public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/59644] [4.9 Regression] r206243 miscompiles Linux kernel Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 13:39:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-59644-4-PCObEKeJpo@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-59644-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59644 Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed| |2014-01-06 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- Created attachment 31755 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31755&action=edit gcc49-pr59644.patch Untested fix. For the code quality cases this patch regresses, perhaps it would be nice to have some LRA target hook where we could finalize the stack realign flags earlier, still during LRA, but late enough that nothing would need to be spilled in the various vector modes, if LRA would be able to cope with just reshuffling the elimination offsets because of that (and even better if it could deal with frame_pointer_needed -> !frame_pointer_needed change at that point). Vlad, do you think there could be such place in LRA (surely it would need to be done before the final lra_eliminate). If we could even more accurately find out if we really need aligned stack or not then, I'd hope it could improve code quality.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-06 13:39 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2013-12-30 23:03 [Bug tree-optimization/59644] New: " trippels at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-12-30 23:43 ` [Bug tree-optimization/59644] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-12-31 8:17 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-12-31 8:18 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-12-31 8:19 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-12-31 8:20 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-12-31 8:26 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-12-31 11:47 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-12-31 13:03 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-06 8:21 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-06 8:48 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-06 9:08 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-06 9:17 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-06 9:26 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-06 9:36 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-06 10:00 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-06 10:04 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-06 10:09 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2014-01-06 10:12 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-06 10:21 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-06 11:28 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-06 11:55 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-06 13:39 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2014-01-06 21:38 ` [Bug target/59644] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-06 21:39 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-59644-4-PCObEKeJpo@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).