From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32556 invoked by alias); 18 Dec 2006 20:43:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 32259 invoked by uid 48); 18 Dec 2006 20:43:11 -0000 Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 20:43:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20061218204311.32258.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug target/30255] register spills in x87 unit need to be 80-bit, not 64 In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2006-12/txt/msg01555.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #2 from whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2006-12-18 20:43 ------- Hi, While it may be decided not to fix this problem, this is not a duplicate of bug 323, and so it should be closed for another reason if you want to ignore it. 323 has a problem because of the function call, where a programmer knows that a round-down can occur by examining the code. This problem is due to register spilling, and so no amount of source examination can figure out if this could occur. Therefore, 323 can be worked around by the knowledgable user, and this one cannot. Also, the 323 would require a pragmas or something to prevent, whereas this problem could be completely avoided merely by spilling the 80-bit value when gcc decides to spill. Since this problem cannot be worked around, and has a much more discrete fix, it is very different indeed from the much harder to fix 323. Thanks, Clint -- whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED Resolution|DUPLICATE | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30255