This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Bug tree-optimization/78731] [5 Regression] Possible bug with switch when optimization is turned on.


https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78731

--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
On Fri, 9 Dec 2016, law at redhat dot com wrote:

> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78731
> 
> Jeffrey A. Law <law at redhat dot com> changed:
> 
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                  CC|                            |law at redhat dot com
> 
> --- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law <law at redhat dot com> ---
> I'm convinced that a table based jump threader that traverses backedges is
> fundamentally a bad idea.  That's why I ripped it out and we rely on
> Sebastian's code to handle those cases -- Sebastian's code doesn't have to deal
> with table invalidation.
> 
> You might consider just disabling threading across the backedges.  There'll be
> testsuite fallout, but in the end the layers upon layers of complexity to deal
> with invalidation just isn't worth it.

I don't think that's appropriate on the branch.  So I appreciate review
of the patch I posted.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]