On Fri, 13 Jun 2008, DJ Delorie wrote: > > > I should start posting these to the testing list. Lots of m16c > > improvements, but some m32c regressions. I haven't tried to diagnose > > these yet, but if nobody claims it's their fault I will ;-) > > > > Anyone know why the regressions happened? > > > > PASS-FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/vsprintf-chk.c execution, -O3 > > -fomit-frame-pointer > > PASS-FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/vsprintf-chk.c execution, -O3 > > -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops > > PASS-FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/vsprintf-chk.c execution, -O3 > > -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions > > PASS-FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/vsprintf-chk.c execution, -O3 -g > > FYI I tracked this down to this patch (r136679): > > 2008-06-11 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > * alias.c (get_alias_set): Use the element alias-set for arrays. > (record_component_aliases): For arrays and vectors do nothing. > * c-common.c (strict_aliasing_warning): Handle the cases > of alias set zero explicitly. > * Makefile.in (dfp.o-warn): Add -Wno-error. > > Before the patch, -mcpu=m16c had execute failures for this test. > After, -mcpu=m32c had execute failures. The problem is in the way > newlib is compiled, not the test case itself. > > Richard, do you want me to try to track this down further, or is this > enough for you to figure out what's happening?
I won't be able to look at this, so any help is appreciated. Richard.
