This is the mail archive of the gcc-regression@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: GCC build failed for native with your patch on 2004-01-27T03:45:02Z.


> 
> > The last time the regression tests were run, GCC did not compile either,
> > so the problem might not be caused by your patch.
> 
> The tester was a little confused about dates.  The build failure was
> actually introduced between
> 
> 2004-01-26T14:22:28Z
> and
> 2004-01-26T21:46:22Z
> 
> The relevant changes appear to be:
> 
> +2004-01-26  Jan Hubicka  <jh@suse.cz>
> +
> +       * cselib.c (discard_useless_values):  Clear out value pointer pointing
> +       to datastructure to be recycled.
> +
> +2004-01-25  Jan Hubicka  <jh@suse.cz>
> +
> +       * genextract.c (main): Do not output the memset when not checking.
> +
> 
> +2004-01-26  Fariborz Jahanian <fjahanian@apple.com>
> +
> +         * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_emit_move): split slow
> +         unaligned load/store into smaller loads and stores.
> +
> +2004-01-26  Fariborz Jahanian <fjahanian@apple.com>
> +
> +        * function.c (assign_parms): Do not assign
> +        long long argument to memory in prologue if
> +        is it loaded into register.
> +
> +2004-01-26  Fariborz Jahanian <fjahanian@apple.com>
> +
> +        PR middle-end/13779
> +         * expr.c (emit_group_load): split constant
> +         correctly into register components of PARALLEL insn.
> +
> +2004-01-26  Fariborz Jahanian <fjahanian@apple.com>
> +
> +       * gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.md (save_stack_nonlocal):
> +       Use adjust_address_nv directly with appropriate mode.
> +       (restore_stack_nonlocal): Ditto.
> +
> 
> I suspect Jan's genextract change.  The pattern that should be
> matching is:
> 
> (define_insn ""
>   [(set (match_operand:CCEQ 0 "cc_reg_operand" "=y,?y")
>         (compare:CCEQ (match_operator:SI 1 "boolean_operator"
>                         [(match_operator:SI 2
>                                       "branch_positive_comparison_operator"
>                                       [(match_operand 3
>                                                       "cc_reg_operand" "y,y")
>                                        (const_int 0)])
>                          (match_operator:SI 4
>                                       "branch_positive_comparison_operator"
>                                       [(match_operand 5
>                                                       "cc_reg_operand" "0,y")
>                                        (const_int 0)])])
>                       (const_int 1)))]
>   ""
>   "cr%q1 %E0,%j2,%j4"
>   [(set_attr "type" "cr_logical,delayed_cr")])

This looks somewhat strange, as the pattern must be refused by recog
that is called several times without clearing the arrays and definitly
shall not depend on it.  Can I have testcase?

Honza
> 
> -- 
> - Geoffrey Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org>


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