Alexander Kabaev wrote:
On Sun, 13 May 2007 10:53:44 +0200
Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Alexander Kabaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
The instruction below appears to be the problematic one, but I
cannot tell why:
[MMI] st8 [r16]=r17
This insn looks completely benign, I'd rathe
On Sun, 13 May 2007 10:53:44 +0200
Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexander Kabaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The instruction below appears to be the problematic one, but I
> > cannot tell why:
> >
> > [MMI] st8 [r16]=r17
>
> This insn looks completely benign, I'd rather it'
Alexander Kabaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The instruction below appears to be the problematic one, but I cannot
> tell why:
>
> [MMI] st8 [r16]=r17
This insn looks completely benign, I'd rather it's the next insn that is
the problem:
chk.a.clr r14, .L1063
This is a speculation che
Hi,
for quite some time we were unable to bootstrap GCC 4.2.x version on
FreeBSD/ia64 with default -O2 optimization flags. The binaries compiler
generates are failing with SIGILL, gengtype tool being the first
victim. GCC 4.1 does not suffer from this issue and this is currently
blocking FreeBSD's
