From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 110537 invoked by alias); 29 Jul 2015 20:11:06 -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 110527 invoked by uid 89); 29 Jul 2015 20:11:05 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 20:11:04 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D247BBC8D1; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 20:11:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freie.home (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t6TKAudx025991 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 29 Jul 2015 16:11:01 -0400 Received: from livre.home (livre.home [172.31.160.2]) by freie.home (8.14.8/8.14.8) with ESMTP id t6TKAf6K032330; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 17:10:41 -0300 From: Alexandre Oliva To: Segher Boessenkool Cc: Richard Biener , Jeff Law , GCC Patches , Christophe Lyon , David Edelsohn , Eric Botcazou Subject: Re: [PR64164] drop copyrename, integrate into expand References: <20150723203112.GB27818@gate.crashing.org> Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 20:32:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20150723203112.GB27818@gate.crashing.org> (Segher Boessenkool's message of "Thu, 23 Jul 2015 15:31:12 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SW-Source: 2015-07/txt/msg02506.txt.bz2 On Jul 23, 2015, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:29:14PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> Yeah. Thanks, I've tested it with this change, and I'm now checking >> this in (full patch first; adjusted incremental patch at the end): > Unfortunately it causes about a thousand test fails on powerpc64-linux > (at least, it seems to be this patch, I haven't actually checked). > Some representative backtraces: Thanks, both of these are now fixed (at least in that they don't ICE any more) in the git branch aoliva/pr64164, but I'm going to investigate a few more issues before I start a regression test on gcc110 and gcc112. -- Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/ You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/ FSF Latin America board member Free Software Evangelist|Red Hat Brasil GNU Toolchain Engineer