From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9507 invoked by alias); 28 Mar 2003 20:06:01 -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 9493 invoked by uid 71); 28 Mar 2003 20:06:00 -0000 Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 20:36:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030328200600.9492.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Eric Botcazou Subject: Re: optimization/9123: [3.2/3.3/3.4 regression ] Internal compiler error in do_SUBST at combine.c:434 Reply-To: Eric Botcazou X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg02011.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR optimization/9123; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Eric Botcazou To: Jason Merrill Cc: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, khindenburg@cherrynebula.net, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: optimization/9123: [3.2/3.3/3.4 regression ] Internal compiler error in do_SUBST at combine.c:434 Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 20:54:18 +0100 > Hmm, I seem to have attached the wrong C testcase. To fail, it needs > consts. It fails with 3.2 and 3.3, but seems to be fixed on the trunk. > > typedef unsigned char T; > inline T clamp (const T in, const T min, const T max) > { > return in <= min ? min : in >= max ? max : in; > } > unsigned char f (int i) > { > return clamp (i, 0, 255); > } I can't reproduce on any branch on i586-redhat-linux-gnu. I strongly suspect that I fixed it everywhere two weeks ago with: 2003-03-14 Eric Botcazou PR optimization/8396 * tree-inline.c (initialize_inlined_parameters): Make sure the value of read-only constant arguments is passed with the right type. Are your 3.2 and 3.3 compilers up-to-date? -- Eric Botcazou