This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug debug/19327] [4.0 Regression] gcc.c-torture/execute/921215-1.c compilation -O3 -g
- From: "dberlin at dberlin dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 18 Jan 2005 02:00:34 -0000
- Subject: [Bug debug/19327] [4.0 Regression] gcc.c-torture/execute/921215-1.c compilation -O3 -g
- References: <20050108172153.19327.danglin@gcc.gnu.org>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-18 02:00 -------
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] gcc.c-torture/execute/921215-1.c
compilation -O3 -g
On Mon, 18 Jan 2005, dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca wrote:
>
> ------- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2005-01-18 01:32 -------
> Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] gcc.c-torture/execute/921215-1
>
>> I'll fix this bug, but you guys should understand that you aren't going to
>> get
>> sane debug info under stabs at -Ox anyway right now (and haven't since
>> rouhgly
>> the tree-ssa merge), since it still assumes that blocks that aren't used
>> don't
>> have used subblocks.
>
> Is this a PR?
No.
Apparently, nobody noticed (IE it only happens at -O1+) :).
However, if you take the testcases from the prs that let to blocks
being marked used, you should be able to come up with a testcase for
this.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19327