Hi!
I've compiled gcc 8.0.1-RC-20180427 to test it with my projects.
There's one new warning for which I cannot tell whether this is a bug
in headers or a bug in gcc.
I have a header from ARM that looks like this (there are more such
functions than these two):
-- >8 -- >8 -- >8 -- >8 -- >8 -- >8
> On Apr 28, 2018, at 9:22 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Thomas Preudhomme:
>
>> Yes absolutely, CSE needs to be avoided. I made memory access volatile
>> because the change was easier to do. Also on Arm Thumb-1 computing the
>> guard's address itself takes several loads so had to modify some
* Maxim Kuvyrkov:
>> On Apr 28, 2018, at 9:22 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>
>> * Thomas Preudhomme:
>>
>>> Yes absolutely, CSE needs to be avoided. I made memory access volatile
>>> because the change was easier to do. Also on Arm Thumb-1 computing the
>>> guard's address itself takes several lo
Snapshot gcc-9-20180429 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/9-20180429/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 9 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk revision
