This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug optimization/10239] [m68k] switch jumptable causes assembler error
- From: "gni at gecko dot de" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 8 Oct 2003 15:00:54 -0000
- Subject: [Bug optimization/10239] [m68k] switch jumptable causes assembler error
- References: <20030327104600.10239.gni@gecko.de>
- 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=10239
------- Additional Comments From gni at gecko dot de 2003-10-08 15:00 -------
Subject: Re: [m68k] switch jumptable causes assembler error
On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 06:16:13PM -0000, mark at codesourcery dot com wrote:
>
> ------- Additional Comments From mark at codesourcery dot com 2003-10-05 18:16 -------
> Subject: Re: [m68k] switch jumptable causes
> assembler error
>
> On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 21:36, zlomek at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> > PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
> >
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10239
>
> This defect is not marked as 3.3 *regression*; just as a bug present in
> 3.3.
How is a bug marked as a regression? Must that happen at the time the
send-pr is done?
> Unless this defect did not occur in some previous release of GCC, I will
> not review this patch for GCC 3.3.
Older GCC versions didn't have that bug. I assume that makes the bug a
regression. However, since modern binutils don't have a problem and that
the bug won't show up often, I think the patch isn't necessary on the
3.3 branch. If its applied to 3.3 thats also fine for me.