--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 14:58 ---
Works for me with r129166. I suppose this was x86_64. And a dup of either
PR33600 or PR33552.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 15:42 ---
Yeah, the asm is bogus for multiple reasons.
But can be fixed easily, e.g. %3, %4 nor %5 aren't used anywhere, so
just nuking the unneeded
r (c), r (a), r (b),
makes this to compile.
Apparently e.g. gcc 4.1.x decided
--- Comment #5 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-09-05 18:38 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Yeah, the asm is bogus for multiple reasons.
...
What is that 3 doing among clobbers? A fancy way to duplicate %rbx
clobber?
I don't know. I made the testcase based on an application that I
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33138
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-28 23:57 ---
The seg fault was fixed by:
2007-08-28 Jakub Jelinek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR middle-end/32370
* passes.c (init_optimization_passes): Move pass_df_finish
after pass_postreload sublist.
Also
--- Comment #2 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-08-21 15:33 ---
BTW, the segfault goes away when I remove the last 3 lines (function tiger_t).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33138
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-08-21 15:32 ---
typedef unsigned long int word64;
extern word64 tiger_table[4 * 256];
tiger_compress (word64 * str, word64 state[3])
{
{
register word64 a, b, c;
word64 aa, bb, cc;
word64 x0, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5, x6, x7;
b
