From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22164 invoked by alias); 13 Jan 2015 20:17:57 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 22116 invoked by uid 48); 13 Jan 2015 20:17:51 -0000 From: "sandra at codesourcery dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/64377] nios2 compile error in options-save.c Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 20:17:00 -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: 5.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: build X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: sandra at codesourcery dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW 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: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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: 2015-01/txt/msg01058.txt.bz2 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64377 --- Comment #13 from Sandra Loosemore --- I think the new version of the patch in comment 11 is probably OK. I ran the entire gcc testsuite (but not g++, etc yet) and have a couple hundred regressions compared to my r217010 build, but I don't see a pattern of them being obviously lto-related. (I started skimming over them and they look mostly like broken test cases.)