This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Bug middle-end/38671] [4.4 Regression] extra code for setting up loops (IV-opts and 32bits vs 64bits)



------- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-12-31 08:12 -------
Confirmed, though I don't have a fully reduced testcase yet.  Basically it
comes down to using unsigned int rather than size_t.  If you had used size_t as
the index, the code would have worked correctly.


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2008-12-31 08:12:50
               date|                            |
            Summary|[4.4 Regression] extra code |[4.4 Regression] extra code
                   |for setting up loops        |for setting up loops (IV-
                   |                            |opts and 32bits vs 64bits)


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38671


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]