From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15559 invoked by alias); 1 Aug 2012 14:27:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 15549 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Aug 2012 14:27:56 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED 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; Wed, 01 Aug 2012 14:27:43 +0000 From: "dave.anglin at bell dot net" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug middle-end/53823] [4.8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/930921-1.c execution at -O0 and -O1 Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 14:27:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: dave.anglin at bell dot net X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rth at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.8.0 X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2012-08/txt/msg00043.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53823 --- Comment #20 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-08-01 14:27:30 UTC --- On 1-Aug-12, at 10:20 AM, dave.anglin at bell dot net wrote: > The difference in extracts and deposits may not be the problem. The - > O2 code appears to have the same extracts as the > -O1 code. I'll see if I can find where the real difference arises. Doh, the correct result is inlined at -O2. foo is still mis-compiled. -- John David Anglin dave.anglin@bell.net