http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51036
--- Comment #7 from Dodji Seketeli 2011-11-14
20:15:18 UTC ---
I am closing this then, as it appears fixed in trunk now.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51036
--- Comment #6 from Uros Bizjak 2011-11-14 18:55:06
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > Hmm, it looks like I can't reproduce this anymore with r181280 on trunk.
> >
> > Are you still seeing it?
>
> No, due to [1]. Bu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51036
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51036
--- Comment #4 from dodji at seketeli dot org
2011-11-14 15:21:50 UTC ---
Interesting. In any case, I hardly find this issue related to my patch,
like what H.J.'s bissecting (thanks for that H.J. by the way!) is
suggesting. So a memory manageme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51036
--- Comment #3 from Uros Bizjak 2011-11-14 14:32:00
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Hmm, it looks like I can't reproduce this anymore with r181280 on trunk.
>
> Are you still seeing it?
No, due to [1]. But - isn't this patch just papering ov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51036
--- Comment #2 from Dodji Seketeli 2011-11-14
14:21:17 UTC ---
Hmm, it looks like I can't reproduce this anymore with r181280 on trunk.
Are you still seeing it?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51036
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dodji at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|---
