Re: PR 52573

2013-01-18 Thread Jeff Law
On 01/18/2013 01:21 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: This test should really go into gcc.target/m68k, without target selector at "dg-do compile" directive. Done. Jeff

Re: PR 52573

2013-01-18 Thread Jeff Law
On 01/18/2013 01:21 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: Hello! @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ +2013-01-17 Jeff Law + + PR rtl-optimization/52573 + * gcc.dg/pr52573.c: New test. 2013-01-17 Jack Howarth PR sanitizer/55679 diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr52573.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr5257

Re: PR 52573

2013-01-18 Thread Uros Bizjak
Hello! > @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ > +2013-01-17 Jeff Law > + > + PR rtl-optimization/52573 > + * gcc.dg/pr52573.c: New test. > 2013-01-17 Jack Howarth > > PR sanitizer/55679 > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr52573.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr52573.c > new file mode 100644 > index

PR 52573

2013-01-17 Thread Jeff Law
hain open until step #7 below to ensure +it conflicts with other output operands of this insn. +See PR 52573. Arguably the insn should not have both +notes; it has proven difficult to fix that without +other undesirable side effects. */