From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-447035-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 26393 invoked by alias); 20 Mar 2014 19:47:35 -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
Received: (qmail 26316 invoked by uid 48); 20 Mar 2014 19:47:30 -0000
From: "ramana at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/53793] [ARM] Debug info is wrong at optimization level -O1
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 19:47:00 -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: 4.6.2
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-debug
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
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: bug_status cc resolution
Message-ID: <bug-53793-4-wZrNnvk8fm@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-53793-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-53793-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-03/txt/msg01904.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53793

Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
                 CC|                            |ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
         Resolution|---                         |WONTFIX

--- Comment #3 from Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Mohamed Shafi from comment #2)
> So this is fixed in 4.7 then. Any plan to back port this?

No plans to backport any of the prologue / epilogue stuff into 4.6. If you see
problems in more recent compilers please raise a bug.