https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92433
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92433
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Nov 11 20:05:49 2019
New Revision: 278066
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278066=gcc=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/92433
* config/rs6000/rs6000-c.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92433
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #5)
> if (y)
> {
> gcc_assert (n == 3);
> std::swap (arg_type[1], arg_type[2]);
> }
>
>
> ?
gcc_assert will work too unless the host
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92433
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
if (y)
{
gcc_assert (n == 3);
std::swap (arg_type[1], arg_type[2]);
}
?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92433
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Reduced testcase that results in the warning also on x86_64-linux with -O2
-Wall:
struct S { void *p; struct S *q; };
void bar (int, ...);
void
foo (struct S *x, int n, int y)
{
void *arg_type[3];
for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92433
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #2)
> That doesn't fix the spurious warning, though.
Sure, it doesn't, that was just a random comment when I have spent a minute
looking at the code in question.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92433
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92433
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab ---
That doesn't fix the spurious warning, though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92433
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
