From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13134 invoked by alias); 4 Dec 2002 02:56:02 -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 13120 invoked by uid 71); 4 Dec 2002 02:56:02 -0000 Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 18:56:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20021204025602.13119.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" Subject: Re: middle-end/7796: [3.3 regression]: sparc-sun-solaris2.7 extra failure w/-m64 on execute/930921-1.c in unroll.c Reply-To: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00185.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR middle-end/7796; it has been noted by GNATS. From: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" To: bangerth@dealii.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Subject: Re: middle-end/7796: [3.3 regression]: sparc-sun-solaris2.7 extra failure w/-m64 on execute/930921-1.c in unroll.c Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 21:47:56 -0500 (EST) The failure still occurs, see: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-12/msg00109.html IIRC, I originally marked it as "high", but all 3.3 regressions were downgraded as part of the "triage" while we were concentrating on 3.2. I don't know if 3.3 regressions are now supposed to go back to high or not. Check with Mark. Thanks, --Kaveh -- Kaveh R. Ghazi ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu