> For a built-in this is generally valid. For plain isnan it depends on what > the > standard says. > > You have to support taking the address of isnan anyway and thus expanding > to a library call in that case. Why doesn't that not work?
Only because I had put a failsafe in builtins.c with a gcc_unreachable () as I never expect The built-ins not to be expanded. The ICEs are coming from this call. > > Richard. > > > >________________________________________ > >From: Tamar Christina > >Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2017 1:21:44 PM > >To: Christophe Lyon; Markus Trippelsdorf > >Cc: Joseph Myers; Jeff Law; GCC Patches; Wilco Dijkstra; > >rguent...@suse.de; Michael Meissner; nd > >Subject: RE: [PATCH][GCC][PATCHv3] Improve fpclassify w.r.t IEEE like > >numbers in GIMPLE. > > > >Thanks, I'm looking at the failure. > >My final validate seems to have only run the GCC tests. > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Christophe Lyon [mailto:christophe.l...@linaro.org] > >> Sent: 08 June 2017 13:00 > >> To: Markus Trippelsdorf > >> Cc: Joseph Myers; Tamar Christina; Jeff Law; GCC Patches; Wilco > >Dijkstra; > >> rguent...@suse.de; Michael Meissner; nd > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH][GCC][PATCHv3] Improve fpclassify w.r.t IEEE like > >> numbers in GIMPLE. > >> > >> On 8 June 2017 at 12:30, Markus Trippelsdorf <mar...@trippelsdorf.de> > >> wrote: > >> > On 2017.01.19 at 18:20 +0000, Joseph Myers wrote: > >> >> On Thu, 19 Jan 2017, Tamar Christina wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > Hi Joseph, > >> >> > > >> >> > I made the requested changes and did a quick pass over the rest > >of > >> >> > the fp cases. > >> >> > >> >> I've no further comments, but watch out for any related test > >failures > >> >> being reported. > >> > > >> > g++.dg/opt/pr60849.C started ICEing on both X86_64 and ppc64le. > >> > > >> > >> Same on arm/aarch64, but there are also other regressions on > >big-endian > >> configs: > >> See http://people.linaro.org/~christophe.lyon/cross- > >> validation/gcc/trunk/249005/report-build-info.html > >> > >> > >> > -- > >> > Markus
