* [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails
2011-10-06 12:59 [Bug middle-end/50628] New: [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-10-06 13:09 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-06 13:35 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (14 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-10-06 13:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-10-06 13:09:03 UTC ---
For completeness, the test case also works with NAG 5.1 (-C=all and -O4), ifort
11.1 (-xHost -O3), pathf95 3.2.99 (-Ofast), openf95 4.2.2.1 (-Ofast), pgf90
10.1-0 (-O3) and 11.5-0 (-fast) and Crayftn 7.1.4.111 (-O3).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails
2011-10-06 12:59 [Bug middle-end/50628] New: [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-06 13:09 ` [Bug middle-end/50628] " burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-10-06 13:35 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-06 13:51 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-10-06 13:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2011-10-06
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-10-06 13:34:38 UTC ---
PRE now changes
-<bb 6>:
D.2317 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR<union munion.1.f2>(__complex__ (4.5e+1, 0.0));
D.2317.e2 = 0;
- D.2329_19 = REALPART_EXPR <VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR<complex(kind=4)>(D.2317)>;
+ D.2329_19 = 0.0;
D.2330_20 = IMAGPART_EXPR <VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR<complex(kind=4)>(D.2317)>;
- D.2331_21 = D.2329_19 != 4.5e+1;
+ D.2331_21 = 1;
D.2332_22 = D.2330_20 != 0.0;
- D.2333_23 = D.2332_22 | D.2331_21;
- if (D.2333_23 == 1)
but you can see that the transform is correct - __complex__ (4.5e+1, 0.0)
is stored to D.2317 but then the realpart is overwritten by a boolean(kind=4)
false. Which is interpreted as 0.0 by REALPART_EXPR
<VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR<complex(kind=4)>(D.2317)>; thus the D.2329_19 != 4.5e+1
is always true.
that's the e1 (7) test. Without PRE it fails at the g4 (2) test (via FRE).
I suppose the frontend eventually fails foul of aliasing issues here?
Reduced testcase:
complex function f2 (a)
integer a
logical e2
entry e2 (a)
if (a .gt. 0) then
e2 = a .lt. 46
else
f2 = 45
endif
end function
program entrytest
complex f2
if (f2 (0) .ne. 45) call abort ()
end
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails
2011-10-06 12:59 [Bug middle-end/50628] New: [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-06 13:09 ` [Bug middle-end/50628] " burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-06 13:35 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-10-06 13:51 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-06 13:55 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
` (12 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-10-06 13:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-10-06 13:50:42 UTC ---
Looks like SRA messes up:
f2 (integer(kind=4) * a)
{
+ complex(kind=4) D.1794;
+ complex(kind=4) SR.5;
+ logical(kind=4) SR.4;
integer(kind=4) D.1791;
logical(kind=4) D.1790;
union munion.0.f2 D.1789;
@@ -181,8 +79,11 @@
<bb 5>:
D.1789 = __result_master.0.f2;
- __result = D.1789;
- D.1779_2 = __result.f2;
+ SR.4_11 = __result_master.0.f2.e2;
+ D.1789.e2 = SR.4_11;
+ D.1794_12 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR<complex(kind=4)>(D.1789);
+ SR.5_14 = D.1794_12;
+ D.1779_2 = SR.5_14;
return D.1779_2;
that looks like quite a stupit transform (the load and the store, using
logical(kind=4) which has the right size but precision 1 - and thus
truncates!)!
FRE then goes and does
__result_master.0.f2.f2 = __complex__ (4.5e+1, 0.0);
D.1808 = __result_master.0.f2;
SR.7_12 = __result_master.0.f2.e2;
- SR.4_6 = __result_master.0.f2.e2;
+ SR.4_6 = 0;
SR.7_8 = SR.4_6;
D.1808.e2 = SR.7_8;
D.1802_7 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR<complex(kind=4)>(D.1808);
because it simply interprets bit zero of 4.5e+1.
Martin?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails
2011-10-06 12:59 [Bug middle-end/50628] New: [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2011-10-06 13:51 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-10-06 13:55 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2011-10-06 14:08 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2011-10-06 13:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> 2011-10-06 13:55:24 UTC ---
This is due to/exposed by revision 179566. The test succeeds with -O2
-fno-inline-small-functions, but fails with -O1 -finline-small-functions.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails
2011-10-06 12:59 [Bug middle-end/50628] New: [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2011-10-06 13:55 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
@ 2011-10-06 14:08 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-06 18:15 ` mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-10-06 14:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-10-06 14:08:08 UTC ---
Basically SRA transforms
union u { char c; bool b; };
u.c = ...;
if (u.c ...)
to
u.c = ...;
bool reg = u.b;
u.b = reg;
if (u.c ...)
which is at least suspicious. If a user would write this I'd say it
is simply undefined (because u.b cannot represent all values that
are in the memory location of u.c).
FRE exposes this via native_interpret_int which at the end does
return double_int_to_tree (type, result);
}
which truncates the value to 1-bit precision. We probably don't want
out-of-precision INTEGER_CSTs here, so we could at most fail here.
But clearly SRA should avoid doing what it does.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails
2011-10-06 12:59 [Bug middle-end/50628] New: [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2011-10-06 14:08 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-10-06 18:15 ` mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-06 18:17 ` [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f90 fails mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: mikael at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-10-06 18:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #6 from Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-10-06 18:13:08 UTC ---
*** Bug 50634 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f90 fails
2011-10-06 12:59 [Bug middle-end/50628] New: [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2011-10-06 18:15 ` mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-10-06 18:17 ` mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-06 18:28 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
` (8 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: mikael at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-10-06 18:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
Summary|[4.7 Regression] |[4.7 Regression]
|gfortran.fortran-torture/ex |gfortran.fortran-torture/ex
|ecute/entry_4.f fails |ecute/entry_4.f90 fails
--- Comment #7 from Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-10-06 18:16:53 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> This is due to/exposed by revision 179566.
According to H.J. in bug 50634:
> On Linux/x86-64, revision 179556:
There is certainly a typo in one of the reported revisions.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f90 fails
2011-10-06 12:59 [Bug middle-end/50628] New: [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2011-10-06 18:17 ` [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f90 fails mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-10-06 18:28 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2011-10-10 15:29 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2011-10-06 18:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> 2011-10-06 18:28:00 UTC ---
> There is certainly a typo in one of the reported revisions.
Yes, it is 179556.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f90 fails
2011-10-06 12:59 [Bug middle-end/50628] New: [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2011-10-06 18:28 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
@ 2011-10-10 15:29 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-03 18:47 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
` (6 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-10-10 15:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|P3 |P1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f90 fails
2011-10-06 12:59 [Bug middle-end/50628] New: [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2011-10-10 15:29 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-11-03 18:47 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2011-11-12 12:33 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
` (5 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2011-11-03 18:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> 2011-11-03 18:45:34 UTC ---
*** Bug 50985 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f90 fails
2011-10-06 12:59 [Bug middle-end/50628] New: [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2011-11-03 18:47 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
@ 2011-11-12 12:33 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2011-11-23 16:41 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2011-11-12 12:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
--- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> 2011-11-12 12:21:27 UTC ---
On x86_64-apple-darwin10 the test was failing for both -m32 and -m64 up to
revision 181046. From revision 181258 it fails only with -m64.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f90 fails
2011-10-06 12:59 [Bug middle-end/50628] New: [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2011-11-12 12:33 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
@ 2011-11-23 16:41 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-24 13:47 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-11-23 16:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-11-23 16:01:37 UTC ---
What happens in SRA is this. This a part of the dump before SRA
(ealias):
<bb 2>:
D.2127_5 = *a_1(D);
if (D.2127_5 > 0)
goto <bb 3>;
else
goto <bb 4>;
<bb 3>:
D.2126_6 = D.2127_5 <= 45;
/* In the following statement SRA notices a logical access
to __result_master.1.f2. */
__result_master.1.f2.e2 = D.2126_6;
goto <bb 5>;
<bb 4>:
/* In the following statement SRA notices a complex access
to __result_master.1.f2. If a scalar type access has a scalar type
sub-access, they cannot be made into replacements. */
__result_master.1.f2.f2 = __complex__ (4.5e+1, 0.0);
<bb 5>:
/* However, before SRA figures that out, it propagates the logical
sub-accesses across the following aggregate assignment in order to
facilitate pseudo copy propagation of aggregates. Thus, D.2125 gets an
artificial logical sub-access which is a child of an aggregate and qualifies
for replacement creation. And that's why the weird logical variable gets
there. */
D.2125 = __result_master.1.f2;
__result_master.1.f2 ={v} {CLOBBER};
__result = D.2125;
D.2056_2 = __result.f2;
}
We should not do propagation of sub-accesses of scalar accesses because
that's never profitable and it would also fix this testcase.
However, I'm afraid that if we encapsulated
__result_master.1.f2.f2 = __complex__ (4.5e+1, 0.0);
into the union type and moved the last two statements of the function
into a different function, we would get the logical replacements of
__result_master.1.f2 and D.2125 again and might incur the same problems
(depending on whether FRE would be able to look through this).
SRA on unions and type-conversions is tough.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f90 fails
2011-10-06 12:59 [Bug middle-end/50628] New: [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2011-11-23 16:41 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-11-24 13:47 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-12-03 15:19 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
` (2 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-11-24 13:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
--- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-11-24 12:18:46 UTC ---
Created attachment 25909
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25909
Fix
This is the fix I wrote about yesterday. It bootstraps and tests fine
on x86_64 and we should want to have it because it always avoids
unnecessary work, even though I find it difficult to see it as a
correctness check. Well...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f90 fails
2011-10-06 12:59 [Bug middle-end/50628] New: [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2011-11-24 13:47 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-12-03 15:19 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2011-12-13 16:17 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-12-13 16:27 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2011-12-03 15:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
--- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> 2011-12-03 15:18:06 UTC ---
On x86_64-apple-darwin10, the patch in comment #12 fixes the pr without new
regression. Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f90 fails
2011-10-06 12:59 [Bug middle-end/50628] New: [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2011-12-03 15:19 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
@ 2011-12-13 16:17 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-12-13 16:27 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-12-13 16:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
--- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-12-13 16:08:19 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Dec 13 16:08:14 2011
New Revision: 182289
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182289
Log:
2011-12-13 Martin Jambor <mjambor@suse.cz>
PR middle-end/50628
* tree-sra.c (propagate_subaccesses_across_link): Do not propagate
sub-accesses of scalar accesses.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/tree-sra.c
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/50628] [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f90 fails
2011-10-06 12:59 [Bug middle-end/50628] New: [4.7 Regression] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f fails burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2011-12-13 16:17 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-12-13 16:27 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-12-13 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
URL| |http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
| |atches/2011-12/msg01000.htm
| |l
Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #15 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-12-13 16:16:28 UTC ---
This is now fixed with the patch from comment #12.
However, this PR helped to uncover a more fundamental bug which is now
PR 51528.
For reference, the message in the mailing list is:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-12/msg01000.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread