This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: A gcc-cris bug?
- From: "Dave Korn" <dk at artimi dot com>
- To: "'Richard Guenther'" <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>,"'Andrew Pinski'" <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>,<gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>,"'Diego Novillo'" <dnovillo at redhat dot com>,"'Tal Agmon'" <tal dot agmon at nsc dot com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 15:47:57 +0100
- Subject: RE: A gcc-cris bug?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gcc-owner On Behalf Of Richard Guenther
> Sent: 06 October 2004 14:57
> To: Andrew Pinski; Richard Guenther; gcc; Dave
> Korn; Diego Novillo; Tal Agmon
> Subject: Re: A gcc-cris bug?
>
> > But, thanks to our abject lack of unit testing, there is no
> way to see
> > if the problem still exists in 4.0.0. Experience suggests that it
> > does, and will need a much more complicated testcase (to get through
> > the tree optimizers to whatever RTL optimizer is buggy).
>
> One way of doing this is to analyze and fix the problem for 3.4 and
> then possibly forward-port the fix. But it ain't a regression...
>
> Richard.
Maybe, but it does make -O3 unusable, doesn't it? I know it's meant to be
'unsafe' and come with suitable health warnings, but this sort of bad
codegen just seems beyond coping with. If the tree-based inliner has always
been similarly unreliable, well maybe it isn't a regression, but also maybe
the inliner should just be disabled on the release branches ?
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....