http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46366
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46366
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev 2010-11-16
14:11:47 UTC ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Nov 16 14:11:39 2010
New Revision: 166798
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166798
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/46366
* gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46366
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev 2010-11-15
11:10:56 UTC ---
It is no problem to make this function return 0; and explicitly declare its
return type, I just need to check that the test case will still ICE without a
patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46366
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu 2010-11-08 17:13:24
UTC ---
The testcase looks invalid to me:
static bitstream_init (picture_t * picture, void *start)
{
picture->bitstream_ptr = start;
}
...
xine_xvmc_t * xvmc = bitstream_init (picture, buffer);
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46366
--- Comment #1 from Andrey Belevantsev 2010-11-08
17:05:38 UTC ---
Sorry, I have checked that the test doesn't ICE but missed the additional
warnings. How about the below patch, do you think it makes sense? I have
verified that the test still I
