This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug target/14798] [3.4/3.5 Regression] [unit-at-a-time?] In case of SH target with -O2 option #pragma interrupt doesn't get resetted.
- From: "anilp1 at kpitcummins dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 8 Jun 2004 06:29:27 -0000
- Subject: [Bug target/14798] [3.4/3.5 Regression] [unit-at-a-time?] In case of SH target with -O2 option #pragma interrupt doesn't get resetted.
- References: <20040331111136.14798.anilp1@kpitcummins.com>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From anilp1 at kpitcummins dot com 2004-06-08 06:29 -------
Subject: RE: [3.4/3.5 Regression] [unit-at-a-time?] In case of SH target with -O2 option #pragma interrupt doesn't get resetted.
Hi Jim,
Currently i have some other priorities, but i will certainly implement your suggestions as i find time.
Thanks and regards,
Anil
-----Original Message-----
From: wilson at specifixinc dot com [mailto:gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org]
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 11:51 AM
To: Anil Paranjape
Subject: [Bug target/14798] [3.4/3.5 Regression] [unit-at-a-time?] In
case of SH target with -O2 option #pragma interrupt doesn't get
resetted.
------- Additional Comments From wilson at specifixinc dot com 2004-06-08 06:20 -------
Subject: Re: [3.4/3.5 Regression] [unit-at-a-time?] In
case of SH target with -O2 option #pragma interrupt doesn't get resetted.
aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> The points you bring up are good ones, and they do deserve bug reports. But
> this patch does fix the problem originally reported, and it is correct in itself.
I was arguing that the patch is wrong because while it fixes one
attribute, it breaks another. You are arguing that the patch is right
because it fixes one attribute. If you are happy with that, then that
is fine with me. It is your port. I just feel an obligation to point
out that there are still a number of other problems that haven't been
fixed yet, and we risk losing knowledge of these other problems if we
close this bug report. But since this isn't my port, this isn't my problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14798