https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116781
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code, ra
Ever confi
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 59149
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59149&action=edit
pr458
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116780
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Blocks|
: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 59148
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116779
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||avr
CC|
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 59146
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59146&action=edit
simd-2.c: C te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116778
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||avr
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116778
--- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
...and without -mlra the code is correct, so likely caused by LRA.
: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 59145
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59145&action=edit
bitfld-lra.c: C test case
$ avr-gcc -mmcu=atmega128 -d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116389
--- Comment #8 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
As it appears, this ICE only occurs with reload (-mno-lra) but not with LRA
(-mlra). Provided PR116326 is fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113934
Bug 113934 depends on bug 116325, which changed state.
Bug 116325 Summary: [lra] ICE: in curr_insn_transform, at
lra-constraints.cc:4283
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116325
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116325
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113932
Bug 113932 depends on bug 116325, which changed state.
Bug 116325 Summary: [lra] ICE: in curr_insn_transform, at
lra-constraints.cc:4283
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116325
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113934
Bug 113934 depends on bug 116324, which changed state.
Bug 116324 Summary: [lra] error: inconsistent operand constraints in an 'asm'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116324
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56183
Bug 56183 depends on bug 116325, which changed state.
Bug 116325 Summary: [lra] ICE: in curr_insn_transform, at
lra-constraints.cc:4283
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116325
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116326
--- Comment #15 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
*** Bug 116325 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56183
Bug 56183 depends on bug 116324, which changed state.
Bug 116324 Summary: [lra] error: inconsistent operand constraints in an 'asm'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116324
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116326
--- Comment #14 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
*** Bug 116324 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113932
Bug 113932 depends on bug 116324, which changed state.
Bug 116324 Summary: [lra] error: inconsistent operand constraints in an 'asm'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116324
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116324
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56183
Bug 56183 depends on bug 116326, which changed state.
Bug 116326 Summary: [lra] internal compiler error: in get_reload_reg, at
lra-constraints.cc:755
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116326
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116326
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113934
Bug 113934 depends on bug 116326, which changed state.
Bug 116326 Summary: [lra] internal compiler error: in get_reload_reg, at
lra-constraints.cc:755
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116326
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113932
Bug 113932 depends on bug 116326, which changed state.
Bug 116326 Summary: [lra] internal compiler error: in get_reload_reg, at
lra-constraints.cc:755
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116326
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116326
--- Comment #11 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Created attachment 59099
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59099&action=edit
Proposed patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-September/662641.html
reload1.cc: rtl-optim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116550
--- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #0)
> This ICE is relatively new; I don't see it with "gcc version 15.0.0
> 20240818".
So that's just a matter of options. The PR also occurs with 20240818 for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56183
Bug 56183 depends on bug 116321, which changed state.
Bug 116321 Summary: [lra][avr] internal compiler error: in avr_out_lpm_no_lpmx,
at config/avr/avr.cc:4572
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116321
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116321
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113934
Bug 113934 depends on bug 116321, which changed state.
Bug 116321 Summary: [lra][avr] internal compiler error: in avr_out_lpm_no_lpmx,
at config/avr/avr.cc:4572
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116321
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113932
Bug 113932 depends on bug 116321, which changed state.
Bug 116321 Summary: [lra][avr] internal compiler error: in avr_out_lpm_no_lpmx,
at config/avr/avr.cc:4572
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116321
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116326
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 59030
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59030&action=edit
lra-bug3.c:
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
uint8_t add1 (const uint8_t *bb, uint8_t nn)
{
uint8_t sum = 0;
do
{
sum += *bb++;
} while (--nn);// Why not just 2 instructions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115523
--- Comment #6 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
As it appears, the test case gives resonable code now; but only for trunk.
On v14, the code is still bloat.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116326
--- Comment #9 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Richard Sandiford from comment #8)
> (In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #7)
> > What about the following line in reload1.h:
> >
> > // Used during roload -> LRA transition because EL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116326
--- Comment #7 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Richard Sandiford from comment #6)
> I don't think we should make any permanent changes to support this kind of
> manipulation, since it's only needed during the transition.
What about the fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116326
--- Comment #5 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Richard Sandiford from comment #4)
> (In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #3)
> > It was due to problems with multi-reg frame-pointer. (AFAIR, using a
> > hard-frame-poiner besides fram
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 59027
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59027&action=edit
incdec.c: GNU-C99 test case
The attached test case produc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116326
--- Comment #3 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Richard Sandiford from comment #2)
> This is caused by the final entry in ELIMINABLE_REGS:
>
> { FRAME_POINTER_REGNUM + 1, STACK_POINTER_REGNUM + 1 }
>
> I guess this was added to work ar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116321
--- Comment #7 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to GCC Commits from comment #6)
> The PR is about an existing testcase that fails with LRA on m86k.
>
> gcc/
> PR middle-end/116321
> * lra-constraints.cc (g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115830
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115830
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49857
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|WONTFIX
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116433
--- Comment #3 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> The real fix is to have named address spaces support extended to C++. See
> PR43745.
That's a different issue. EEPROM handling is too complicated, we don't w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116236
--- Comment #26 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #25)
> I think there was a corresponding bug on the AVR side, not sure if that's
> now also resolved.
As far as I understand, the AVR issue is of a different kind
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116325
--- Comment #3 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #2)
> Created attachment 58958 [details]
> qsort.c. C test case
>
> LRA can't compile qsort.c from libc; same ICE.
Just compile qsort.c with -mlra (optimizatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116325
--- Comment #2 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Created attachment 58958
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58958&action=edit
qsort.c. C test case
LRA can't compile qsort.c from libc; same ICE.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116321
--- Comment #4 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> See the m68k bug - LRA/IRA _never_ use strict = 1
You mean PR116236? Its fix says:
> This matters on targets like m68k that support index extension
> and th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116389
--- Comment #7 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Created attachment 58955
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58955&action=edit
Reduced C test case
$ avr-gcc pr116389-red.c -S -Os -mmcu=avrtiny
struct T { int val; };
void f_int (int)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116390
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115830
--- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Created attachment 58953
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58953&action=edit
proposed patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-August/659422.html
AVR: target/115830 - Make
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116390
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|WAITING
--- Comment #12 from Georg-J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116390
--- Comment #11 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
This PR is about a segmentation fault, which has been fixed already by the
commit above.
The "insn does not satisfy its constraints" ICE you are seeing now is PR116389.
Please f'up to PR116389.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116407
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116407
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||avr
Keywords|
: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
This error can occur with some text peepholes:
void delay_62 (int x)
{
do
__builtin_avr_nops (62);
while (--x != -1);
}
int main (void)
{
return 0;
}
$ avr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116389
--- Comment #5 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #4)
> "IRA doesn't understand the impact of paradoxical subreg" is a
> reasonable assessment.
RA should either assess the validity of a paradoxical subreg in the m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116390
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116389
--- Comment #3 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #2)
> or a backend bug with avr.
I don't see what the avr backend is doing wrong. I played around with
avr_hard_regno_mode_ok etc. and denied SImode for R30, but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116402
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Blocks|
mal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Trying to switch the avr backend to LRA, I came across a bunch of questions
which may pop up as other backend maintainers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116325
--- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Created attachment 58945
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58945&action=edit
C++ test case from libstdc++v3
This is a test case from libstdc++v3. Compile with
$ avr-g++ pr116389.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116390
--- Comment #6 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Detlef Vollmann from comment #5)
> Thanks for your patch.
> It solves the segfault ICE for -O2.
> But unfortunately it doesn't solve the build for -O3 or -O4.
> It still produces the same er
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116389
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116390
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116390
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||14.1.0
Summary|Another IC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85624
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|15.0|14.3
--- Comment #7 from Georg-Johann
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85624
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116236
--- Comment #10 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
What do we do when strict=0 and legitimate_address_p passes a hard register
that is not valid? Reject it? Or is that fine and ra will fix it?
(There are cases where passes like insn combine are propag
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116321
--- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
What I do not understand is when I also set -mlog=legitimate_address_p then I
only get logs that have strict=0 and not a single one with strict=1, like:
avr_addr_space_legitimate_address_p[fun64:split5(3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116322
--- Comment #2 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
And it may be easier to use when we had a $builddir/gcc/regenerate-opt-urls.py
built by configure
1) $builddir/gcc/regenerate-opt-urls.py would know where $srcdir is.
2) $builddir/gcc/regenerate-opt-url
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116236
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116326
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-08-10
Keywords|
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 58898
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58898&action=edit
GNU-C99 te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116325
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target|
: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 58897
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58897&action=edit
pr60040-2.c: GNU-C99 test case from gcc.target/avr
$ avr-gcc pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113934
--- Comment #11 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
LRA even breaks building libgcc: PR116324
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116324
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
ty: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 58896
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58896&action=edit
lra-bug2.c: GNU-C9
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
$ ./regenerate-opt-urls.py -h
usage: regenerate-opt-urls.py [-h] [--unit-test] base_html_dir src_gcc_dir
[...]
Usage (from build/gcc subdirectory):
../../src/gcc/regenerate-opt-urls.py HTML
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113934
--- Comment #10 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #9)
> (In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #4)
> > Would someone please explain what has to be done?
> >
> > It's likely more than just
> >
> > #defin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116321
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code, ra
St
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
typedef __UINT64_TYPE__ uint64_t;
uint64_t fun64 (const __flash uint64_t *p)
{
return *p;
}
runs into
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113934
--- Comment #8 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
...more questions:
TARGET_IRA_CHANGE_PSEUDO_ALLOCNO_CLASS: Same issue: This hook can change a
reload class. The purpose is clear for regalloc guys, but when and d why and
how would I do it for a specifi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113934
--- Comment #7 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
...more questions:
What's the connexion between TARGET_REGISTER_PRIORITY and
ADJUST_REG_ALLOC_ORDER / reg_alloc_order[].
What about reload_completed? Does semantics stay the same? What about
reg_renum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113934
--- Comment #6 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
...to be more specific:
TARGET_CANNOT_SUBSTITUTE_MEM_EQUIV_P explains the function of the hook from the
perspective of someone who is implementing a register allocator, but there is
no explanation whethe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113934
--- Comment #4 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Would someone please explain what has to be done?
It's likely more than just
#define TARGET_LRA_P hook_bool_void_true
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116295
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|15.0|14.3
Resolution|---
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 58877
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58877&action=edit
ice-flash.c: GNU-C99 test case
l
,
||ice-on-valid-code
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed||2024-08-08
Ever confirmed|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43745
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2012-01-07 00:00:00 |2024-8-2
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97276
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116056
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eugene at hutorny dot in.ua
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64053
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116056
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116056
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Target|
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The current syntax of the "signal" and "interrupt" attributes imposes to have a
function with an assembler name that resembles the ISR name, like in
_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89270
--- Comment #16 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #14)
> Fixed on trunk sofar. Joseph correctly mentioned that iff AVR would define
> __int24 using INT_N in avr-modes.def the issue would have been mitigated as
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18065
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2005-05-01 04:18:52 |2024-7-18
Summary|usual ar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90616
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Build|amd64-portbld-freebsd10.4 |
Priority|P3
1 - 100 of 1878 matches
Mail list logo
