This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: C++ Issue on GCC 3.0 branch
- To: law at redhat dot com
- Subject: Re: C++ Issue on GCC 3.0 branch
- From: "John David Anglin" <dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca>
- Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:43:29 -0400 (EDT)
- Cc: mark at codesourcery dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
> In message <200104250323.XAA05283@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca>you write:
> > 2001-01-04 John David Anglin <dave@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca>
> >
> > * pa.c (hppa_init_pic_save): Update last_parm_insn after emitting
> > pic save insn.
> This is fine for the mainline sources as well as the branch.
>
> Thanks for tracking this down!
Before I installed this, I checked to make sure there were no gcc regressions
in the testsuite with -fPIC. I found that in fact there were some. It looks
like there are problems with the placement of the save instruction when
the first non parameter insn is nil. I think we need to place the save
after the first insn (the one returned by get_insns ()) in this case.
Some of the fails in the testsuite are due to an abort at integrate.c:430
due to first insn not being a note:
;; Function z
(note 2 0 26 NOTE_INSN_DELETED 0)
(insn 26 2 3 (set (reg:SI 98)
(reg:SI 19 %r19)) -1 (nil)
(nil))
(note 3 26 5 NOTE_INSN_FUNCTION_BEG 0)
I am going to go back to the original form and not use
get_first_nonparm_insn (). I think this will fix the problem.
This suggests that there is also a bug in get_eh_context () for
the same reason.
Dave
--
J. David Anglin dave.anglin@nrc.ca
National Research Council of Canada (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6605)