--- Comment #4 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-31 18:09 ---
Subject: Bug 43524
Author: uros
Date: Wed Mar 31 18:09:04 2010
New Revision: 157880
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157880
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2010-03-27 Uros Bizjak
--- Comment #5 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-31 20:14 ---
Subject: Bug 43524
Author: uros
Date: Wed Mar 31 20:14:10 2010
New Revision: 157894
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157894
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2010-03-27 Uros Bizjak
--- Comment #6 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-03-31 20:18 ---
Fixed.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #1 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-03-26 09:03 ---
Looks like a wrong assert to me. The compilation works without problems when
assert is removed and the result looks sane for both -m32 and -m64 (you have to
provide your own __chkstk for -mstack-arg-probe, of course).
--- Comment #2 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-26 12:14 ---
The assert here is just in respect to comment Only valid for Win32.. Just
win32 targets are providing for gcc a __chkstk implementation. So I think it
was the reason for this assert. But AFAICS there is no other
--- Comment #3 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-26 18:22 ---
Subject: Bug 43524
Author: uros
Date: Fri Mar 26 18:22:37 2010
New Revision: 157757
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157757
Log:
PR target/43524
* config/i386/i386.c
