From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14087 invoked by alias); 14 Oct 2003 07:30:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 14078 invoked from network); 14 Oct 2003 07:30:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 14 Oct 2003 07:30:05 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h9E7CEO17969; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 03:12:14 -0400 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h9E7U2L30845; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 03:30:02 -0400 Received: from dot.sfbay.redhat.com (dot.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.24.7]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h9E7U1J31728; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 00:30:01 -0700 Received: (from rth@localhost) by dot.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h9E7U0L27362; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 00:30:00 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: dot.sfbay.redhat.com: rth set sender to rth@redhat.com using -f Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 11:37:00 -0000 From: Richard Henderson To: law@redhat.com Cc: Steven Bosscher , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, dnovillo@redhat.com Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] bug analysis for 20000603-1.c Message-ID: <20031014073000.GB27340@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Richard Henderson , law@redhat.com, Steven Bosscher , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, dnovillo@redhat.com References: <1066085644.16921.40.camel@steven.lr-s.tudelft.nl> <200310140145.h9E1jNU5009473@speedy.slc.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200310140145.h9E1jNU5009473@speedy.slc.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00489.txt.bz2 On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 07:45:22PM -0600, law@redhat.com wrote: > >Well, mind sharing with us what other test cases have also already been > >analyzed, so there's not too much duplication of effort? > Well, I know what the tree-ssa.exp failures are since I cobbled together > most of those tests. I think everyone else just ignores them :-) I've been trying to work the last two weeks or so fixing or xfailing all of them. We really need to be able to tell at a glance whether a patch causes a regression. r~