This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] New testsuite regressions
> > On Sun, 2003-11-30 at 14:26, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >
> > > I am looking into this now. What architecture/flags did you used to
> > > reproduce this?
> > >
> > None other than --disable-multilib. This is off of a vanilla bootstrap
> > with checking enabled on x86_64.
> >
> > On x86 (bootstrapped with --disable-checking), the only new failures are
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Testsuite differences between 20031129/gcc.sum.gz and 20031130/gcc.sum.gz
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > New regressions in 20031130/gcc.sum.gz:
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/bcp-1.c execution
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/bcp-1.c execution
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/bcp-1.c execution
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/bcp-1.c execution
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/bcp-1.c execution
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/bcp-1.c execution
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/bcp-1.c execution
> >
> > Fixed regressions in 20031130/gcc.sum.gz:
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Hi,
> I managed to reproduce the bcp-1.c failure that is caused by somewhat confused
> code to clear DECL_SAVED_TREE I managed to update incorrectly. This code is
> redundant as callgraph code contains more strict logic, so I am removing it and
> will commit the patch as obivous if thesting pases. I also moved ggc_collect
> to the very end of function as it clears some extra pointers. This
> change is not needed, but very trivial.
>
> I believe that the other failures are caused by same problem (the code
> was very wrong), but it would be great if you could try the patch. I am
> trying to reproduce it on x86-64 now.
>
> In incremental patch I will remove rest of confusion and unify
> cgraph/tree_rest_of_compilation memory management code.
Hi,
all failures appears to be gone on x86-64 tester, however not all of
these reproduced for me. I've however reproduced the with gc,gcac on
x86-64 and verified that they are gone.
I am commiting the fix.
Honza