From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17276 invoked by alias); 23 Aug 2009 11:41:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 17216 invoked by uid 48); 23 Aug 2009 11:41:33 -0000 Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 11:41:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20090823114133.17215.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug target/40718] Invalid code produced with -foptimize-sibling-calls In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "ubizjak at gmail dot com" 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: 2009-08/txt/msg01806.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #9 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-08-23 11:41 ------- (In reply to comment #8) > This patch fixes for me Dmitry's sample, but does not fix mine. Still SIGSEGVs. > I've managed to > place whole testcase in one file: Ah, the same cure should be applied to "*call_value_pop_1" pattern too. Wait a minute, I'll craft a patch ASAP. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40718