public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "linkw at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/108240] ICE in emit_library_call_value_1 at gcc/calls.cc:4181 since r13-4894-gacc727cf02a144
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2023 07:00:28 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-108240-4-UEByBv1jKH@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-108240-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108240

Kewen Lin <linkw at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Target|poiwerpc                    |powerpc
                 CC|                            |bergner at gcc dot gnu.org,
                   |                            |segher at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin <linkw at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
2) before the culprit commit r13-4894, if there is an explicit -m64, it does
set powerpc64 (as it's set explicitly), while if there is no explicit -m64, it
does nothing. The implicit 64 bit setting would always implicitly enable
powerpc64 initially, so it's fine. As this case shows, it's possible that the
used cpu would unset powerpc64 later if it's not default.

With the culprit commit r13-4894, we always implicitly enable powerpc64 for
both explicit and implicit 64 bit, it's the same as before for the explicit 64
bit case, but for the implicit 64 bit case, there is no chance for the used cpu
to unset powerpc64 (like this case). To keep it consistent with the previous,
the fix can be to only enable powerpc64 implicitly for explicit 64 bit, while
let it be for implicit 64 bit.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-01-03  7:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-12-28  9:13 [Bug target/108240] New: " marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-28  9:24 ` [Bug target/108240] " marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-03  1:55 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-03  6:57 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-03  7:00 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2023-01-09 14:02 ` [Bug target/108240] [13 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-09 14:14 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-10  1:45 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-10  3:04 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-11  9:32 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-11 14:29 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-16  6:40 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-16  6:44 ` [Bug target/108240] [13 Regression] Error message missing since r13-4894-gacc727cf02a144 (then make concealed ICE exposed) linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-17 12:25 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-17 12:49 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-17 13:32 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-01  5:19 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-01  5:38 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-108240-4-UEByBv1jKH@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).