From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-359025-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 5846 invoked by alias); 7 Jun 2011 15:21:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 5745 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Jun 2011 15:21:56 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.7 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 07 Jun 2011 15:21:40 +0000
From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug lto/49277] [4.7 Regression] 456.hmmer in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to build
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: lto
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenther at suse dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.7.0
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-49277-4-FpNegQYOQF@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-49277-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-49277-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 15:21:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-06/txt/msg00551.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49277

--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> 2011-06-07 15:20:37 UTC ---
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote:

> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49277
> 
> --- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-06-07 15:01:48 UTC ---
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > On Mon, 6 Jun 2011, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Can you bisect the set of object files (adding -r -nostdlib to the link)
> > and provide preprocessed source for the minimal set of object files that
> > trigger at least one such error?
> 
> I will do that.
> 
> > The object files are not compatible with the three versions of lto1
> > I have around.
> > 
> 
> Which revision of GCC are you using? My testcase was compiled by
> revision 174710.  I can build my testcase with the same revision of
> your GCCs.

preprocessed source is prefered, otherwise it's hard to minimize
the testcase further.

Richard.