This is the mail archive of the
gcc-regression@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: 10 GCC regressions, 8 new, with your patch on 2001-07-16T22:08:55Z.
- To: Daniel Berlin <dan at cgsoftware dot com>
- Subject: Re: 10 GCC regressions, 8 new, with your patch on 2001-07-16T22:08:55Z.
- From: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 12:40:50 +0200
- Cc: gcc-regression at gcc dot gnu dot org, jh at suse dot cz
- References: <200107170121.f6H1Lop04174@maat.cygnus.com> <874rsc475r.fsf@cgsoftware.com>
> "GCC regression checker" <regress@maat.cygnus.com> writes:
>
> > With your recent patch, GCC has some regression test failures, which
> > used to pass. There are 8 new failures, and 2
> > failures that existed before and after that patch; 0 failures
> > have been fixed.
> >
> > The new failures are:
> > powerpc-eabisim gcc.sum gcc.c-torture/execute/920501-7.c
> > powerpc-eabisim gcc.sum gcc.c-torture/execute/comp-goto-2.c
> > powerpc-eabisim gcc.sum gcc.dg/20000707-1.c
> > powerpc-eabisim gcc.sum gcc.dg/unused-2.c
> > native gcc.sum gcc.c-torture/execute/920501-7.c
> > native gcc.sum gcc.c-torture/execute/comp-goto-2.c
> > native gcc.sum gcc.dg/20000707-1.c
> > native gcc.sum gcc.dg/unused-2.c
>
> Jan, these look like they might have been affected by the unneeded
> code labels, PRE doesn't even touch the code for at least , so
> it's not a load motion problem. :)
I am trying to reproduce it, but the tree I used for commit don't have
the problem, so I will try to update and see if I will be able to reproduce
this.
Perhaps it is the -mcpu= thing.
Honza