http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50106
--- Comment #12 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-12 02:50:37 UTC ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Jun 12 02:50:34 2012
New Revision: 188416
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188416
Log:
Backport r180240 from mainline
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50106
--- Comment #8 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-20
09:07:36 UTC ---
Author: ramana
Date: Thu Oct 20 09:07:30 2011
New Revision: 180240
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=180240
Log:
2011-10-20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50106
--- Comment #9 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-20
09:24:10 UTC ---
Author: ramana
Date: Thu Oct 20 09:24:06 2011
New Revision: 180241
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=180241
Log:
Backport from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50106
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50106
--- Comment #11 from Sebastian Huber sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de
2011-10-20 11:07:09 UTC ---
Thank you very much. With this change the GCC 4.6.2-RC-20111019 produces now
correct code in this case.
I know understand why the unused
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50106
--- Comment #6 from Sebastian Huber sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de
2011-10-18 14:19:55 UTC ---
Created attachment 25543
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25543
arm-eabi-g++ -march=armv5t -mthumb -Os -S compiler1.test.ii -o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50106
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50106
Sebastian Huber sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|arm-rtemseabi4.11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50106
--- Comment #4 from Sebastian Huber sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de
2011-08-22 09:43:39 UTC ---
Yes, this patch fixes the problem.
It is still not clear to me why we save the volatile registers r0, r1, and r2
at all. Also we restore r1, r2,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50106
--- Comment #1 from Sebastian Huber sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de
2011-08-17 08:53:00 UTC ---
Created attachment 25029
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25029
arm-rtemseabi4.11-g++ -march=armv5t -mthumb -Os -S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50106
--- Comment #2 from Sebastian Huber sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de
2011-08-17 08:54:55 UTC ---
Created attachment 25030
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25030
arm-rtemseabi4.11-g++ -march=armv5t -mthumb -O2 -S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50106
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
12 matches
Mail list logo
