From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12601 invoked by alias); 30 Jul 2010 15:10:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 12439 invoked by alias); 30 Jul 2010 15:09:38 -0000 Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:10:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100730150938.12438.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug bootstrap/44970] [4.6 regression] Revision 162270 failed to bootstrap In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca" 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: 2010-07/txt/msg03324.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #53 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2010-07-30 15:09 ------- Subject: Re: [4.6 regression] Revision 162270 failed to bootstrap On Thu, 29 Jul 2010, bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > ------- Comment #51 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-29 19:46 ------- > Thanks. I can more-or-less produce the same assembly with a cross compiler, > but just from looking at the assembly and the debugging dumps I can't quite > figure out which function is being miscompiled. Can you produce a good (not > miscompiled) .s file with a working cc1 and attach that as well for comparison? Just one further point, I know that the problem is related to 2010-07-16 Bernd Schmidt PR target/42235 * function.c (record_hard_reg_sets): New static function. (assign_parm_setup_reg): If an optab for extending exists and the generated code clobbbers no hard regs, emit the insn directly and create a REG_EQUIV note. At least at one time, reverting this change restored bootstrap. It probably would be useful to compare .s files with and without this change. Dave -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44970