From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Corey Minyard To: Richard Henderson Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Loop optimization bug with Ada front end on PPC (and probably Alpha) Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 13:25:00 -0000 Message-ID: <3C040513.60803@acm.org> References: <20011124124100.A2485@redhat.com> <3C0179C5.2090002@acm.org> <20011125175500.A11474@redhat.com> <3C0274ED.7000708@acm.org> <20011126134922.A24167@redhat.com> <3C02E95E.3010903@acm.org> <20011126231726.A29727@redhat.com> <3C03D700.3010205@acm.org> <20011127102856.A30042@redhat.com> <3C03EF09.60009@acm.org> <20011127125755.C30084@redhat.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-11/msg01384.html Message-ID: <20011127132500.meM3w6ZcBUruIXRCW2yOY1c-yQudIEeCEJvZtpd7W54@z> Richard Henderson wrote: >On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 01:52:41PM -0600, Corey Minyard wrote: > >>Unforunately, this causes my original problem to come back. I'm nervous >>about this patch, too, I don't understand it at all. >> > >This original problem is the Ada test case you forwarded, >or something else? > yes, the original Ada testcase. >>I tried moving this test to doloop_modify_runtime in doloop.c and adding >>the increment to the "diff" rtx in this situation, and it works in my >>simple testcase and didn't cause the problem in the regression. >> > >Hum. Perhaps you're right -- putting this change in doloop >will limit liability, so to speak. I'll move my change. > Are you moving back to the original loop test? I think the original test you had didn't work because it wasn't the doloop case, but if you put it in the doloop code it should work properly. Bummer, my bootstrap just segv-ed. Oh well, a little more work, some variable was probably NULL. -Corey