------- Comment #30 from rguenther at suse dot de 2008-09-02 09:16 ------- Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-1.c execution at -O2 and above
On Mon, 1 Sep 2008, dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca wrote: > ------- Comment #29 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2008-09-01 > 18:17 ------- > Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-1.c > execution at -O2 and above > > > On hppa64-hp-hpux11.11, the test still fails at certain optimizations: > > > > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-1.c execution, -O0 > > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-1.c execution, -O1 > > I'm also seeing the following two fails which appear at first sight to > be related: > > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/920908-2.c execution, -O0 > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/920908-2.c execution, -O1 Interesting. The -O0 failure hints at either wrong IL from the start, problems with expansion or with the backend itself (expansion of bitfield operations nowadays expects to be able to truncate intermediate results to the respective bitfield precision, in former times this was not done). Please try to reduce these large testcases and analyze the -O0 failure. Thanks, Richard. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35518
