From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23316 invoked by alias); 11 Dec 2004 09:39:45 -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 23293 invoked by uid 48); 11 Dec 2004 09:39:43 -0000 Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 09:39:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20041211093943.23292.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20041124222749.18665.skunk@iskunk.org> References: <20041124222749.18665.skunk@iskunk.org> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug other/18665] [3.4/4.0 Regression] -ftrapv borks up simple integer arithmetic X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-12/txt/msg01599.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-11 09:39 ------- > Since the symbol exists in 3.3 (which I'd forgotten), we have to keep it. > But I don't see any reason we can't fix the bug in its implementation. > So let's do proper simode arithmetic. Agreed. It turns out that the same problem exists for DImode arithmetic on targets for which the word_mode is smaller than SImode: since the di variants were always emitted, should we still emit them now? Can the big __mulvdi3 routine contained in libgcc2.c be compiled with real DImode on those targets? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18665