--- Comment #7 from manfred99 at gmx dot ch 2007-10-05 09:36 ---
Ok, I managed to produce a testcase: a wrapper around the miscompiled
function and all the missing routines. Input data is read from a binary file,
so the program has to be run on a x86 machine (littleendian).
I attach a t
--- Comment #8 from manfred99 at gmx dot ch 2007-10-05 09:39 ---
Created an attachment (id=14300)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14300&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33638
--- Comment #6 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-10-04 06:48 ---
> And as I told in the bug report, inserting or deleting code suddenly
> let the issue vanish. I already tried to reduce this code with the
> result that removing dead code fixed the miscompilation.
If this is the case,
--- Comment #5 from manfred99 at gmx dot ch 2007-10-03 20:10 ---
Subject: Re: optimization bug: wrong code with
-fforce-addr
> --- Comment #4 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-10-03 15:43 ---
> Please provide enough sources to create an _executable_ that shows the
> failure
--- Comment #4 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-10-03 15:43 ---
Please provide enough sources to create an _executable_ that shows the failure.
We are dealing with runtime failure here.
A _short_ testcase (<30 lines) is nice to have, so all non-related parts should
be removed. Wanderi
--- Comment #3 from manfred99 at gmx dot ch 2007-10-03 12:49 ---
Created an attachment (id=14290)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14290&action=view)
Assembler code when commenting line 315, works
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33638
--- Comment #2 from manfred99 at gmx dot ch 2007-10-03 12:47 ---
Created an attachment (id=14289)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14289&action=view)
Assembler code of original code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33638
--- Comment #1 from manfred99 at gmx dot ch 2007-10-03 12:46 ---
Created an attachment (id=14288)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14288&action=view)
Source code of affected function
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33638
