This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: target/9068: [3.4 regression] [x86] comisd & comiss constraints are incorrect
- From: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
- To: bangerth at dealii dot org, gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org,jh at suse dot cz, kelleycook at comcast dot net, nobody at gcc dot gnu dot org,gcc-gnats at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 11:05:02 +0100
- Subject: Re: target/9068: [3.4 regression] [x86] comisd & comiss constraints are incorrect
- References: <20030111003211.744.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
> Old Synopsis: [x86] comisd & comiss intel-syntax constraints are incorrect
> New Synopsis: [3.4 regression] [x86] comisd & comiss constraints are incorrect
>
> State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed
> State-Changed-By: bangerth
> State-Changed-When: Fri Jan 10 16:32:10 2003
> State-Changed-Why:
> Confirmed. This also happens on x86-linux, and has nothing
> to do with intel asm syntax, since I can reproduce it
> with this smaller testcase
> ----------------------------------
> int foo(int count, double sum) {
> return (sum/count > 0.0000001);
> }
> --------------------------------
> and the following (shorter) command line:
> tmp/g> /home/bangerth/bin/gcc-3.4-pre/bin/c++ -msse2 x.c
> x.c: In function `int foo(int, double)':
> x.c:3: internal compiler error: in get_attr_length_immediate, at insn-attrtab.c
> :22751
> Please submit a full bug report,
This should be independent problem I fixed yesterday.
>
> This is a regression w.r.t. 3.3, where things worked,
> although probably more by chance.
> Jan, you are the author of the hunk of code that the patch
> in this report touches. Can you comment on its validity?
>
> Thinking more about it, the original report probably
> was about this code (which indeed fails only with intel
> asm syntax):
> -----------------------------
> int foo(double sum) {
> return (sum > 0.0000001);
> }
> -------------------------------
> tmp/g> /home/bangerth/bin/gcc-3.4-pre/bin/c++ -msse2 -Wall -march=pentium4 -ffast-math -mfpmath=sse -masm=intel x.c
> x.c: In function `int foo(double)':
> x.c:3: internal compiler error: output_operand: operand number missing after
> %-letter
> Please submit a full bug report,
I will fix this too.
Honza