[Bug tree-optimization/19333] [4.0 Regression] Compilation SEGFAULTs with -O1 -finline-functions on the x86_64 architecture.

[joseph at codesourcery dot com]

------- Additional Comments From joseph at codesourcery dot com  2005-01-28 11:09 -------
Subject: Re:  [4.0 Regression] Compilation
 SEGFAULTs with -O1 -finline-functions on the x86_64 architecture.

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:

> gcc.c-torture/compile/20011130-1.c  -O0  (test for excess errors) 
> gcc.c-torture/compile/20011130-1.c  -O1  (test for excess errors) 
> gcc.c-torture/compile/20011130-1.c  -O2  (test for excess errors) 
> gcc.c-torture/compile/20011130-1.c  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  (test for excess 
> errors) 
> gcc.c-torture/compile/20011130-1.c  -O3 -g  (test for excess errors) 
> gcc.c-torture/compile/20011130-1.c  -Os  (test for excess errors) 
> gcc.dg/20030815-1.c (test for excess errors) 

Correct, I don't know whether it's useful to reorder the testcases 
minimally to avoid arrays of incomplete types.

> gcc.dg/array-7.c  (test for errors, line 14) 
> gcc.dg/array-7.c (test for excess errors) 
> gcc.dg/noncompile/20000901-1.c  -O0  (test for excess errors) 
> gcc.dg/noncompile/20000901-1.c  -O1  (test for excess errors) 
> gcc.dg/noncompile/20000901-1.c  -O2  (test for excess errors) 
> gcc.dg/noncompile/20000901-1.c  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  (test for excess 
> errors) 
> gcc.dg/noncompile/20000901-1.c  -O3 -g  (test for excess errors) 
> gcc.dg/noncompile/20000901-1.c  -Os  (test for excess errors) 
> gcc.dg/noncompile/init-2.c  -O0  (test for excess errors) 
> gcc.dg/noncompile/init-2.c  -O1  (test for excess errors) 
> gcc.dg/noncompile/init-2.c  -O2  (test for excess errors) 
> gcc.dg/noncompile/init-2.c  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  (test for excess errors) 
> gcc.dg/noncompile/init-2.c  -O3 -g  (test for excess errors) 
> gcc.dg/noncompile/init-2.c  -Os  (test for excess errors) 

For these I think the testcases should be updated to expect the additional 
or changed diagnostics.



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19333