From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-prs-return-34768-listarch-gcc-prs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 5071 invoked by alias); 10 May 2003 00:56:01 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-prs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 5008 invoked by uid 71); 10 May 2003 00:56:01 -0000
Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 00:56:00 -0000
Message-ID: <20030510005601.5007.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
From: Falk Hueffner <falk.hueffner@student.uni-tuebingen.de>
Subject: Re: target/10700: 3.2/3.3: ICE on alpha while building libquicktime
Reply-To: Falk Hueffner <falk.hueffner@student.uni-tuebingen.de>
X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00855.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-prs.sourceware.org>

The following reply was made to PR target/10700; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Falk Hueffner <falk.hueffner@student.uni-tuebingen.de>
To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Cc:  
Subject: Re: target/10700: 3.2/3.3: ICE on alpha while building libquicktime
Date: 10 May 2003 02:55:32 +0200

 http://gcc.gnu.org/PR?10700
 
 There's some problem with this tree (on ia64):
 
  <mult_expr 0x2000000000349fb0
     type <integer_type 0x20000000002ec750 int SI
         size <integer_cst 0x20000000002e8930 constant 32>
         unit size <integer_cst 0x20000000002e8a80 constant 4>
         align 32 symtab 0 alias set 3 precision 32 min <integer_cst 0x20000000002e8a20 -2147483648> max <integer_cst 0x20000000002e8a50 2147483647>
         pointer_to_this <pointer_type 0x2000000000316630>>
    
     arg 0 <truth_or_expr 0x2000000000349f50
         type <integer_type 0x20000000002ec9c0 long unsigned int unsigned DI
             size <integer_cst 0x20000000002e8ab0 constant 64>
             unit size <integer_cst 0x20000000002e8c00 constant 8>
             align 64 symtab 0 alias set -1 precision 64 min <integer_cst 0x20000000002e8c90 0> max <integer_cst 0x20000000002e8cc0 18446744073709551615>>
        
         arg 0 <eq_expr 0x2000000000349bf0 type <integer_type 0x20000000002ec9c0 long unsigned int>
             arg 0 <parm_decl 0x20000000003852b0 block>
             arg 1 <integer_cst 0x2000000000349bc0 constant 1>>
         arg 1 <eq_expr 0x2000000000349c50 type <integer_type 0x20000000002ec9c0 long unsigned int>
             arg 0 <parm_decl 0x20000000003852b0 block>
             arg 1 <integer_cst 0x2000000000349c20 constant 3>>>
     arg 1 <integer_cst 0x2000000000349b90 type <integer_type 0x20000000002ec750 int> constant 8>>
 
 expand_mult eventually gets passed (reg:DI XXX) and (const_int 8) and
 doesn't like the result mode being different from arg0's mode. I'm not
 sure whether it is supposed to. Also, shouldn't the type of eq_expr
 and truth_or_expr always be int? Maybe somebody more knowledgeable can
 comment on this...
 
 -- 
 	Falk