This is the mail archive of the 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]

Re: ira.c update_equiv_regs patch causes gcc/testsuite/ regression

On 18/08/15 10:45, Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
On 18 August 2015 at 10:25, Alex Velenko <> wrote:

On 31/07/15 12:04, Alex Velenko wrote:

On 29/07/15 23:14, Jeff Law wrote:

On 07/28/2015 12:18 PM, Alex Velenko wrote:

On 21/04/15 06:27, Jeff Law wrote:

On 04/20/2015 01:09 AM, Shiva Chen wrote:

Hi, Jeff

Thanks for your advice.

can_replace_by.patch is the new patch to handle both cases.

pr43920-2.c.244r.jump2.ori is the original  jump2 rtl dump

pr43920-2.c.244r.jump2.patch_can_replace_by is the jump2 rtl dump
after patch  can_replace_by.patch

Could you help me to review the patch?

Thanks.  This looks pretty good.

I expanded the comment for the new function a bit and renamed the
function in an effort to clarify its purpose.  From reviewing
can_replace_by, it seems it should have been handling this case, but
clearly wasn't due to implementation details.

I then bootstrapped and regression tested the patch on x86_64-linux-gnu
where it passed.  I also instrumented that compiler to see how often
this code triggers.  During a bootstrap it triggers a couple hundred
times (which is obviously a proxy for cross jumping improvements).  So
it's triggering regularly on x86_64, which is good.

I also verified that this fixes BZ64916 for an arm-non-eabi toolchain
configured with --with-arch=armv7.

Installed on the trunk.  No new testcase as it's covered by existing


I see this patch been committed in r222256 on trunk. Is it okay to port
this to fsf-5?

It's not a regression, so backporting it would be generally frowned
upon.  If you feel strongly about it, you should ask Jakub, Joseph or
Richi (the release managers) for an exception to the general policy.


Hi Jakub,
Can this commit be ported to fsf-5? It fixed
at the time, so I think it is a good idea to port. Please, see
Kind regards,


Currently this test is passed on fsf-trunk, but not passed on fsf-5, so I
think it is a regression on fsf-5:

That does not make it a regression, it is only a regression if a
version prior to 5 passes, how does this test behave on 4.9?


Hi Marcus,

On fsf-4.9 I see the test pass:

PASS: (test for excess errors)
PASS: scan-assembler-times pop 2
PASS: scan-assembler-times beq 3
Executing on host: arm-none-eabi-size pr43920-2.o   (timeout = 300)
spawn arm-none-eabi-size pr43920-2.o
   text	   data	    bss	    dec	    hex	filename
     54	      0	      0	     54	     36	pr43920-2.o
text size is 54
PASS: object-size text <= 54

So this is a regression in fsf-5.

Kind regards,

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