This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Fix to PR41012
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 1:40 AM, Xinliang David Li<davidxl@google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 2:03 AM, Richard
> Guenther<richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 7:14 PM, Xinliang David Li<davidxl@google.com> wrote:
>>> Please see the attached file a new patch to fix the problem -- the
>>> argmismatch ?legality check is moved from lowering to the inliner
>>> together with the rest of the checks.
>>>
>>> Bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64/linux.
>>> SPEC2k int and SPEC06 testing with FDO.
>>>
>>> Ok to checkin?
>>
>> You seem to amend all places where we check tree_can_inline_p
>> but one (which looks like an omission). ?So - can you fold the
>> checks into that function instead?
>
> Yes, this is what I want to ?do too.
>
>
>>
>> Ok with that change.
>
> See new patch. ?Bootstrap and retested on x86_64/linux. SPEC2k and
> SPEC06 testing with FDO.
Ah, nice cleanup. The changelog in the patch itself is the old one
(the separately attached one is ok).
The patch is ok.
Thanks,
Richard.
> Thanks,
>
> David
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Richard.
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Xinliang David Li<davidxl@google.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Joseph S. Myers<joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The attached patch is meant to fix 41012. With this patch,
>>>>>
>>>>> Why does this patch not add a testcase to the testsuite?
>>>>
>>>> Will be added.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> David
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Joseph S. Myers
>>>>> joseph@codesourcery.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>