From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3727 invoked by alias); 22 Oct 2003 17:54:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 3714 invoked by uid 48); 22 Oct 2003 17:54:52 -0000 Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 18:04:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20031022175452.3713.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "cgd at broadcom dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20031022174758.12729.cgd@broadcom.com> References: <20031022174758.12729.cgd@broadcom.com> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/12729] mipsisa64-elf regressions: g++.old-deja/g++.jason/thunk1.C, thunk2.C X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg01910.txt.bz2 List-Id: PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12729 ------- Additional Comments From cgd at broadcom dot com 2003-10-22 17:54 ------- FYI, same host/target/test env, g++.old-deja/g++.pt/vaarg3.C also seems to have regressed between those two dates, also with a ridiculously deep (possibly infintely recursing) call stack. (both it and the first example given in this ticket have over 1000 frames worth of stack trace... 8-) For now i'm assuming it's the same issue.