On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 7:40 PM, Bill Schmidt
wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> I would like to backport this fix to GCC 5, 6, and 7. All have passed
> regstrap on
> powerpc64le-linux-gnu (with the test case moved to gcc.dg/ubsan, of course).
> Is this ok?
Yes.
Richard.
> Thanks!
>
> -- Bill
>
>
>> On
Hi Richard,
I would like to backport this fix to GCC 5, 6, and 7. All have passed regstrap
on
powerpc64le-linux-gnu (with the test case moved to gcc.dg/ubsan, of course).
Is this ok?
Thanks!
-- Bill
> On Jul 14, 2017, at 1:05 PM, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> PR81162 identifies a bug in
Thomas, thanks for the heads-up! I didn't realize we had this dependency.
I'll move the test case shortly.
-- Bill
> On Jul 17, 2017, at 5:47 AM, Thomas Preudhomme
> wrote:
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> Is there a reason the new test is in gcc.dg rather than in gcc.dg/ubsan? The
> test FAILs when ther
Hi Bill,
Is there a reason the new test is in gcc.dg rather than in gcc.dg/ubsan? The
test FAILs when there is no ubsan runtime support and fsanitize_undefined
effective target is not available in gcc.dg (one needs to load ubsan-dg for this
effective target to be defined).
Best regards,
Tho
Hi,
PR81162 identifies a bug in SLSR involving overflow that occurs when
replacing a NEGATE_EXPR with a PLUS_EXPR. This is another example
of an unprofitable transformation that should be skipped anyway,
hence this simple patch. Bootstrapped and tested on
powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu, committed
