This is the mail archive of the
gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: optimization/10877: [3.3/3.4 regression] miscompilation with -O3 -fPIC on x86
- From: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
- To: nobody at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org,
- Date: 20 May 2003 17:16:04 -0000
- Subject: Re: optimization/10877: [3.3/3.4 regression] miscompilation with -O3 -fPIC on x86
- Reply-to: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
The following reply was made to PR optimization/10877; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Andrew Pinski <pinskia@physics.uc.edu>
To: Andrew Pinski <pinskia@physics.uc.edu>
Cc: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ices.utexas.edu>,
Christian Ehrhardt <ehrhardt@mathematik.uni-ulm.de>, <gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>,
<lloyd@acm.jhu.edu>, <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: optimization/10877: [3.3/3.4 regression] miscompilation with -O3 -fPIC on x86
Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 13:14:22 -0400
I can reproduce it with `GNU assembler 2.11.93.0.2 20020207' tough so
it looks like it binutils fault but it has already been fixed.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
On Tuesday, May 20, 2003, at 13:08 US/Eastern, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> Mine is the top of the tree from the fsf's tree:
> GNU assembler 2.14.90 20030520
>
> Thanks,
> Andrew Pinski
>
> On Tuesday, May 20, 2003, at 13:05 US/Eastern, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
>>
>>> Feeding this assembler file into gcc 3.2 on an Intel box works for me
>>> and the program doesn't crash! This might mean that we have an
>>> assembler/binutils problem here.
>>
>> Whereas if I do the same, it crashes. So you seem to have a point :-)
>>
>> My binutils are
>> 2.11.92.0.10 20011021 (SuSE)
>> (this is what SuSE shipped with 8.0). What do you have?
>>
>> W.
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---
>> Wolfgang Bangerth email:
>> bangerth@ices.utexas.edu
>> www:
>> http://www.ices.utexas.edu/~bangerth/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>