* [Bug tree-optimization/57698] rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox
2013-06-24 11:25 [Bug tree-optimization/57698] New: rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox markus at trippelsdorf dot de
@ 2013-06-24 18:03 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-06-25 9:19 ` markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (9 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-06-24 18:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57698
Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I saw this too. There is always_inline (force_inline in the source) function
taking always_inline as a callback and we don't work hard enough to inline all
of them. I am not sure if GCC is missing some indirect call inlining or it is
bug in firefox.
Concerning error/warning We generally output error when always_inline is not
inlined for some reason, so it seems bit odd to error sometimes and warn at
other times.
We also may just have disregard_inline_limits attribute for uses like this.
Honza
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/57698] rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox
2013-06-24 11:25 [Bug tree-optimization/57698] New: rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2013-06-24 18:03 ` [Bug tree-optimization/57698] " hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2013-06-25 9:19 ` markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2013-06-25 10:20 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
` (8 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: markus at trippelsdorf dot de @ 2013-06-25 9:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57698
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf <markus at trippelsdorf dot de> ---
Here's a reduced example:
% cat test.ii
typedef bool (*IsAcceptableThis) (const int &);
inline int
fn1 (IsAcceptableThis p1)
{
p1 (0);
return 0;
}
__attribute__ ((always_inline))
inline bool fn2 (const int &)
{
return 0;
}
void
fn3 ()
{
fn1 (fn2);
}
% g++ -c -O2 test.ii
test.ii: In function ‘void fn3()’:
test.ii:10:13: error: inlining failed in call to always_inline ‘bool fn2(const
int&)’: indirect function call with a yet undetermined callee
inline bool fn2 (const int &)
^
test.ii:5:11: error: called from here
p1 (0);
^
>From gcc-bugs-return-425073-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Jun 25 09:22:04 2013
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-425073-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 17554 invoked by alias); 25 Jun 2013 09:22:04 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 17468 invoked by uid 48); 25 Jun 2013 09:22:01 -0000
From: "dominiq at lps dot ens.fr" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/40920] Derived type with BIND(C) - rejected as argument.
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 09:22:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.5.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: rejects-valid
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-40920-4-iFighFdQgj@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-40920-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-40920-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-06/txt/msg01452.txt.bz2
Content-length: 547
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id@920
Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
AFAICT this PR has been fixed from 4.6 up to trunk (4.9). Closing as FIXED.
Please reopen if I am missing something.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/57698] rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox
2013-06-24 11:25 [Bug tree-optimization/57698] New: rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2013-06-24 18:03 ` [Bug tree-optimization/57698] " hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-06-25 9:19 ` markus at trippelsdorf dot de
@ 2013-06-25 10:20 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
2013-06-26 15:27 ` marxin.liska at gmail dot com
` (7 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: hubicka at ucw dot cz @ 2013-06-25 10:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57698
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> ---
Hmm,
the problem here is that we output errors after early inlining always now,
while previously we did
only when some other inlining happened in the function (adding extra early
inlinable function
to the testcase should reproduce the error message on early GCC releases).
We can fix by outputting always inline errors only after real inliner was run
(when optimizing)
but then such testcases won't compile at -O0 that is uncol too.
Other alternatives include declaring such testcases invalid, always not
outputting diagnostic on
previously indirect calls, teaching always inliner to do indirect inlining
(that will need to
do analysis at -O0), adding disregard_inline_limits attribute...
Each of these has pros and cons...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/57698] rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox
2013-06-24 11:25 [Bug tree-optimization/57698] New: rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2013-06-25 10:20 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
@ 2013-06-26 15:27 ` marxin.liska at gmail dot com
2013-07-08 12:26 ` kpet at free dot fr
` (6 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: marxin.liska at gmail dot com @ 2013-06-26 15:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57698
Martin Liška <marxin.liska at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |marxin.liska at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška <marxin.liska at gmail dot com> ---
*** Bug 57729 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
>From gcc-bugs-return-425218-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Wed Jun 26 15:27:06 2013
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-425218-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 16409 invoked by alias); 26 Jun 2013 15:27:06 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 16336 invoked by uid 48); 26 Jun 2013 15:27:03 -0000
From: "marxin.liska at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/57729] Always inline: indirect function call with a yet undetermined callee
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 15:27:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin.liska at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-57729-4-VlOx87qOXa@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-57729-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-57729-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-06/txt/msg01597.txt.bz2
Content-length: 510
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57729
Martin Liška <marxin.liska at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška <marxin.liska at gmail dot com> ---
Duplicate.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 57698 ***
>From gcc-bugs-return-425220-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Wed Jun 26 15:31:37 2013
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-425220-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 24017 invoked by alias); 26 Jun 2013 15:31:37 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 23626 invoked by uid 48); 26 Jun 2013 15:31:33 -0000
From: "ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/57727] RaspberryPi gcc internal compiler error unrecognisable insn
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 15:31:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.6.3
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cc resolution
Message-ID: <bug-57727-4-ip6ZlmYKmP@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-57727-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-57727-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-06/txt/msg01599.txt.bz2
Content-length: 703
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idW727
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC| |ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
--- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Reproduced with GCC 4.6.4.
However, this is fixed on all currently maintained versions of GCC, it worked
for me with 4.7.4, 4.8.1 and current trunk (4.9).
GCC 4.6 is not maintained anymore, please use a more recent release if you can.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/57698] rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox
2013-06-24 11:25 [Bug tree-optimization/57698] New: rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2013-06-26 15:27 ` marxin.liska at gmail dot com
@ 2013-07-08 12:26 ` kpet at free dot fr
2013-07-08 13:16 ` markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (5 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: kpet at free dot fr @ 2013-07-08 12:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57698
kpet at free dot fr changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |kpet at free dot fr
--- Comment #5 from kpet at free dot fr ---
I encounter a similar problem when building pixman.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/57698] rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox
2013-06-24 11:25 [Bug tree-optimization/57698] New: rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2013-07-08 12:26 ` kpet at free dot fr
@ 2013-07-08 13:16 ` markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2013-07-12 1:57 ` tmsriram at google dot com
` (4 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: markus at trippelsdorf dot de @ 2013-07-08 13:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57698
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf <markus at trippelsdorf dot de> ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #3)
> Hmm,
> the problem here is that we output errors after early inlining always now,
> while previously we did
> only when some other inlining happened in the function (adding extra early
> inlinable function
> to the testcase should reproduce the error message on early GCC releases).
> We can fix by outputting always inline errors only after real inliner was
> run (when optimizing)
> but then such testcases won't compile at -O0 that is uncool too.
I"m not sure if I understand you correctly, but the test-case compiles
just fine at -O0. So outputting the always inline errors only after the
real inliner was run should fix the issue. No?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/57698] rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox
2013-06-24 11:25 [Bug tree-optimization/57698] New: rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2013-07-08 13:16 ` markus at trippelsdorf dot de
@ 2013-07-12 1:57 ` tmsriram at google dot com
2013-07-12 2:10 ` tmsriram at google dot com
` (3 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: tmsriram at google dot com @ 2013-07-12 1:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57698
--- Comment #7 from Sriraman Tallam <tmsriram at google dot com> ---
Taking a stab at fixing this. Here is what is going on. In rev. 200179, this
change to tree-inline.c
Index: tree-inline.c
===================================================================
--- tree-inline.c (revision 200178)
+++ tree-inline.c (revision 200179)
@@ -3905,8 +3905,6 @@
for inlining, but we can't do that because frontends overwrite
the body. */
&& !cg_edge->callee->local.redefined_extern_inline
- /* Avoid warnings during early inline pass. */
- && cgraph_global_info_ready
/* PR 20090218-1_0.c. Body can be provided by another module. */
&& (reason != CIF_BODY_NOT_AVAILABLE || !flag_generate_lto))
{
made inline failure errors during early inlining reportable. Now, this
function is called when the early_inliner calls optimize_inline_calls. The
reason for the failure, CIF_INDIRECT_UNKNOWN_CALL, should not be reported
because it is not a valid reason,(see can_inline_edge_p in ipa-inline.c for the
list of reasons we intend to report) but it gets reported because of the above
change.
I have the following patch to tree-inline.c to fix this by enumerating all the
early inliner failures that should be reported. I took this list by simply
looking at can_inline_edge_p. Please see patch below. Comments please?
Index: tree-inline.c
===================================================================
--- tree-inline.c (revision 200912)
+++ tree-inline.c (working copy)
@@ -3838,6 +3838,32 @@ add_local_variables (struct function *callee, stru
}
}
+/* Should an error be reported when early inliner fails to inline an
+ always_inline function? That depends on the REASON. */
+
+static inline bool
+report_early_inliner_always_inline_failure (cgraph_inline_failed_t reason)
+{
+ /* Only the following reasons need to be reported when the early inliner
+ fails to inline an always_inline function. Called from
+ expand_call_inline.*/
+ switch (reason)
+ {
+ case CIF_BODY_NOT_AVAILABLE:
+ case CIF_FUNCTION_NOT_INLINABLE:
+ case CIF_OVERWRITABLE:
+ case CIF_MISMATCHED_ARGUMENTS:
+ case CIF_EH_PERSONALITY:
+ case CIF_UNSPECIFIED:
+ case CIF_NON_CALL_EXCEPTIONS:
+ case CIF_TARGET_OPTION_MISMATCH:
+ case CIF_OPTIMIZATION_MISMATCH:
+ return true;
+ default:
+ return false;
+ }
+}
+
/* If STMT is a GIMPLE_CALL, replace it with its inline expansion. */
static bool
@@ -3905,6 +3931,9 @@ expand_call_inline (basic_block bb, gimple stmt, c
for inlining, but we can't do that because frontends overwrite
the body. */
&& !cg_edge->callee->local.redefined_extern_inline
+ /* During early inline pass, check if the reason is reportable. */
+ && (cgraph_global_info_ready
+ || report_early_inliner_always_inline_failure (reason))
/* PR 20090218-1_0.c. Body can be provided by another module. */
&& (reason != CIF_BODY_NOT_AVAILABLE || !flag_generate_lto))
{
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/57698] rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox
2013-06-24 11:25 [Bug tree-optimization/57698] New: rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2013-07-12 1:57 ` tmsriram at google dot com
@ 2013-07-12 2:10 ` tmsriram at google dot com
2013-07-18 17:21 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: tmsriram at google dot com @ 2013-07-12 2:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57698
--- Comment #8 from Sriraman Tallam <tmsriram at google dot com> ---
One other alternative to the patch proposed earlier. The reported bug happens
only when optimization is turned on as the early inliner pass invokes
incremental inlining which calls optimize_inline_calls and triggers the above
failure. So, the fix is then as simple as:
Index: tree-inline.c
===================================================================
--- tree-inline.c (revision 200912)
+++ tree-inline.c (working copy)
@@ -3905,6 +3905,10 @@ expand_call_inline (basic_block bb, gimple stmt, c
for inlining, but we can't do that because frontends overwrite
the body. */
&& !cg_edge->callee->local.redefined_extern_inline
+ /* During early inline pass, report only when optimization is
+ not turned on. */
+ && (cgraph_global_info_ready
+ || !optimize)
/* PR 20090218-1_0.c. Body can be provided by another module. */
&& (reason != CIF_BODY_NOT_AVAILABLE || !flag_generate_lto))
{
Seems like the right fix to me. Ok?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/57698] rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox
2013-06-24 11:25 [Bug tree-optimization/57698] New: rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2013-07-12 2:10 ` tmsriram at google dot com
@ 2013-07-18 17:21 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-07-18 22:07 ` tmsriram at google dot com
2013-07-19 4:57 ` markus at trippelsdorf dot de
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-07-18 17:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57698
Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2013-07-18
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Yes, this is OK.
I wonder if we should output direct calls to autoinlines we introduce late
(i.e. if the error should be moved to expander). That would of course break the
Firefox again, but I think once we decided to error on uninlined calls we
should be consistent in it...
Honza
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/57698] rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox
2013-06-24 11:25 [Bug tree-optimization/57698] New: rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2013-07-18 17:21 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2013-07-18 22:07 ` tmsriram at google dot com
2013-07-19 4:57 ` markus at trippelsdorf dot de
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: tmsriram at google dot com @ 2013-07-18 22:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57698
--- Comment #10 from Sriraman Tallam <tmsriram at google dot com> ---
Patch committed. This should fix this.
Sri
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/57698] rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox
2013-06-24 11:25 [Bug tree-optimization/57698] New: rev.200179 causes many errors (inlining failures) when building Firefox markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2013-07-18 22:07 ` tmsriram at google dot com
@ 2013-07-19 4:57 ` markus at trippelsdorf dot de
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: markus at trippelsdorf dot de @ 2013-07-19 4:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57698
Markus Trippelsdorf <markus at trippelsdorf dot de> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #11 from Markus Trippelsdorf <markus at trippelsdorf dot de> ---
(In reply to Sriraman Tallam from comment #10)
> Patch committed. This should fix this.
>
> Sri
Thanks Sri.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread