https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
--- Comment #15 from Christophe Lyon ---
Testcase committed to trunk as r224649, to gcc-5-branch as r224670.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
--- Comment #14 from Christophe Lyon ---
Author: clyon
Date: Fri Jun 19 14:41:32 2015
New Revision: 224671
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224671&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-06-19 Christophe Lyon
PR target/62308
Backport
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
--- Comment #13 from Christophe Lyon ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #12)
> However, I am probably missing something since with an updated 4.9-branch
> and without this patch, I couldn't make the compiler crash:
> $ aarch64-unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
--- Comment #12 from Christophe Lyon ---
(In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #11)
> (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #10)
> > Hello Vladimir,
> > Have you been able to make progress on this bug?
>
> Thanks for the remainder, Cris
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
--- Comment #11 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #10)
> Hello Vladimir,
> Have you been able to make progress on this bug?
Thanks for the remainder, Cristophe. Sometimes I am loosing track of bugs I
should wor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
--- Comment #10 from Christophe Lyon ---
Hello Vladimir,
Have you been able to make progress on this bug?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
Fei Yang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fei.yang0953 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
--- Comment #8 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Venkataramanan from comment #7)
> Where reload gets
>
> (set (reg:DI 0 x0 [76]) (reg:DI 1 x1 [ args+8 ]))
> (set (reg:TI 0 x0 [74]) (reg:TI -1 [+-8 ])
>
> Looks same issue to me.
>
> Vla
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
--- Comment #7 from Venkataramanan ---
I tried to look at the RTL and assembly code generated after the patch comitted
in 215707.
The code generated looks good some unoptimal code but it is at -O0.
sub sp, sp, #16 // 15 *addd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
--- Comment #6 from Venkataramanan ---
git bisect experiment showed this revision after which bug disappears.
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=215707
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
--- Comment #5 from Venkataramanan ---
Not able to reproduce with latest trunk r215964. Bisecting to find a revision
from which bug disappears.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
Yvan Roux changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
--- Comment #2 from yml ---
But with the option of -mlittle-endian ,it would not have this error. Do it
prove that the backend support zero-length arrays passed by value ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ABI
Target|
16 matches
Mail list logo
