public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug optimization/12199] [3.3-hammer regression] long double miscompilation in gsl/amd64
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 00:52:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030907005248.20242.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030906231705.12199.gbeauchesne@mandrakesoft.com>

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12199


pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   GCC host triplet|x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu    |
 GCC target triplet|                            |x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
           Keywords|                            |wrong-code


------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2003-09-07 00:52 -------
I think the reason why with -O2, it is exhausted, is because check and (I think fabs, might have 
already) gets inlined because unit-at-a-time is enabled on the 3.3-hammer branch (and the 
mainline also) at -O2 and above.
It would be nice to know if this bug is also on the mainline.
Also what happens if you add __attribute__((__no_inline__)) to the function check, does it still 
create wrong code?


  reply	other threads:[~2003-09-07  0:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-09-06 23:17 [Bug optimization/12199] New: " gbeauchesne at mandrakesoft dot com
2003-09-07  0:52 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org [this message]
2003-09-07  7:52 ` [Bug optimization/12199] " gbeauchesne at mandrakesoft dot com
2003-09-09 13:53 ` gbeauchesne at mandrakesoft dot com
2003-09-09 15:01 ` jh at suse dot cz
2003-10-01 15:06 ` zlomek at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-12-09 18:23 ` dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
2004-04-21  2:16 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20030907005248.20242.qmail@sources.redhat.com \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).