From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9545 invoked by alias); 7 Feb 2005 18:56:09 -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 9477 invoked by uid 48); 7 Feb 2005 18:56:06 -0000 Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 00:15:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20050207185606.9476.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "giovannibajo at libero dot it" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20020309112600.5900.schmid@snake.iap.physik.tu-darmstadt.de> References: <20020309112600.5900.schmid@snake.iap.physik.tu-darmstadt.de> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/5900] [g77 & gfortran] Lapack regressions since g77 2.95.2 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2005-02/txt/msg00440.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-02-07 18:56 ------- Thomas, can you try if -O1 also produces wrong-code? Also can you try to selectively disable tree optimizations (-fno-tree-this, -fno-tree-that) and see if you find out which optimizer is triggering the miscompilation? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5900