This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: ICE in langhooks.c on SPU
- From: Revital1 Eres <ERES at il dot ibm dot com>
- To: "Richard Guenther" <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "Dave Korn" <dave dot korn at artimi dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 17:41:36 +0300
- Subject: Re: ICE in langhooks.c on SPU
gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org wrote on 28/08/2007 17:31:08:
> On 8/28/07, Dave Korn <dave.korn@artimi.com> wrote:
> > On 28 August 2007 15:10, Richard Guenther wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Or maybe on ppc/spu enum bitfields are signed and the following
> > >
> > > DECL_FUNCTION_CODE (decl) = -1;
> > > gcc_assert (DECL_FUNCTION_CODE (decl) >= function_code);
> > >
> > > doesnt work?
> >
> > I saw what you did there, and thought it slightly peculiar. Wouldn't
> >
> > DECL_FUNCTION_CODE (decl) = function_code;
> > gcc_assert (DECL_FUNCTION_CODE (decl) == function_code);
> >
> > have worked just as well, or is there some gotcha you were trying to
avoid with
> > the dead store trick?
>
> Oh, indeed - this looks like it should have less problems. Revital, if
that
> works for you then changing the code above to what Dave suggests is also
> pre-approved (but it really might be that SPU needs more than 1024
builtin
> functions of a kind).
It seems that replacing the above code does not solve the problem.
Thanks,
Revital