[Bug target/40668] 64-bit sparc miscompiles memcpy of argument inside switch

2010-09-20 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-20 21:46 --- By Jakub. -- ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/40668] 64-bit sparc miscompiles memcpy of argument inside switch

2009-07-11 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-11 09:23 --- Subject: Bug 40668 Author: jakub Date: Sat Jul 11 09:23:32 2009 New Revision: 149511 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=149511 Log: PR target/40668 * function.c

[Bug target/40668] 64-bit sparc miscompiles memcpy of argument inside switch

2009-07-11 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-11 09:26 --- Subject: Bug 40668 Author: jakub Date: Sat Jul 11 09:26:23 2009 New Revision: 149512 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=149512 Log: PR target/40668 * function.c

[Bug target/40668] 64-bit sparc miscompiles memcpy of argument inside switch

2009-07-08 Thread mikpe at it dot uu dot se
--- Comment #7 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-07-08 16:43 --- 4.4-20090630 plus this fix bootstrapped fine, fixed the test case, built a working 2.6.31-rc2 Linux kernel, and built a working Erlang VM. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40668

[Bug target/40668] 64-bit sparc miscompiles memcpy of argument inside switch

2009-07-08 Thread blp at cs dot stanford dot edu
--- Comment #8 from blp at cs dot stanford dot edu 2009-07-08 17:30 --- Wow, that's amazingly fast turnaround. Thanks so much guys! -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40668

[Bug target/40668] 64-bit sparc miscompiles memcpy of argument inside switch

2009-07-07 Thread mikpe at it dot uu dot se
--- Comment #3 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-07-07 11:35 --- Confirmed, with gcc-4.3-20090705 it works, with gcc-4.4-20090630 it fails. Compiling with -S and comparing the .s files it looks like 4.4 completely mis-schedules the code for put_uint32: put_uint32: .register

[Bug target/40668] 64-bit sparc miscompiles memcpy of argument inside switch

2009-07-07 Thread mikpe at it dot uu dot se
--- Comment #4 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-07-07 16:28 --- A reghunt identified Jakub's (added to cc: list) r142481 (PR38367 fix) as the source of this regression. -- mikpe at it dot uu dot se changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/40668] 64-bit sparc miscompiles memcpy of argument inside switch

2009-07-07 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-07 19:05 --- Created an attachment (id=18151) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18151action=view) gcc44-pr40668.patch Untested patch that fixes this testcase. I believe my commit was correct, but apparently it

[Bug target/40668] 64-bit sparc miscompiles memcpy of argument inside switch

2009-07-07 Thread mikpe at it dot uu dot se
--- Comment #6 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-07-07 23:10 --- (In reply to comment #5) Created an attachment (id=18151) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18151action=view) [edit] gcc44-pr40668.patch Untested patch that fixes this testcase. Thanks. This fixes

[Bug target/40668] 64-bit sparc miscompiles memcpy of argument inside switch

2009-07-06 Thread blp at cs dot stanford dot edu
--- Comment #1 from blp at cs dot stanford dot edu 2009-07-07 05:57 --- Created an attachment (id=18147) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18147action=view) preprocessed test input -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40668

[Bug target/40668] 64-bit sparc miscompiles memcpy of argument inside switch

2009-07-06 Thread blp at cs dot stanford dot edu
--- Comment #2 from blp at cs dot stanford dot edu 2009-07-07 05:58 --- Created an attachment (id=18148) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18148action=view) test program (before preprocessing) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40668