[Bug bootstrap/66252] [6 regression] bootstrap comparison failures on sparc-linux

2015-06-11 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66252 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug bootstrap/66252] [6 regression] bootstrap comparison failures on sparc-linux

2015-06-11 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66252 --- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Thu Jun 11 15:59:27 2015 New Revision: 224386 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224386&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR bootstrap/66252 * config/sparc/sparc.c (hard_regno

[Bug bootstrap/66252] [6 regression] bootstrap comparison failures on sparc-linux

2015-06-11 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66252 --- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Thu Jun 11 15:58:32 2015 New Revision: 224385 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224385&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR bootstrap/66252 * config/sparc/sparc.c (hard_regno_

[Bug bootstrap/66252] [6 regression] bootstrap comparison failures on sparc-linux

2015-06-11 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66252 --- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Thu Jun 11 15:56:30 2015 New Revision: 224384 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224384&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR bootstrap/66252 * config/sparc/sparc.c (hard_regno_

[Bug bootstrap/66252] [6 regression] bootstrap comparison failures on sparc-linux

2015-06-08 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66252 --- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou --- It's a known fragility of the SPARC back-end in 32-bit mode, which really wants to forbid DImode values in odd-numbered registers. The problem is that the calling conventions for 'long long' disagree, so DIm

[Bug bootstrap/66252] [6 regression] bootstrap comparison failures on sparc-linux

2015-06-08 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66252 --- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou --- cse.c:fold_rtx is miscompiled by the stage2 compiler, more precisely in: if (const_arg1 != 0 && CONST_INT_P (const_arg1) && INTVAL (const_arg1) < 0 /* This used to test

[Bug bootstrap/66252] [6 regression] bootstrap comparison failures on sparc-linux

2015-05-26 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66252 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Version|unknown

[Bug bootstrap/66252] [6 regression] bootstrap comparison failures on sparc-linux

2015-05-26 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66252 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug bootstrap/66252] [6 regression] bootstrap comparison failures on sparc-linux

2015-05-25 Thread mikpelinux at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66252 --- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson --- Still occurs with trunk @ r223652.

[Bug bootstrap/66252] [6 regression] bootstrap comparison failures on sparc-linux

2015-05-25 Thread andreast at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66252 --- Comment #2 from Andreas Tobler --- I see the same failures on sparc-solaris 10

[Bug bootstrap/66252] [6 regression] bootstrap comparison failures on sparc-linux

2015-05-25 Thread mikpelinux at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66252 --- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson --- Started with r67: fc6cc27b3f46a6f70f610ec93a1c5e68d83c933b is the first bad commit commit fc6cc27b3f46a6f70f610ec93a1c5e68d83c933b Author: rguenth Date: Tue Apr 21 12:52:43 2015 + 2015-04

[Bug bootstrap/66252] [6 regression] bootstrap comparison failures on sparc-linux

2015-05-22 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66252 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0