This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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]

RE: [PATCH] [gcc, combine] Backport to GCC 5.0 branch "PR46164: Don't combine the insns if a volatile register is contained".


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Segher Boessenkool [mailto:segher@kernel.crashing.org]
> Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 9:29 PM
> To: Hale Wang
> Cc: law@redhat.com; GCC Patches; Richard Sandiford; 'Terry Guo'
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] [gcc, combine] Backport to GCC 5.0 branch "PR46164:
> Don't combine the insns if a volatile register is contained".
> 
> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 01:56:54PM +0800, Hale Wang wrote:
> > > >> gcc/ChangeLog:
> > > >> 2015-04-22 Hale Wang <hale.wang@arm.com>
> > > >>                     Terry Guo  <terry.guo@arm.com>
> > > >>
> > > >>        PR rtl-optimization/64818
> > > >>        * combine.c (can_combine_p): Don't combine user-specified
> > > >> register
> > > if
> > > >>        it is in an asm input.
> > > >>
> > > >> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> > > >> 2015-04-22 Hale Wang <hale.wang@arm.com>
> > > >>                     Terry Guo  <terry.guo@arm.com>
> > > >>
> > > >>        PR rtl-optimization/64818
> > > >>        * gcc.target/arm/pr64818.c: New.
> 
> > This patch applies cleanly on GCC 5.0 branch. Bootstrap and regression
test
> are OK for X86_64.
> >
> > Can we backport this patch to GCC 5.0 branch?
> 
> It should be perfectly safe, and it's a pretty nasty bug.  But it is
technically not
> a regression (or is it?), so I'll defer to the release managers.
> 

Yes, I agree it is not a regression.
> 
> Segher




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