From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26340 invoked by alias); 21 Nov 2001 07:06:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 26304 invoked by uid 71); 21 Nov 2001 07:06:04 -0000 Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 09:38:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20011121070604.26301.qmail@sourceware.cygnus.com> To: wilson@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: wilson@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: target/2246: Code generated for IA64 doesn't reset NaT bit on scratch reg Reply-To: wilson@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2001-11/txt/msg00380.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR target/2246; it has been noted by GNATS. From: wilson@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, sje@cup.hp.com, wilson@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Subject: Re: target/2246: Code generated for IA64 doesn't reset NaT bit on scratch reg Date: 21 Nov 2001 07:04:47 -0000 Synopsis: Code generated for IA64 doesn't reset NaT bit on scratch reg State-Changed-From-To: analyzed->closed State-Changed-By: wilson State-Changed-When: Tue Nov 20 23:04:46 2001 State-Changed-Why: Andrew MacLeod has contributed two patches to address NaT problems. The first patch fixes the specific problem shown by this testcase, and is nearly identical to a patch that Steve Ellcey suggested on a private mailing list. The second patch fixes the general instance of this problem as described in my comments. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2001-11/msg00501.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2001-11/msg00500.html Both patches have been approved, but have not been checked in yet. That should happen shortly. http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&pr=2246&database=gcc