From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3544 invoked by alias); 25 Oct 2002 19:36:00 -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 3517 invoked by uid 71); 25 Oct 2002 19:36:00 -0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 12:36:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20021025193600.3516.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Peter Barada Subject: Re: target/8343: m68k-elf/rtems ICE at instantiate_virtual_regs_1 Reply-To: Peter Barada X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg01028.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR target/8343; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Peter Barada To: graham.stott@btinternet.com Cc: joel@gcc.gnu.org, ccj@acm.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, joel@OARcorp.com, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, Peter.Barada@motorola.com, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: target/8343: m68k-elf/rtems ICE at instantiate_virtual_regs_1 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 15:27:34 -0400 > Synopsis: m68k-elf/rtems ICE at instantiate_virtual_regs_1 > > State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback > State-Changed-By: joel > State-Changed-When: Fri Oct 25 05:59:45 2002 > State-Changed-Why: > Peter Barada has this important piece of information which > should be a big clue to fixing it: > > Ok, I've narrowed your ICE down to between two version, one 525 days > ago(where it worked) and 523 days ago (where it failed). > > The verion from each is: > > Fail: version 3.1 20010519 > Work: version 3.1 20010517 I've narrowed it even further :-) 'cvs update -D "2001/05/19 04:24:49" gcc' works 'cvs update -D "2001/05/19 04:29:50" gcc' fails The only thing of interest changing is gcc/gcc/recog.c, from version 1.102 to version 1.103. The log for gcc/gcc/recog.c looks like: revision 1.103 date: 2001/05/19 08:24:50; author: hubicka; state: Exp; lines: +85 -150 * recog.c (general_operand): Prohibit nonzero subreg bytes on subregs containing mem. This was with the following testcase: extern unsigned foo; unsigned long long bar (void) { unsigned long long t = foo; return t * foo; } Hope this helps someone find what's broken... Now back to seeing if I can make any sense out of target/8309. -- Peter Barada Peter.Barada@motorola.com Wizard 781-852-2768 (direct) WaveMark Solutions(wholly owned by Motorola) 781-270-0193 (fax)