This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: Insertng a call function

From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
To: drizzle drizzle <drizzle76 at gmail dot com>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 10:52:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Insertng a call function
References: <7326d8e4050728101594b67c1@mail.gmail.com> <20050728181557.GA6630@topo.toronto.redhat.com> <7326d8e405072814012a5c9aab@mail.gmail.com> <7326d8e405072907276f8c5e0f@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 10:27:21AM -0400, drizzle drizzle wrote:

> Could it be that it being done lower in the pass unlike insertions in
> tree-profile, gomp - some ssa defintion information is missing. The
> reason I have been led to think is because it fails
> register_new_defintions.  I would appreciate any suggestions.
> 
Very many things could be wrong.  You'll need to show us the
exact patch you are testing, with a test case and the exact error
message you are getting.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Insertng a call function
  - From: drizzle drizzle

References:
- Insertng a call function
  - From: drizzle drizzle
- Re: Insertng a call function
  - From: Diego Novillo
- Re: Insertng a call function
  - From: drizzle drizzle
- Re: Insertng a call function
  - From: drizzle drizzle

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