This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug rtl-optimization/25514] [4.0/4.1 regression] internal consistency failure
- From: "richard at nildram dot co dot uk" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 6 Jan 2007 08:42:49 -0000
- Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/25514] [4.0/4.1 regression] internal consistency failure
- References: <bug-25514-11770@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #21 from richard at nildram dot co dot uk 2007-01-06 08:42 -------
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 regression] internal consistency failure
"ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
>> Eric asked me to weigh in here. My only concern about a backport is Comment
>> #9, which suggests that the patch didn't work. I'm assuming that since we're
>> all talking about backporting it, that comment was mistaken? If indeed there
>> are no known problems, I think it's reasonable to put this on 4.1.
>
> Thanks Mark. It seems that a whole new class of internal consistency failures
> due to the mishandling of REG_NOTEs in the combiner appeared in 4.1.x (for
> example rtl-optimization/28243 and the blocked rtl-optimization/29329) and up.
> Richard's patch is the most generic fix available as of today, so backporting
> it or not to the 4.1.x branch has cascading effects on the other PRs. Maybe
> the problem reported in comment #9 is another variant.
>
> Richard, are you still ready to backport it? If so, I can revert my patch for
> rtl-optimization/28243 right now to make things easier.
Yup, I'm still ready to backport it if the consensus is that
the patch is OK for 4.1. I see from later comments that you
might be backporting it yourself, but the offer still stands
if you haven't started yet.
Richard
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25514