* [Bug regression/62102] [4.10 Regression]: gcc.dg/torture/pr48953.c -O2 -flto
2014-08-12 2:01 [Bug regression/62102] New: [4.10 Regression]: gcc.dg/torture/pr48953.c -O2 -flto hp at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-08-13 8:29 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-08-13 17:13 ` [Bug regression/62102] [5 " hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-08-13 8:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62102
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Likely
+2014-06-28 Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz>
+
+ * tree-inline.c (remap_type_1): Do not duplicate fields
+ that are shared in between type and its main variant.
maybe you can verify that reverting fixes the issue?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug regression/62102] [5 Regression]: gcc.dg/torture/pr48953.c -O2 -flto
2014-08-12 2:01 [Bug regression/62102] New: [4.10 Regression]: gcc.dg/torture/pr48953.c -O2 -flto hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-08-13 8:29 ` [Bug regression/62102] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-08-13 17:13 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-08-13 17:17 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-08-13 17:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62102
Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed| |2014-08-13
CC| |hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
looking into it...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug regression/62102] [5 Regression]: gcc.dg/torture/pr48953.c -O2 -flto
2014-08-12 2:01 [Bug regression/62102] New: [4.10 Regression]: gcc.dg/torture/pr48953.c -O2 -flto hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-08-13 8:29 ` [Bug regression/62102] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-08-13 17:13 ` [Bug regression/62102] [5 " hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-08-13 17:17 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-08-13 22:28 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-08-13 17:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62102
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
-fno-early-inlining triggers segfaults on non-cris targets.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug regression/62102] [5 Regression]: gcc.dg/torture/pr48953.c -O2 -flto
2014-08-12 2:01 [Bug regression/62102] New: [4.10 Regression]: gcc.dg/torture/pr48953.c -O2 -flto hp at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2014-08-13 17:17 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-08-13 22:28 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-09-19 21:45 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: hp at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-08-13 22:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62102
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> +2014-06-28 Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz>
> +
> + * tree-inline.c (remap_type_1): Do not duplicate fields
> + that are shared in between type and its main variant.
>
> maybe you can verify that reverting fixes the issue?
That is r212111; I confirmed that reverting that indeed fixes the issue.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug regression/62102] [5 Regression]: gcc.dg/torture/pr48953.c -O2 -flto
2014-08-12 2:01 [Bug regression/62102] New: [4.10 Regression]: gcc.dg/torture/pr48953.c -O2 -flto hp at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2014-08-13 22:28 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-09-19 21:45 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-10-13 14:47 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-09-19 21:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62102
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I think that would be rather symptomatic fix and I plan to push out the type
verifier soon that will ICE without the patch on all targets. I failed to
reproduce this on x86 (I thought originally I have reproducer but it was
unrelated problem).
I will try to find time to build binutils so I can reproduce it for
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu next week. Sorry for the delays - the reproducibility
of LTO bugs is somewhat annoying.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug regression/62102] [5 Regression]: gcc.dg/torture/pr48953.c -O2 -flto
2014-08-12 2:01 [Bug regression/62102] New: [4.10 Regression]: gcc.dg/torture/pr48953.c -O2 -flto hp at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-19 21:45 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-10-13 14:47 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-10-14 0:46 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-10-14 6:45 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-10-13 14:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62102
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Since this testcase also involves VLA, can you, please, test if the patch for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62127
(now in mainline) fixes the problem?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug regression/62102] [5 Regression]: gcc.dg/torture/pr48953.c -O2 -flto
2014-08-12 2:01 [Bug regression/62102] New: [4.10 Regression]: gcc.dg/torture/pr48953.c -O2 -flto hp at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2014-10-13 14:47 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-10-14 0:46 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-10-14 6:45 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: hp at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-10-14 0:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62102
Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #6)
> Since this testcase also involves VLA, can you, please, test if the patch
> for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62127
(now in mainline)
> fixes the problem?
My autotester picked up that commit, and this regression is gone, thanks!
I'm closing this PR.
Specifically, this regression is gone with a commit in the range
(216146:216158], matching the commit in question. Incidentally, at r216158
there's only gcc.dg/tls/alias-1.c i.e. PR61548 (since I started tracking
regressions for cris-elf in 2007).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug regression/62102] [5 Regression]: gcc.dg/torture/pr48953.c -O2 -flto
2014-08-12 2:01 [Bug regression/62102] New: [4.10 Regression]: gcc.dg/torture/pr48953.c -O2 -flto hp at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2014-10-14 0:46 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-10-14 6:45 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: hubicka at ucw dot cz @ 2014-10-14 6:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62102
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> ---
>
> My autotester picked up that commit, and this regression is gone, thanks!
> I'm closing this PR.
Great! I was starring in that patch and did not notice this quite obvious
omision
for at least 20 times :( Good it is gone.
The consequences of not remapping the type were particularly confusing to deal
with...
Honza
>
> Specifically, this regression is gone with a commit in the range
> (216146:216158], matching the commit in question. Incidentally, at r216158
> there's only gcc.dg/tls/alias-1.c i.e. PR61548 (since I started tracking
> regressions for cris-elf in 2007).
>
> --
> You are receiving this mail because:
> You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread