This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PING H.J. Lu] Re: [PATCH] PR35371 GCSE loses track of REG_POINTER attribute
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: Peter Bergner <bergner at vnet dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: Richard Sandiford <rsandifo at nildram dot co dot uk>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 07:46:56 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PING H.J. Lu] Re: [PATCH] PR35371 GCSE loses track of REG_POINTER attribute
- References: <20080225222624.GA26857@vervain.rchland.ibm.com> <email@example.com> <1204052325.7014.2.camel@otta> <47C467BA.firstname.lastname@example.org> <1204240130.7376.16.camel@otta> <1205163133.6782.57.camel@otta>
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 10:32:13AM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 17:08 -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
> > HJ,
> > Given the x86/x86_64 issues with the last indexed load/store patch,
> > can you SPEC test this patch to make sure the rtlanal.c change doesn't
> > affect you? Thanks.
> If you get a chance, can you please SPEC test the patch located in:
> just to make sure it doesn't have a negative impact on x86/x86_64?
I can use gcc to compile SPEC CPU now. But your patch won't apply
patching file rtlanal.c
patching file gcse.c
Hunk #2 succeeded at 4463 (offset 7 lines).
Hunk #4 succeeded at 6120 (offset 7 lines).
patching file emit-rtl.c
Reversed (or previously applied) patch detected! Assume -R? [n]
against revision 133140. Do you have an updated patch?