From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id BDB863858C01; Tue, 24 Oct 2023 04:33:23 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org BDB863858C01 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1698122003; bh=tOBdGXeuuX04KNDqn7XGFhemcwBKfPXKTxUVm/2PBp4=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=DzlJUhTd+oK2onOgsxuSpsmtV/HTZatrHs4mtL2S8ussHhB9JhwiXFVXh+XE3dBys 9sl+IN+dGcjbSrYYTTDNRBRla37GHkepNX5N03/2KrAluIONEVm5N7rruIHQjE/Bvw a4ESpP2bnZ9ElGuW/5kGbFFTgTrr6KHJrUcMxod8= From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/111677] [12/13/14 Regression] darktable build on aarch64 fails with unrecognizable insn due to -fstack-protector changes Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 04:33:23 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: target X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.2.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D111677 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- Really I wished the -fstack-protector changes were NOT backported since it = was not a regression and not a security issue (according to GCC's own security policy).=