--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-03 15:07 ---
The assert has been removed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-26 13:58 ---
Which means that we should probably stop optimizing right after writing out
LTO IL and simply expand to RTL and assembly at that point.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-26 13:58 ---
Usually this happens when we after writing out LTO IL drop some symbols because
we keep optimizing. But we use the final set of symbols in the object files
for doing linker resolution - that's possibly a different s
--- Comment #3 from d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com 2010-02-26
02:46 ---
Created an attachment (id=19964)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19964&action=view)
Testcase
Yet another thing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42453
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-31 16:04 ---
Hm, yeah - there's also PR41584 - another empty TU bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42453
--- Comment #1 from d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com 2009-12-21
22:32 ---
Created an attachment (id=19362)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19362&action=view)
Backtrace
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42453
