* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
@ 2009-03-03 16:57 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-03-04 9:07 ` r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (17 subsequent siblings)
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-03-03 16:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-03 16:57 -------
Huh. It's not even compiling.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
2009-03-03 16:57 ` [Bug driver/39356] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-03-04 9:07 ` r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
2009-03-06 15:12 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (16 subsequent siblings)
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com @ 2009-03-04 9:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #2 from r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com 2009-03-04 09:07 -------
(In reply to comment #1)
> Huh. It's not even compiling.
>
You're right.
OTOH the sequence
$ gcc -v -S hello.c
$ gcc -v -c hello.s
$ gcc -v -o hello hello.o
builds correctly.
Anyway the driver is broken for x86_64-pc-mingw32.
Perhaps somebody can point Kai Tietz to that problem, eventually he has some
glue.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
2009-03-03 16:57 ` [Bug driver/39356] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-03-04 9:07 ` r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
@ 2009-03-06 15:12 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-03-07 10:46 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (15 subsequent siblings)
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-03-06 15:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #3 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-06 15:12 -------
Well, the issues in driver seems to be related to pexecute in protoize.c. On a
first glance, I noticed that here for pid's an 'int' type is used (btw in
libiberty a 'long' is used for keeping the pids, which is for w64 incorrect,
too).
The problem is, that pid_t has to have a scalar size on w64 of 64-bits.
--
ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot
| |org
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-03-06 15:12:19
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2009-03-06 15:12 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-03-07 10:46 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-03-09 15:07 ` r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (14 subsequent siblings)
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-03-07 10:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #4 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-07 10:46 -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> Well, the issues in driver seems to be related to pexecute in protoize.c. On a
> first glance, I noticed that here for pid's an 'int' type is used (btw in
> libiberty a 'long' is used for keeping the pids, which is for w64 incorrect,
> too).
> The problem is, that pid_t has to have a scalar size on w64 of 64-bits.
>
Sorry, pex_run & co aren't the reason for this issue. By further debugging I
found that for bigger functions using alloca with variable sizes wrong code is
generated for optimizations bigger then -O0.
By this reason the driver gcc.c in execute is broken. The interesting issue
about this is, when trying to make a smaller testcase out of it, code is
produced correct.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2009-03-07 10:46 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-03-09 15:07 ` r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
2009-03-15 20:08 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (13 subsequent siblings)
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com @ 2009-03-09 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #5 from r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com 2009-03-09 15:07 -------
(In reply to comment #4)
> Sorry, pex_run & co aren't the reason for this issue. By further debugging I
> found that for bigger functions using alloca with variable sizes wrong code is
> generated for optimizations bigger then -O0.
> By this reason the driver gcc.c in execute is broken. The interesting issue
> about this is, when trying to make a smaller testcase out of it, code is
> produced correct.
>
I can confirm this. Building the compiler with CFLAGS="-O0" results in a
working driver.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2009-03-09 15:07 ` r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
@ 2009-03-15 20:08 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-03-15 20:13 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-03-15 20:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #6 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-15 20:08 -------
This bug was reasoned by duplicate existance of function __chkstk.
For targets mingw/cygwin this symbol allocates and probes stack (see
/gcc/config/i386/cygwin.asm). The VC variant export the same symbol name in
kernel32, ntdll, and ntoskernl. But the MS variant just probes the stack and
does not allocates stack space.
I temporary removed the exports from our .def files in mingw-w64 and this
solves the issue so far.
The bad side of this fix is, that libraries generated by VC can't be linked
proper, if they reference the ms __chkstk variant.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2009-03-15 20:08 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-03-15 20:13 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-03-16 2:13 ` dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net
` (11 subsequent siblings)
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-03-15 20:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #7 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-15 20:13 -------
The following patch solves this problem and prevents the name collision for 32
and 64 bits win32 systems.
ChangeLog
* config/i386/i386.md (allocate_stack_worker_32): Use
___gnu_chkstk.
(allocate_stack_worker_64): Likewise.
* config/i386/cygwin.asm (__alloca): Renamed to __gnu_alloca.
(___chkstk): Renamed to ___gnu_chkstk.
Index: gcc/gcc/config/i386/cygwin.asm
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/gcc/config/i386/cygwin.asm
+++ gcc/gcc/config/i386/cygwin.asm
@@ -40,11 +40,11 @@
increments is necessary to ensure that the guard pages used
by the OS virtual memory manger are allocated in correct sequence. */
- .global ___chkstk
- .global __alloca
#ifndef _WIN64
-___chkstk:
-__alloca:
+ .global ___gnu_chkstk
+ .global ___gnu_alloca
+___gnu_chkstk:
+__gnu_alloca:
pushl %ecx /* save temp */
leal 8(%esp), %ecx /* point past return addr */
cmpl $0x1000, %eax /* > 4k ?*/
@@ -72,9 +72,11 @@ Ldone:
pushl %eax
ret
#else
+ .global ___gnu_chkstk
+ .global __gnu_alloca
/* __alloca is a normal function call, which uses %rcx as the argument. And
stack space
for the argument is saved. */
-__alloca:
+__gnu_alloca:
movq %rcx, %rax
addq $0x7, %rax
andq $0xfffffffffffffff8, %rax
@@ -107,7 +109,7 @@ Ldone_alloca:
/* ___chkstk is a *special* function call, which uses %rax as the argument.
We avoid clobbering the 4 integer argument registers, %rcx, %rdx,
%r8 and %r9, which leaves us with %rax, %r10, and %r11 to use. */
-___chkstk:
+___gnu_chkstk:
addq $0x7, %rax /* Make sure stack is on alignment of 8. */
andq $0xfffffffffffffff8, %rax
popq %r11 /* pop return address */
Index: gcc/gcc/config/i386/i386.md
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/gcc/config/i386/i386.md
+++ gcc/gcc/config/i386/i386.md
@@ -20297,7 +20297,7 @@
(set (reg:SI SP_REG) (minus:SI (reg:SI SP_REG) (match_dup 1)))
(clobber (reg:CC FLAGS_REG))]
"!TARGET_64BIT && TARGET_STACK_PROBE"
- "call\t___chkstk"
+ "call\t___gnu_chkstk"
[(set_attr "type" "multi")
(set_attr "length" "5")])
@@ -20310,7 +20310,7 @@
(clobber (reg:DI R11_REG))
(clobber (reg:CC FLAGS_REG))]
"TARGET_64BIT && TARGET_STACK_PROBE"
- "call\t___chkstk"
+ "call\t___gnu_chkstk"
[(set_attr "type" "multi")
(set_attr "length" "5")])
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2009-03-15 20:13 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-03-16 2:13 ` dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net
2009-03-16 9:16 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net @ 2009-03-16 2:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #8 from dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net 2009-03-16 02:13 -------
(In reply to comment #7)
> The following patch solves this problem and prevents the name collision for 32
> and 64 bits win32 systems.
>
> ChangeLog
>
> * config/i386/i386.md (allocate_stack_worker_32): Use
> ___gnu_chkstk.
> (allocate_stack_worker_64): Likewise.
> * config/i386/cygwin.asm (__alloca): Renamed to __gnu_alloca.
> (___chkstk): Renamed to ___gnu_chkstk.
>
No. This breaks backward compatibility. Static libraries and objects built
with current and older versions of gcc will not be able to resolve references
to __alloca or ___chkstk. Why not add labels with the new names as aliases
rather than replace.
Danny
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2009-03-16 2:13 ` dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net
@ 2009-03-16 9:16 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-03-19 14:33 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-03-16 9:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #9 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-16 09:15 -------
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > The following patch solves this problem and prevents the name collision for 32
> > and 64 bits win32 systems.
> >
> > ChangeLog
> >
> > * config/i386/i386.md (allocate_stack_worker_32): Use
> > ___gnu_chkstk.
> > (allocate_stack_worker_64): Likewise.
> > * config/i386/cygwin.asm (__alloca): Renamed to __gnu_alloca.
> > (___chkstk): Renamed to ___gnu_chkstk.
> >
> No. This breaks backward compatibility. Static libraries and objects built
> with current and older versions of gcc will not be able to resolve references
> to __alloca or ___chkstk. Why not add labels with the new names as aliases
> rather than replace.
>
> Danny
>
Ok, for 32-bits this makes sense to keep the old symbol names. Beside there is
still a chance that a user uses the manually the chkstk.o file, which can lead
to undefined behaviour (at least if the user code references __chkstk).
For 64-bit I prefer to avoid those old names and simply rename it.
Is this ok for you? I'll file then a patch for it?
Kai
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2009-03-16 9:16 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-03-19 14:33 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-03-20 5:29 ` nightstrike at gmail dot com
` (8 subsequent siblings)
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-03-19 14:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #10 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-19 14:33 -------
(In reply to comment #9)
Patch sent. See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-03/msg00914.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2009-03-19 14:33 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-03-20 5:29 ` nightstrike at gmail dot com
2009-06-22 1:11 ` xenofears at gmail dot com
` (7 subsequent siblings)
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: nightstrike at gmail dot com @ 2009-03-20 5:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #11 from nightstrike at gmail dot com 2009-03-20 05:28 -------
I can confirm that our 4.3 release worked, and that this is a 4.4 regression.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2009-03-20 5:29 ` nightstrike at gmail dot com
@ 2009-06-22 1:11 ` xenofears at gmail dot com
2009-06-22 1:42 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: xenofears at gmail dot com @ 2009-06-22 1:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #12 from xenofears at gmail dot com 2009-06-22 01:11 -------
(In reply to comment #10)
> (In reply to comment #9)
> Patch sent. See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-03/msg00914.html
(I am new as an official team member of Mingw-w64, and am making a project of
my own based on it. You will see it by tomorrow morning at
http://www.cadforte.com for now, which I own and run in my own network.
Greetings everyone.)
I can confirm this works, with optimization set to -O0. Windows x64 native
still fails in stage 2 with -O2, as is default for the bootstrap. I will report
this as a separate bug. In addition, -DCLOOG_PPL_BACKEND fails in stage 1.
I have been trying to build native x64 gcc for weeks, and you can expect other
reports from me.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2009-06-22 1:11 ` xenofears at gmail dot com
@ 2009-06-22 1:42 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-06-22 1:43 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-06-22 1:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #13 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 01:42 -------
*** Bug 40513 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |xenofears at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2009-06-22 1:42 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-06-22 1:43 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-07-22 12:24 ` rainer at emrich-ebersheim dot de
` (4 subsequent siblings)
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-06-22 1:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 01:42 -------
*** Bug 40514 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2009-06-22 1:43 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-07-22 12:24 ` rainer at emrich-ebersheim dot de
2009-07-22 16:07 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: rainer at emrich-ebersheim dot de @ 2009-07-22 12:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #15 from rainer at emrich-ebersheim dot de 2009-07-22 12:24 -------
Is there a chance that we get this fixed soon?
Rainer
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2009-07-22 12:24 ` rainer at emrich-ebersheim dot de
@ 2009-07-22 16:07 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-08-30 8:35 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-07-22 16:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #16 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-22 16:06 -------
(In reply to comment #15)
> Is there a chance that we get this fixed soon?
>
> Rainer
>
Well, I would like to fix this. Better now then later. But I couldn't find the
real reason for this issue. The patch above solved the problem on 4.4.0 branch
some time ago, but now it seems to be a different issue. But AFAICT is is
related to chkstk/alloca here.
Cheers,
Kai
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (15 preceding siblings ...)
2009-07-22 16:07 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-08-30 8:35 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-08-31 8:11 ` rainer at emrich-ebersheim dot de
2009-09-01 16:16 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-08-30 8:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #17 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-30 08:35 -------
(In reply to comment #16)
> (In reply to comment #15)
> > Is there a chance that we get this fixed soon?
> >
> > Rainer
> >
>
> Well, I would like to fix this. Better now then later. But I couldn't find the
> real reason for this issue. The patch above solved the problem on 4.4.0 branch
> some time ago, but now it seems to be a different issue. But AFAICT is is
> related to chkstk/alloca here.
>
> Cheers,
> Kai
>
Could you please test if issue still exist for trunk and current 4.4 branch. It
could be a duplicate of PR/41184.
Cheers,
Kai
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (16 preceding siblings ...)
2009-08-30 8:35 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-08-31 8:11 ` rainer at emrich-ebersheim dot de
2009-09-01 16:16 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: rainer at emrich-ebersheim dot de @ 2009-08-31 8:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #18 from rainer at emrich-ebersheim dot de 2009-08-31 08:11 -------
Subject: Re: assembler isn't called
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org schrieb:
> ------- Comment #17 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-30 08:35 -------
> (In reply to comment #16)
>> (In reply to comment #15)
>>> Is there a chance that we get this fixed soon?
>>>
>>> Rainer
>>>
>> Well, I would like to fix this. Better now then later. But I couldn't find the
>> real reason for this issue. The patch above solved the problem on 4.4.0 branch
>> some time ago, but now it seems to be a different issue. But AFAICT is is
>> related to chkstk/alloca here.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Kai
>>
>
> Could you please test if issue still exist for trunk and current 4.4 branch. It
> could be a duplicate of PR/41184.
>
> Cheers,
> Kai
>
>
I will try, but probably not before Wednesday.
Cheers,
Rainer
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAkqbhZMACgkQoUhjsh59BL5I8gCgiofn0d3yJ1v7DnkIH9hGr3y8
DzAAn1aDUGlbuS64F44c/p7woSY5J5oI
=f36P
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [Bug driver/39356] assembler isn't called
2009-03-03 14:03 [Bug driver/39356] New: assembler isn't called r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com
` (17 preceding siblings ...)
2009-08-31 8:11 ` rainer at emrich-ebersheim dot de
@ 2009-09-01 16:16 ` ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org
18 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-09-01 16:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #19 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-01 16:16 -------
I verified it by myself and it is a duplicate of 41184
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 41184 ***
--
ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |DUPLICATE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread