This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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]

Re: Reload patch version 3


At 11:54 31.08.98 , Bernd Schmidt wrote:
>> 
>> Ok, this fixed the bootstrap fail, but make check showed the following
>> regressions:
>> 
>> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/950503-1.c execution,  -O1 
>> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/950503-1.c execution,  -O2 
>> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/950503-1.c execution,  -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer
>> -finline-functions 
>> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/950503-1.c execution,  -O2 -g 
>> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/950503-1.c execution,  -Os 
>> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/conversion.c execution,  -O2
>> -fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions 
>> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/rbug.c execution,  -O2
>> -fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions 
>
>Thanks. I'll see if I can understand PPC assembly well enough to figure out
>what's going on there.

Do you have access to a PPC/Linux machine? If not, ask me or people on
#mklinux/EFnet (I'm franzo on IRC) for an account.

>> and during compile I got the following unusual warning:
>> fp-bit.c: In function `__pack_f':
>> fp-bit.c:542: warning: Subreg here
>
>That's just a debugging message which I overlooked and didn't remove. It
warns
>about a case which appears to be rarely encountered and where I wasn't sure
>I got things right.

Ok.

>> Additionally your patch seems to fix Geoff's pet bug ;-) asm("" : : :
>> "cc"), which now compiles just fine (also part of the configure tests of
>> glibc-2.0.95).
>
>Could you explain quickly why this wouldn't work before?

Explain? Not really, but there was a discussion of the problem on the egcs
list back in ~Jan-March98. Check the archive for messages from Geoff
Keating or ask him directly.
The error issued by the compiler is:
test8.c: In function `foo':
test8.c:5: fixed or forbidden register 68 (0) was spilled for class CR0_REGS.
This may be due to a compiler bug or to impossible asm
statements or clauses.

I think (!) it has something to do with the multiple condition code
registers (cr0-cr7, 4 bit each, combined into one 32bit reg, dunno if cc
means cr0 or the whole 32bit reg) available on PPC.

Franz.



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