http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47749
--- Comment #5 from Davide Rizzo <elpa.rizzo at gmail dot com> 2011-02-15 12:05:58 UTC --- No, with this testcase it doesn't abort. I think the return value is random not only with flag=false (that could be acceptable), but also with flag=true. I don't use any compiler flag, I tried with -O0, -O1, -O2 and -O3 but I didn't notice any difference. Unfortunately I cannot try other compiler's versions. Comparing the arm assembler listings, in the failing version the statement that restores the correct return value in the return register is missing. 2011/2/15 rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org <gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47749 > > --- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> > 2011-02-15 11:18:45 UTC --- > does adding > > extern "C" void abort (void); > int main() { if (!fn_bad (true)) abort(); return 0; } > > cause the testcase to abort at runtime? Which flags are you using for > compiling? > > -- > Configure bugmail: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email > ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- > You reported the bug. >
