From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2992 invoked by alias); 5 May 2006 16:12:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 2968 invoked by uid 48); 5 May 2006 16:12:06 -0000 Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 16:12:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060505161206.2967.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug c/27445] create_tmp_var_raw (gimplify.c) inadventently asserts 'volatile' on temps In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "gary at intrepid dot com" 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 X-SW-Source: 2006-05/txt/msg00526.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #3 from gary at intrepid dot com 2006-05-05 16:12 ------- (In reply to comment #1) > Do you have a testcase this will better understand the problem and to see if > your patch is correct? I'm not sure how to demonstrate that there is a problem. I think it is clear that the author of the function planned on using new_type instaed of type, and that it is incorrect to assert 'volatile' on a compiler temporary, but am uncertain as to whether asserting 'volatile' leads to any particular difficulties in the present compiler. I'm hoping one of the gimplify developers can help construct a test case, if applicable. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27445