From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 90704 invoked by alias); 20 May 2016 09:32:38 -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 90688 invoked by uid 89); 20 May 2016 09:32:37 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=ebotcazouadacorecom, sra, late-SRA, latesra X-HELO: mail-wm0-f51.google.com Received: from mail-wm0-f51.google.com (HELO mail-wm0-f51.google.com) (74.125.82.51) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 20 May 2016 09:32:27 +0000 Received: by mail-wm0-f51.google.com with SMTP id n129so73698358wmn.1 for ; Fri, 20 May 2016 02:32:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=X1/kpXCrjI4vaZLqg5yDGGMFCAZCLa/wnbRXVTrZGzw=; b=FXNdA5buAkT/0BVJ3xWZnny03rApH1i4TfZ+1MTxIqjXWYd8qom/ejAZ9t+z4dEtML 3fwAstS1HaIdIXM/rt88W1MCMurkHfNSP/Dc1rRCF0BYwhB75DbFKn81Coij3z5IeSLM qj/WEYf6So5x5Wh9CPqc+6T9Z4e3EyOLqnELVPsCXaR4c2qhNRhAsr3xStJddPOeFNXc oGk14anlwY2EACjRb/lRTvlr5757rpmfWf5yQNK9f3rdnJIbYdxw/io5DlD1HKxSeDJ3 oBt8CkF3z10K6/2cYkHEXXpSCpoCIiE9U93Fl4IedONNkECXKD1pj6DFrDHpdVOxlEv6 Xu2w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FWZiRiVgLWMyRdZoCq3gGD7HaQ6NUGK++TgPv+2moH/iy/6lH4lj5OX9XyzvXMdRxVDC1oxXoBwBbdO8A== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.10.162 with SMTP id j2mr2207321wjb.72.1463736744701; Fri, 20 May 2016 02:32:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.87.34 with HTTP; Fri, 20 May 2016 02:32:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1654126.nIsqskhxhe@polaris> References: <6226269.FBBDIS7nhY@polaris> <20609673.FxQTIz62nb@polaris> <20160513152403.GL5580@virgil.suse.cz> <1654126.nIsqskhxhe@polaris> Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 09:32:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [patch] Fix PR tree-optimization/70884 From: Richard Biener To: Eric Botcazou Cc: Martin Jambor , GCC Patches , alan.lawrence@arm.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-05/txt/msg01610.txt.bz2 On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> Effectively, the patch prevents late-SRA from doing anything for both >> testcases (PR 70884 and PR 70919). I have started a bootstrap and >> testing on x86_64 and i686 only a few moments ago but it would be >> great if someone also tried on an architecture for which the >> constant-pool SRA enhancement was intended, just to be sure. > > Can you apply it now? It's a wrong-code regression on the 6 branch and people > can still chime it later in any case. The patch is ok if it passed bootstrap/regtest. I believe at least on ARM we had some tree-ssa.exp testcase(s) that were no longer XFAILing with the added support. Thanks, Richard. > -- > Eric Botcazou