public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug target/43546] New: ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm
@ 2010-03-26 19:12 zsojka at seznam dot cz
2010-03-26 19:37 ` [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (9 more replies)
0 siblings, 10 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: zsojka at seznam dot cz @ 2010-03-26 19:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
Command line:
gcc -O1 -m32 -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm -msse testcase.c
------ testcase.c ------
extern void bar(double);
void foo() { bar(1.0); }
------------------------
Tested revisions:
r157723 - crash
alpha20100318 - segfault (without checking)
r153685 - crash
4.4 r153668 - crash
4.4.3, 4.3.4, 4.2.4, 4.1.2 (gentoo) - OK (without checking)
3.4.6, 3.3.6 - doesn't know -msseregparm
Compiler output:
/mnt/svn/gcc-trunk/binary-157723-lto/bin/gcc -O1 -m32
-mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm -msse testcase.c
testcase.c: In function 'foo':
testcase.c:2:1: internal compiler error: in assign_stack_local_1, at
function.c:353
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
--
Summary: ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -
mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: zsojka at seznam dot cz
GCC host triplet: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43546
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm
2010-03-26 19:12 [Bug target/43546] New: ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm zsojka at seznam dot cz
@ 2010-03-26 19:37 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-03-26 23:26 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (8 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-03-26 19:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-26 19:37 -------
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Keywords| |ice-on-valid-code
Known to fail| |4.4.0 4.4.3 4.5.0
Known to work| |4.3.4
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-03-26 19:37:06
date| |
Summary|ICE: in |[4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE: in
|assign_stack_local_1, at |assign_stack_local_1, at
|function.c:353 with - |function.c:353 with -
|mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 |mpreferred-stack-boundary=2
|-msseregparm |-msseregparm
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43546
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm
2010-03-26 19:12 [Bug target/43546] New: ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm zsojka at seznam dot cz
2010-03-26 19:37 ` [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-03-26 23:26 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2010-03-26 23:29 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (7 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com @ 2010-03-26 23:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-03-26 23:26 -------
We are trying to store DFmode with SFmode alignment since
compress_float_constant converts 1.0DF to 1.0SF. This patch
works around the problem:
--
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
index 35b4c49..14879c2 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
@@ -25828,7 +25828,8 @@ ix86_rtx_costs (rtx x, int code, int outer_code_i, int
*total, bool speed)
return false;
case FLOAT_EXTEND:
- if (!(SSE_FLOAT_MODE_P (mode) && TARGET_SSE_MATH))
+ if (!(SSE_FLOAT_MODE_P (mode)
+ && (TARGET_SSE_MATH || TARGET_SSEREGPARM)))
*total = 0;
return false;
--
-msseregparm is very similar to -mfpmath=sse for function parameters.
Personally, I think we should allow -msseregparm only if -mfpmath=sse
is used.
---
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
index 35b4c49..9f6d947 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
@@ -3306,10 +3306,11 @@ override_options (bool main_args_p)
}
}
- /* Accept -msseregparm only if at least SSE support is enabled. */
+ /* Accept -msseregparm only if at least SSE fpmath support is enabled. */
if (TARGET_SSEREGPARM
- && ! TARGET_SSE)
- error ("%ssseregparm%s used without SSE enabled", prefix, suffix);
+ && ! TARGET_SSE_MATH)
+ error ("%ssseregparm%s used without SSE fpmath enabled",
+ prefix, suffix);
ix86_fpmath = TARGET_FPMATH_DEFAULT;
if (ix86_fpmath_string != 0)
@@ -4620,16 +4621,16 @@ ix86_function_sseregparm (const_tree type, const_tree
decl, bool warn)
if (TARGET_SSEREGPARM
|| (type && lookup_attribute ("sseregparm", TYPE_ATTRIBUTES (type))))
{
- if (!TARGET_SSE)
+ if (!TARGET_SSEREGPARM)
{
if (warn)
{
if (decl)
error ("Calling %qD with attribute sseregparm without "
- "SSE/SSE2 enabled", decl);
+ "SSE fpmath enabled", decl);
else
error ("Calling %qT with attribute sseregparm without "
- "SSE/SSE2 enabled", type);
+ "SSE fpmath enabled", type);
}
return 0;
}
--
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |hjl dot tools at gmail dot
| |com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43546
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm
2010-03-26 19:12 [Bug target/43546] New: ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm zsojka at seznam dot cz
2010-03-26 19:37 ` [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-03-26 23:26 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
@ 2010-03-26 23:29 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2010-03-27 12:53 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com @ 2010-03-26 23:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-03-26 23:29 -------
Created an attachment (id=20219)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20219&action=view)
A patch to check TARGET_SSE_MATH instead of TARGET_SSE
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43546
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm
2010-03-26 19:12 [Bug target/43546] New: ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2010-03-26 23:29 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
@ 2010-03-27 12:53 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-03-27 14:11 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (5 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-03-27 12:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-27 12:53 -------
No, sseregparm should be perfectly fine with x87 math - it only needs
(obviously) SSE registers available. It's an ABI switch like regparm,
whether math is done using SSE registers or x87 math doesn't and shouldn't
matter.
The workaround looks odd - it can't be the real solution.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43546
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm
2010-03-26 19:12 [Bug target/43546] New: ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2010-03-27 12:53 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-03-27 14:11 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2010-03-27 15:24 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com @ 2010-03-27 14:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-03-27 14:11 -------
(In reply to comment #4)
> No, sseregparm should be perfectly fine with x87 math - it only needs
> (obviously) SSE registers available. It's an ABI switch like regparm,
> whether math is done using SSE registers or x87 math doesn't and shouldn't
> matter.
>
Then you need to exam all code paths with -msseregparm to see
if TARGET_SSEREGPARM check is needed when TARGET_SSE_MATH is
checked.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43546
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm
2010-03-26 19:12 [Bug target/43546] New: ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2010-03-27 14:11 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
@ 2010-03-27 15:24 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-03-27 15:38 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
` (3 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-03-27 15:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-27 15:23 -------
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > No, sseregparm should be perfectly fine with x87 math - it only needs
> > (obviously) SSE registers available. It's an ABI switch like regparm,
> > whether math is done using SSE registers or x87 math doesn't and shouldn't
> > matter.
> >
>
> Then you need to exam all code paths with -msseregparm to see
> if TARGET_SSEREGPARM check is needed when TARGET_SSE_MATH is
> checked.
I don't follow. TARGET_SSEREGPARM does not mean you'll do SSE math.
It merely says that you can expect incoming arguments in SSE registers
instead of on stack. For -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 how is the stack
for incoming arguments of double type aligned? Also if we'd ever spill
a double to stack with x87 math we'd run into exactly the same assert?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43546
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm
2010-03-26 19:12 [Bug target/43546] New: ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2010-03-27 15:24 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-03-27 15:38 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2010-03-27 16:38 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com @ 2010-03-27 15:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-03-27 15:37 -------
(In reply to comment #6)
> I don't follow. TARGET_SSEREGPARM does not mean you'll do SSE math.
> It merely says that you can expect incoming arguments in SSE registers
> instead of on stack. For -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 how is the stack
> for incoming arguments of double type aligned? Also if we'd ever spill
> a double to stack with x87 math we'd run into exactly the same assert?
>
TARGET_SSEREGPARM may put DF/SF in xmm registers for
function parameters, which is very similar to TARGET_SSE_MATH
which uses xmm for DF/SF, but more than just function parameters.
BTW, "-mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msse" never worked before
gcc 4.4. We have a bunch of related bug reports:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33721
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43546
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm
2010-03-26 19:12 [Bug target/43546] New: ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2010-03-27 15:38 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
@ 2010-03-27 16:38 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-03-27 16:39 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-30 8:56 ` [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5/4.6 " jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
9 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-03-27 16:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-27 16:38 -------
Just to clarify, the issue is that
(insn 6 5 7 2 t.i:2 (set (reg:DF 21 xmm0)
(float_extend:DF (mem/u/c/i:SF (symbol_ref/u:SI ("*.LC0") [flags 0x2])
[0 S4 A32]))) 99 {*extendsfdf2_i387} (expr_list:REG_EQUAL (const_double:DF
-2147483648 [0x80000000] 1.0e+0 [0x0.8p+1])
(nil)))
with
(define_insn "*extendsfdf2_i387"
[(set (match_operand:DF 0 "nonimmediate_operand" "=f,m")
(float_extend:DF (match_operand:SF 1 "nonimmediate_operand" "fm,f")))]
"TARGET_80387"
"* return output_387_reg_move (insn, operands);"
[(set_attr "type" "fmov")
(set_attr "mode" "SF,XF")])
requires a reload for the x87 register to xmm0 move. The
(define_insn "*extendsfdf2_sse"
[(set (match_operand:DF 0 "nonimmediate_operand" "=x")
(float_extend:DF (match_operand:SF 1 "nonimmediate_operand" "xm")))]
"TARGET_SSE2 && TARGET_SSE_MATH"
"%vcvtss2sd\t{%1, %d0|%d0, %1}"
[(set_attr "type" "ssecvt")
(set_attr "prefix" "maybe_vex")
(set_attr "mode" "DF")])
alternative is not enabled, both because just -msse is supplied and
SSE math is not enabled. But I fail to see why we can't go through
unaligned memory if the user asks us to - which puts the finger
at the assert that triggers (and maybe reload if it can not properly
deal with less aligned stack slots).
Testcase that doesn't need -msseregparm:
extern void __attribute__((sseregparm)) bar(double);
void foo() { bar(1.0); }
commenting the assert yields odd
foo:
pushl %ebp
movl %esp, %ebp
subl $8, %esp
fld1
fstpl -8(%ebp)
movlps -8(%ebp), %xmm0
call bar
leave
ret
obviously w/o -msse2 there's no movsd, thus the odd code.
And the handed out secondary memory has correct alignment:
insn 6 5 11 2 t.i:2 (set (reg:DF 8 st)
(float_extend:DF (mem/u/c/i:SF (symbol_ref/u:SI ("*.LC0") [flags 0x2])
[0 S4 A32]))) 99 {*extendsfdf2_i387} (expr_list:REG_EQUAL (const_double:DF
-2147483648 [0x80000000] 1.0e+0 [0x0.8p+1])
(nil)))
(insn 11 6 12 2 t.i:2 (set (mem/c:DF (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 6 bp)
(const_int -8 [0xfffffff8])) [0 S8 A32])
(reg:DF 8 st)) 74 {*movdf_nointeger} (nil))
(insn 12 11 7 2 t.i:2 (set (reg:DF 21 xmm0)
(mem/c:DF (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 6 bp)
(const_int -8 [0xfffffff8])) [0 S8 A32])) 74 {*movdf_nointeger}
(nil))
(call_insn 7 12 10 2 t.i:2 (call (mem:QI (symbol_ref:SI ("bar") [flags 0x41]
<function_decl 0xb77a4c80 bar>) [0 S1 A8])
(const_int 0 [0x0])) 484 {*call_0} (nil)
(expr_list:REG_DEP_TRUE (use (reg:DF 21 xmm0))
(nil)))
so why are we using assign_stack_local here and not assign_stack_local_1 (...,
true)? Here, at
#3 0x0846d729 in get_secondary_mem (x=0xb77a96f0, mode=DFmode, opnum=0,
type=RELOAD_FOR_OUTPUT) at /home/richard/src/trunk/gcc/reload.c:608
608 = assign_stack_local (mode, GET_MODE_SIZE (mode), 0);
(gdb) l
603 {
604 #ifdef SECONDARY_MEMORY_NEEDED_RTX
605 secondary_memlocs[(int) mode] = SECONDARY_MEMORY_NEEDED_RTX
(mode);
606 #else
607 secondary_memlocs[(int) mode]
608 = assign_stack_local (mode, GET_MODE_SIZE (mode), 0);
609 #endif
610 }
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43546
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm
2010-03-26 19:12 [Bug target/43546] New: ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2010-03-27 16:38 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-03-27 16:39 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-30 8:56 ` [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5/4.6 " jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
9 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-03-27 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-27 16:39 -------
In fact reduce_alignment_ok is _only_ used in the assert.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43546
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm
2010-03-26 19:12 [Bug target/43546] New: ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm zsojka at seznam dot cz
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2010-03-27 16:39 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-30 8:56 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
9 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-30 8:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|4.4.4 |4.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43546
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm
[not found] <bug-43546-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2010-10-01 12:10 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2010-10-01 12:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43546
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|4.4.5 |4.4.6
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-10-01 12:10 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-03-26 19:12 [Bug target/43546] New: ICE: in assign_stack_local_1, at function.c:353 with -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -msseregparm zsojka at seznam dot cz
2010-03-26 19:37 ` [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-03-26 23:26 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2010-03-26 23:29 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2010-03-27 12:53 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-03-27 14:11 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2010-03-27 15:24 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-03-27 15:38 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2010-03-27 16:38 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-03-27 16:39 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-30 8:56 ` [Bug target/43546] [4.4/4.5/4.6 " jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
[not found] <bug-43546-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2010-10-01 12:10 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).