http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47763
--- Comment #2 from Jie Zhang <jiez at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-02-16 07:42:45 UTC --- OK. From this point, it's not empty. But if it returns an uninitialized value, why bother initialize r0 to 0. Btw, the patch in reviewing: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-02/msg00787.html I just realized that we need a new PR number for the test case. So I reported this bug.
