This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: optimization/5968: flow.c ICE compiling 254.gap on ia64 with -O2 -funroll-loops
- From: Janis Johnson <janis187 at us dot ibm dot com>
- To: jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org, janis187 at us dot ibm dot com, gcc-gnats at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 11:00:58 -0800
- Subject: Re: optimization/5968: flow.c ICE compiling 254.gap on ia64 with -O2 -funroll-loops
- References: <20020315134431.5946.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
On Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 01:44:31PM -0000, jakub@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
> Synopsis: flow.c ICE compiling 254.gap on ia64 with -O2 -funroll-loops
>
> State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
> State-Changed-By: jakub
> State-Changed-When: Fri Mar 15 05:44:30 2002
> State-Changed-Why:
> Are you sure you had my patch installed?
> Cannot reproduce it today at all and it really looks
> like 5891.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=5968
OK, I'm embarrassed. I updated my 3.1 tree yesterday and built and ran
200.sixtrack and 254.gap; 200.sixtrack built and ran fine, so I assumed
that I had picked up Jakub's patch, but it turns out I didn't. Today I
updated the tree again, verified that his patch is there, and both tests
work fine. Sorry for the confusion, PR 5968 is the same as PR 5891.
I also saw runtime failures with 254.gap on i686-pc-linux.gnu, and with
Jakub's fix for 5891 it now works fine. I plan to continue building and
running (with the small test input) SPEC CPU2000 benchmarks with a
variety of optimization options and tracking down and reporting
failures.
Janis