This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Bug debug/54831] [4.8 Regression] ICE: in vt_add_function_parameter, at var-tracking.c:9412 with -O -fno-split-wide-types -g


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54831

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-10-08 08:44:50 UTC ---
That doesn't make much sense, as it wouldn't be tracked anyway, too much code
would need to be changed to also track PARALLELs.
I'd say the easiest fix would be just turn that gcc_assert into
if (!assert_cond) return; and adjust the comment not to say that we assert
something.  Alex, what do you think?


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]