[r11-3641 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pta-ptrarith-1.c -Os scan-tree-dump alias "ESCAPED = {[^\n}]* i f [^\n}]*}" on Linux/x86_64 (-m32 -march=cascadelake)

Iain Sandoe idsandoe@googlemail.com
Sun Oct 4 17:03:29 GMT 2020


H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 5:57 PM Segher Boessenkool
> <segher@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 12:21:04PM -0700, sunil.k.pandey via Gcc-patches  
>> wrote:
>>> On Linux/x86_64,
>>>
>>> c34db4b6f8a5d80367c709309f9b00cb32630054 is the first bad commit
>>> commit c34db4b6f8a5d80367c709309f9b00cb32630054
>>> Author: Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz>
>>> Date:   Sat Oct 3 17:20:16 2020 +0200
>>>
>>>    Track access ranges in ipa-modref
>>>
>>> caused
>>
>> [ ... ]
>>
>> This isn't a patch.  Wrong mailing list?
>
> I view this as a follow up of
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/555314.html
>
> What do people think about this kind of followups?  Is this appropriate
> for this mailing list?

it seems quite noisy - and I wonder how effective; mailing list traffic  
goes by and is forgotten.

ISTM that a much neater solution would be to raise a BZ and add the commit  
author as CC’d

… but that might be too hard to implement?

Iain




More information about the Gcc-regression mailing list