From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 94880 invoked by alias); 6 Jul 2015 18:53:39 -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 94815 invoked by uid 48); 6 Jul 2015 18:53:35 -0000 From: "ubizjak at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/66782] Unable to run 64-bit wine after MS->SYSV register changes Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2015 18:53:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.1.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: ubizjak at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 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: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2015-07/txt/msg00490.txt.bz2 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D66782 --- Comment #1 from Uro=C5=A1 Bizjak --- Adding clobbered registers explicitly is exactly the same as adding them to call_fusage, so I don't see any problem here from the first sight. Can you please provide a minimized testcase, following instructions at [1]. Unfortunately, I don't have access to Windows target, please provide a test= case that fails on linux. You can decorate calls with __attribute__((ms_abi)) ev= en on linux. [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/#report >>From gcc-bugs-return-491601-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Jul 06 19:03:28 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 116976 invoked by alias); 6 Jul 2015 19:03:28 -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 116853 invoked by uid 48); 6 Jul 2015 19:03:19 -0000 From: "schwab@linux-m68k.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/66773] sign-compare warning for == and != are pretty useless Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2015 19:03:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.7.2 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: schwab@linux-m68k.org X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 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: 2015-07/txt/msg00491.txt.bz2 Content-length: 178 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66773 --- Comment #3 from Andreas Schwab --- It's always the boundary cases that matter most for security.