From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 115246 invoked by alias); 17 Apr 2015 12:53:44 -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 115209 invoked by uid 48); 17 Apr 2015 12:53:40 -0000 From: "ubizjak at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/64950] postpone expanding va_arg till pass_stdarg Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 12:53:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: patch X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement X-Bugzilla-Who: ubizjak at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: vries 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: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2015-04/txt/msg01438.txt.bz2 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D64950 --- Comment #8 from Uro=C5=A1 Bizjak --- (In reply to vries from comment #7) > Marking resolved, fixed. So, can PR41089 hack [1] finally be reverted? [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-08/msg00072.html >>From gcc-bugs-return-483887-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Fri Apr 17 12:55:59 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 125672 invoked by alias); 17 Apr 2015 12:55:58 -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 Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 125607 invoked by uid 48); 17 Apr 2015 12:55:54 -0000 From: "jason at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug debug/65549] [4.9/5/6 Regression] crash in htab_hash_string with -flto -g Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 12:55:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: debug X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: lto X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jason at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.9.4 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc 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: 2015-04/txt/msg01439.txt.bz2 Content-length: 806 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65549 Jason Merrill changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #29 from Jason Merrill --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #17) > Lambda functions aren't really nested functions in the tree-nested.c sense, > but still are so closely related to the functions they are nested in that > IMHO it would be desirable not to split them off into separate partitions, > not just temporarily for GCC 5 for debug info reasons. Agreed. decl_function_context of the lambda function should give you the containing function.