This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug optimization/12209] [3.4 Regression] GCC fails to bootstrap Cygwin with -funit-at-a-time
- From: "hubicka at ucw dot cz" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 8 Oct 2003 08:30:13 -0000
- Subject: [Bug optimization/12209] [3.4 Regression] GCC fails to bootstrap Cygwin with -funit-at-a-time
- References: <20030908142116.12209.kcook@gcc.gnu.org>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12209
------- Additional Comments From hubicka at ucw dot cz 2003-10-08 08:30 -------
Subject: Re: [3.4 Regression] GCC fails to bootstrap Cygwin with -funit-at-a-time
> PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12209
>
>
>
> ------- Additional Comments From dannysmith at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-10-08 07:51 -------
> This bug appears to be the same as __attribute__((regparm()) vs the
> stack probing code (cygwin.asm) reported here (with testcase):
>
> http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-06/msg00122.html
>
> If change regparm(3) to fastcall in the above testcase, it succeeds.
> fastcall use ECX not EAX as the first allocated register.
OK, when exactly stack probing happens? I think we have two choices.
Either disqualify regparm (at least emit warning on it) and modify
unit-at-a-time code or fix stack probing somehow. What sounds as better
approach?
Honza
>
> Danny
>
>
>
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.