58 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-03-28 12:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-28 12:58 -------
The return statement does not have line information, even without LTO:
f2 (int i, int j)
{
<bb 2>:
[/home/richard/src/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/guality/pr41353-1.c : 23:5] j_3
= j_1(D) + i_2(D);
[/home/richard/src/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/guality/pr41353-1.c : 23:5] #
DEBUG j => j_3
[/home/richard/src/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/guality/pr41353-1.c : 26:7] #
DEBUG i1 => [/home/richard/src/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/guality/pr41353-1.c :
26] i_2(D) * 2
[/home/richard/src/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/guality/pr41353-1.c : 27:7] #
DEBUG i2 => [/home/richard/src/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/guality/pr41353-1.c :
27] i_2(D) * 3
return j_3;
}
(same dump with -flto). There's no line 28 in the debug information of
either variant - still gdb breaks on the closing } for -O2 but on the
start of f3 () for -O2 -flto. But the non-LTO variant has a line advance
entry to line 29.
What is missing is visible in the .expand dump - the non-LTO variant
does have line number information on the function return (line 29), but
the LTO variant does not.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43552
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [Bug debug/43552] FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr41353-1.c with -flto and -fwhopr
2010-03-28 0:22 [Bug debug/43552] New: " danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-03-28 12:41 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-03-28 12:58 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-03-28 12:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-28 12:41 -------
There is no line 28 to break on, instead it breaks at f3().
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-03-28 12:41:05
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43552
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-02-24 13:42 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <bug-43552-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2011-02-24 13:45 ` [Bug debug/43552] FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr41353-1.c with -flto and -fwhopr rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-03-28 0:22 [Bug debug/43552] New: " danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-03-28 12:41 ` [Bug debug/43552] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-03-28 12:58 ` rguenth 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).