This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug target/77686] [6/7 Regression] wrong code on arm-linux-gnueabi and arm-linux-gnueabihf
- From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 09:23:54 +0000
- Subject: [Bug target/77686] [6/7 Regression] wrong code on arm-linux-gnueabi and arm-linux-gnueabihf
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-77686-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77686
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This can only uncover another pre-existing issue as it is a 100% obvious fix.
I do not have a good way to run anything on arm so please help me spot the
wrong-code in the assembler output.
TBAA issues are also often exposed by scheduling so please try
-fno-schedule-insns[2] or -fstrict-aliasing with -O1.
-Updating SSA information for statement MEM[(struct function *)&D.43856 + 4B] =
__f$__dummy_a;
+Updating SSA information for statement MEM[(struct __lambda0 *)&D.43856] =
this might also very well be a C++ FE issue.