From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 6EEE2384640E; Thu, 25 Apr 2024 08:04:18 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 6EEE2384640E
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1714032258;
	bh=lZMpUstyQ1vgGATSa0piYxPOKmezkIknLmqcHJim5RU=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=Dg5YeYtJfuUTer4LBZ61URmc+lZ53ZVnbv+3+mt37EcAVoxpcn2jaYJmxv+Q0adlN
	 dw7qWVkx5obgrTVc3TQdPTDSm/c3OKkoei+6ua68fu6/dCNL4USzdDh1rqm9W8C/f1
	 T338cysTcPmxVUf9AIrcHSyvBcpU3QHWlDbpGvrY=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/114848] longarch: epilogue in _Unwind_RaiseException
 corrupts return value due to __builtin_eh_return
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2024 08:04:17 +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: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
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: version
Message-ID: <bug-114848-4-wWqzDrycMe@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-114848-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-114848-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D114848

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Version|14.0                        |13.2.0

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #1)
> Hmm, AFAIK this should be already fixed with r14-6440?
>=20
> I cannot reproduce it with r14-9823 but maybe it has regressed again in t=
he
> recent weeks.

Oh I only tested gcc 13.2.0. If it is fixed you can close it.=