This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug ipa/64694] [5 Regression] FAIL: 23_containers/unordered_set/insert/hash_policy.cc
- From: "hubicka at ucw dot cz" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 18:52:00 +0000
- Subject: [Bug ipa/64694] [5 Regression] FAIL: 23_containers/unordered_set/insert/hash_policy.cc
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-64694-4 at http dot gcc dot gnu dot org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64694
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64694
>
> --- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> ---
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64694
> >
> > --- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> ---
> > r219076 introduced:
> >
> > if (current_badness != badness)
> > {
> > if (edge_heap.min () && badness > edge_heap.min_key ())
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > Does it look right?
>
> This is a thinko, indeed. I am testing a fix, but I doubdt this can affect
> correctness
> of a testcase. I see it does inlining, but why it depends on inline decisions?
I meant unwinding.
Honza