https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358
--- Comment #8 from Honggyu Kim ---
(In reply to Mikael Pettersson from comment #6)
> (In reply to Honggyu Kim from comment #4)
>
> > Can I add this testcase with your modification as my first gcc contribution?
> > :)
>
> Sure, just attach it t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358
Honggyu Kim changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.9.2
--- Comment #9 from Honggyu Kim ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358
--- Comment #12 from Honggyu Kim ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #11)
> Thinking about it again, there's no reason not to do sibcalls, it's just the
> code gets confused on how to shuffle the arguments around. Will investigate
> deeper
Ye
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358
--- Comment #13 from Honggyu Kim ---
Created attachment 35041
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35041&action=edit
backport patch from linaro
Jongsung Kim (neidhard@lge.com) found a patch that generates this error.
I think
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358
--- Comment #17 from Honggyu Kim ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #16)
> I'm working on a patch btw.
This bug is only shown in arm code so maybe the bug is in gcc/config/arm
directory.
I was trying to fix it myself but I may need more expe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358
--- Comment #20 from Honggyu Kim ---
Hi all,
Kyrill submitted a bug fix patch about 2 weeks ago.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-03/msg01014.html
I have tested his patch and found that the problem is clearly fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358
--- Comment #26 from Honggyu Kim ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #25)
> This should be fixed on trunk for GCC 6.
> I'll keep this open for a few days to make sure there are no glaring
> complaints about the patch as it gets through the aut
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hong.gyu.kim at lge dot com
struct pack
{
int fine;
int victim;
int killer;
};
int bar(int a, int b, struct pack p);
int foo(int arg1, int arg2, int arg3, struct pack p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358
Honggyu Kim changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358
--- Comment #2 from Honggyu Kim ---
Sorry, I miss typed the initial argument status for "foo"
I will modified "MEM[sp-4]: p.killer" to "MEM[sp+4]: p.killer" as follows:
r0: arg1
r1: arg2
r2: arg3
r3: p.fine
MEM[sp]: p.victim
MEM[sp+4]: p.killer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358
--- Comment #4 from Honggyu Kim ---
Dear Mikael Pettersson
I also have a runtime testcase, which is different from dejagnu format.
Can I add this testcase with your modification as my first gcc contribution? :)
I was trying to fix this bug mysel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358
--- Comment #5 from Honggyu Kim ---
I just wrote foo function code separately to debug gcc more easily by compile
only problematic code.
12 matches
Mail list logo
