From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <jit-return-714-listarch-jit=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 21397 invoked by alias); 4 Jul 2015 13:20:59 -0000
Mailing-List: contact jit-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:jit@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:jit-help@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:jit-subscribe@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: jit-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 21386 invoked by uid 89); 4 Jul 2015 13:20:58 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Checked: by ClamAV 0.98.7 on sourceware.org
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on sourceware.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-HELO: mail-yk0-f169.google.com
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:content-type;
        bh=0KkEgdZ3uRKkY17mmJvSRPPAd+UBVPYU+e4jSPkiyjg=;
        b=TDFGY3zzo9FQL2hi/cMR9twFe6T5ufCSSECS19RMlaiCjktI2RlBzlNjLOvw3c8EXk
         UHjJDHAsUPUdZQdlvsLNTUSKkVjpOLrzLYfOfqtXKMMkHUBvJBX/8KFXUII2o/bmB3QG
         dno3OvXnjFqi3AQ4brFlm2M1e6bYyFiRLDIDTn5WZePwn/kdjGNBYmA0qJjI8balVtAl
         XAgn8o6C0Hk0zDJ4Z+gKQNdMheddSG9HtkTQzPNC8fBTprRXA5xxEGbwYGLt3IIGDUAF
         6EXwkPR5cqk7i7P3luLwc4GirpZYQrhr4WLg9fzprKIv6Y4KKIOf9Uf6GvA33O/SC6jc
         sOJw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlX0qWPjrfhuQTn6x72MZ4BnaKuJUsR8m41y7ZxQeLkGnv5jYuR8X8INT78/05Q414sz35m
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.129.103.84 with SMTP id b81mr49472154ywc.55.1436016055213;
 Sat, 04 Jul 2015 06:20:55 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CACXZuxfKRkEzSjzPCvpSvL0EcryEofyL-xjgJLxByNQDNpBjTg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACXZuxc3z92zKFWhNBU4a0LDxhyNRiZcbMf83HVYkOn-7CScDQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACXZuxfKRkEzSjzPCvpSvL0EcryEofyL-xjgJLxByNQDNpBjTg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2015 00:00:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CACXZuxez_fzRYnmZ-traUo2uOr5fU4kC3VrEbWYC8UWDnvEa_A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: A possible code generation issue
From: Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile@majumdar.org.uk>
To: jit@gcc.gnu.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-SW-Source: 2015-q3/txt/msg00014.txt.bz2

On 4 July 2015 at 13:11, Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile@majumdar.org.uk> wrote:
> Looks like in the failure case the code is being incorrectly
> optimized. I wonder if this is a manifestation of the get_address bug,
> perhaps the real fix will be better than the patch I am using. I will
> use the latest gcc 5 branch and see if that helps.
>

Hi Dave,

I am now using the latest gcc-5-branch from gcc github mirror.
Unfortunately the issue still persists.

If set optimization level to 0 or 1, then it works ok, but at levels 2
or 3 the break occurs.

Regards
Dibyendu