This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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]

Re: SRA and inconsistencies in bit-field types

From: Grigory Zagorodnev <grigory_zagorodnev at linux dot intel dot com>
To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
Cc: Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, jakub at redhat dot com
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 18:03:01 +0300
Subject: Re: SRA and inconsistencies in bit-field types
References: <or1wku4yo1.fsf@free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <84fc9c000702130127h1ea6f9fu9558b41253306d78@mail.gmail.com> <ory7n0ujsu.fsf@free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <84fc9c000702150146s40391b60u24044433c39bea61@mail.gmail.com> <ory7mzqpau.fsf@free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>

Alexandre Oliva wrote:

How about enclosing the gcc_assert in #ifdef ENABLE_CHECKING in the
4.1 and 4.2 branches?  (I'm going to test the 4.2 branch now)

That's also fine.


4.2 testing completed, so this is what I've installed in the branches
(4.1 and 4.2, respectively):


Alexandre,
it appears that this patch caused cpu2006/povray compilation failure.

Could you take a look at PR30823, please?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30823

- Grigory

Follow-Ups:
- Re: SRA and inconsistencies in bit-field types
  - From: Alexandre Oliva

References:
- SRA and inconsistencies in bit-field types
  - From: Alexandre Oliva
- Re: SRA and inconsistencies in bit-field types
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: SRA and inconsistencies in bit-field types
  - From: Alexandre Oliva
- Re: SRA and inconsistencies in bit-field types
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: SRA and inconsistencies in bit-field types
  - From: Alexandre Oliva

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