--- Comment #5 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-04 15:41 ---
Closing 4.1 branch.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.2 |4.1.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28376
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28376
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28376
--- Comment #3 from falk at debian dot org 2006-07-14 08:08 ---
This simplified test case ICEs already at -O:
static const long unsigned sizes[] = { 4, 8 };
static long unsigned maxSize(const long unsigned *v) {
unsigned long max = 0;
unsigned long i = 0;
for (;
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-14 08:20 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
This simplified test case ICEs already at -O:
00.expand already contains the unfolded leu. I suppose this is not valid RTL?
I think this is a case where we unroll the loop but don't do
--- Comment #1 from vapier at gentoo dot org 2006-07-14 02:42 ---
Created an attachment (id=11887)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11887action=view)
PR28376.ii
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28376
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-14 03:45 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
ice.ii:13: error: unrecognizable insn:
(insn 23 22 24 2 (set (reg:DI 84)
(leu:DI (const_int 0 [0x0])
(const_int 4 [0x4]))) -1 (nil)
(nil))
This should never
