From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 79819 invoked by alias); 29 Apr 2016 10:17:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 79807 invoked by uid 89); 29 Apr 2016 10:17:46 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=133,11, 13311, HX-Envelope-From:sk:ebotcaz, H*F:U*ebotcazou X-HELO: smtp.eu.adacore.com Received: from mel.act-europe.fr (HELO smtp.eu.adacore.com) (194.98.77.210) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 29 Apr 2016 10:17:45 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-smtp.eu.adacore.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82786817DB; Fri, 29 Apr 2016 12:17:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp.eu.adacore.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.eu.adacore.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yuB6qM363CqH; Fri, 29 Apr 2016 12:17:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from polaris.localnet (bon31-6-88-161-99-133.fbx.proxad.net [88.161.99.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.eu.adacore.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3F81381723; Fri, 29 Apr 2016 12:17:42 +0200 (CEST) From: Eric Botcazou To: Uros Bizjak Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH, i386]: Extend TARGET_READ_MODIFY{,_WRITE} peepholes to all integer modes Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 10:17:00 -0000 Message-ID: <3799415.uPfXC5v7Nr@polaris> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/3.16.7-35-desktop; KDE/4.14.9; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <3466465.kPQ0hp1mLX@polaris> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-SW-Source: 2016-04/txt/msg01965.txt.bz2 > I'm testing the attached patch. Does it fix your ada failures? No, it totally breaks stack checking. :-( === acats tests === FAIL: c52103x FAIL: c52104x +FAIL: c52104y +FAIL: cb1010a +FAIL: cb1010c +FAIL: cb1010d === acats Summary === -# of expected passes 2318 -# of unexpected failures 2 +# of expected passes 2314 +# of unexpected failures 6 Native configuration is x86_64-suse-linux-gnu === gcc tests === @@ -133,11 +137,24 @@ Running target unix +FAIL: gnat.dg/opt49.adb 3 blank line(s) in output +FAIL: gnat.dg/opt49.adb (test for excess errors) +UNRESOLVED: gnat.dg/opt49.adb compilation failed to produce executable +FAIL: gnat.dg/stack_check1.adb 3 blank line(s) in output +FAIL: gnat.dg/stack_check1.adb (test for excess errors) +UNRESOLVED: gnat.dg/stack_check1.adb compilation failed to produce executable +FAIL: gnat.dg/stack_check2.adb 3 blank line(s) in output +FAIL: gnat.dg/stack_check2.adb (test for excess errors) +UNRESOLVED: gnat.dg/stack_check2.adb compilation failed to produce executable +FAIL: gnat.dg/stack_check3.adb 3 blank line(s) in output +FAIL: gnat.dg/stack_check3.adb (test for excess errors) /home/eric/svn/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gnat.dg/opt49.adb:31:4: error: unrecognizable insn: (insn 33 32 34 8 (parallel [ (set (mem/v:DI (reg/f:DI 7 sp) [0 S8 A8]) (unspec [ (const_int 0 [0]) ] UNSPEC_PROBE_STACK)) (clobber (reg:CC 17 flags)) ]) /home/eric/svn/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gnat.dg/opt49.adb:17 -1 (nil)) +===========================GNAT BUG DETECTED==============================+ | 7.0.0 20160429 (experimental) [trunk revision 235619] (x86_64-suse-linux) GCC error:| | in extract_insn, at recog.c:2287 | | Error detected around /home/eric/svn/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gnat.dg/opt49.adb:31:4| -- Eric Botcazou