This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@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]

[Bug bootstrap/44970] [4.6 regression] Revision 162270 failed to bootstrap


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44970

--- Comment #100 from Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org> 2010-11-14 23:34:28 UTC ---
> Cool!  The reduced code no longer makes any sense but it should compile.
> I'm sure this was a fair bit of work.

Actually delta made all the work down to 31 lines of typedefs/structs and 35
lines of mostly-dead code.  All I did manually was remove the remaining Linux
structs (replacing them with multiple scalars), propagate constants, and little
more.

Anyway, I have a new patch that I'm bootstrapping; forward_propagate_asm wasn't
adjusting use->def info properly, and the new stricter checking caught that. 
To avoid code duplication the patch is a bit different from the other.  It's
more aesthetic differences than practical differences in behavior, but still I
prefer to test it first on x86_64 before posting it.  It should take only a day
or two.


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