--- Comment #8 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:14 ---
Fixed in 4.0 and up. Won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-28 10:22 ---
Postpone until 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target
--- Comment #6 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-21 02:09 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
I've made a small amount of headway on this.
Labels L22 and L21 were (when created) the addresses of objects in the code.
However, they are deleted (presumably as unreachable), but the
--- Additional Comments From rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-02
22:27 ---
I've made a small amount of headway on this.
Labels L22 and L21 were (when created) the addresses of objects in the code.
However, they are deleted (presumably as unreachable), but the references to the
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15231
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-15
03:24 ---
It works on the mainline if we remove the use of the extension:
((void)((0)), irq_stat[0].__local_bh_count)++
gets replaced with
((void)((0)), irq_stat[0].__local_bh_count++)
--
What
