public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: target/9068: [3.4 regression] [x86] comisd & comiss constraints are incorrect
@ 2003-01-11 10:06 Jan Hubicka
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jan Hubicka @ 2003-01-11 10:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: nobody; +Cc: gcc-prs
The following reply was made to PR target/9068; it has been noted by GNATS.
>From jh@suse.cz Mon Jan 13 00:57:26 2003
From: Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz>
To: bangerth@dealii.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
jh@suse.cz, kelleycook@comcast.net, nobody@gcc.gnu.org,
gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Cc:
Subject: Re: target/9068: [3.4 regression] [x86] comisd & comiss constraints are incorrect
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 11:05:02 +0100
> Old Synopsis: [x86] comisd & comiss intel-syntax constraints are incorrect
> New Synopsis: [3.4 regression] [x86] comisd & comiss constraints are incorrect
>
> State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed
> State-Changed-By: bangerth
> State-Changed-When: Fri Jan 10 16:32:10 2003
> State-Changed-Why:
> Confirmed. This also happens on x86-linux, and has nothing
> to do with intel asm syntax, since I can reproduce it
> with this smaller testcase
> ----------------------------------
> int foo(int count, double sum) {
> return (sum/count > 0.0000001);
> }
> --------------------------------
> and the following (shorter) command line:
> tmp/g> /home/bangerth/bin/gcc-3.4-pre/bin/c++ -msse2 x.c
> x.c: In function `int foo(int, double)':
> x.c:3: internal compiler error: in get_attr_length_immediate, at insn-attrtab.c
> :22751
> Please submit a full bug report,
This should be independent problem I fixed yesterday.
>
> This is a regression w.r.t. 3.3, where things worked,
> although probably more by chance.
> Jan, you are the author of the hunk of code that the patch
> in this report touches. Can you comment on its validity?
>
> Thinking more about it, the original report probably
> was about this code (which indeed fails only with intel
> asm syntax):
> -----------------------------
> int foo(double sum) {
> return (sum > 0.0000001);
> }
> -------------------------------
> tmp/g> /home/bangerth/bin/gcc-3.4-pre/bin/c++ -msse2 -Wall -march=pentium4 -ffast-math -mfpmath=sse -masm=intel x.c
> x.c: In function `int foo(double)':
> x.c:3: internal compiler error: output_operand: operand number missing after
> %-letter
> Please submit a full bug report,
I will fix this too.
Honza
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: target/9068: [3.4 regression] [x86] comisd & comiss constraints are incorrect
@ 2003-03-21 21:09 hubicka
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: hubicka @ 2003-03-21 21:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs, gcc-prs, jh, kelleycook, nobody
Synopsis: [3.4 regression] [x86] comisd & comiss constraints are incorrect
State-Changed-From-To: analyzed->closed
State-Changed-By: hubicka
State-Changed-When: Fri Mar 21 21:09:48 2003
State-Changed-Why:
Fixed by my earlier patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=9068
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: target/9068: [3.4 regression] [x86] comisd & comiss constraints are incorrect
@ 2003-01-11 0:32 bangerth
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: bangerth @ 2003-01-11 0:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs, gcc-prs, jh, kelleycook, nobody
Old Synopsis: [x86] comisd & comiss intel-syntax constraints are incorrect
New Synopsis: [3.4 regression] [x86] comisd & comiss constraints are incorrect
State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed
State-Changed-By: bangerth
State-Changed-When: Fri Jan 10 16:32:10 2003
State-Changed-Why:
Confirmed. This also happens on x86-linux, and has nothing
to do with intel asm syntax, since I can reproduce it
with this smaller testcase
----------------------------------
int foo(int count, double sum) {
return (sum/count > 0.0000001);
}
--------------------------------
and the following (shorter) command line:
tmp/g> /home/bangerth/bin/gcc-3.4-pre/bin/c++ -msse2 x.c
x.c: In function `int foo(int, double)':
x.c:3: internal compiler error: in get_attr_length_immediate, at insn-attrtab.c
:22751
Please submit a full bug report,
This is a regression w.r.t. 3.3, where things worked,
although probably more by chance.
Jan, you are the author of the hunk of code that the patch
in this report touches. Can you comment on its validity?
Thinking more about it, the original report probably
was about this code (which indeed fails only with intel
asm syntax):
-----------------------------
int foo(double sum) {
return (sum > 0.0000001);
}
-------------------------------
tmp/g> /home/bangerth/bin/gcc-3.4-pre/bin/c++ -msse2 -Wall -march=pentium4 -ffast-math -mfpmath=sse -masm=intel x.c
x.c: In function `int foo(double)':
x.c:3: internal compiler error: output_operand: operand number missing after
%-letter
Please submit a full bug report,
So it seems as if these were two reports in one. The latter
example, however, never worked as long as SSE support is
present, which is not surprising since the code the patch
in this report touches is unchanged since the first SSE
patch to i386.c
W.
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=9068
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-03-21 21:09 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-01-11 10:06 target/9068: [3.4 regression] [x86] comisd & comiss constraints are incorrect Jan Hubicka
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-03-21 21:09 hubicka
2003-01-11 0:32 bangerth
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).