--- Comment #6 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-11 13:32 ---
Subject: Bug 25042
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Jan 11 13:32:44 2006
New Revision: 109583
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=109583
Log:
PR target/25042
* i386.c (ix86_init_mmx_sse_
--- Comment #5 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-11 13:26 ---
Subject: Bug 25042
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Jan 11 13:26:45 2006
New Revision: 109582
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=109582
Log:
PR target/25042
* i386.c (ix86_init_mmx_sse_b
--- Comment #4 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-10 20:26 ---
Honza, are you going to do something useful with your patch from comment #3?
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-19 23:11 ---
testing patch:
Index: config/i386/i386.c
===
*** config/i386/i386.c (revision 108753)
--- config/i386/i386.c (working copy)
*** ix86_funct
--- Comment #2 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-19 18:15
---
Crashes are bad: P2 for now. If it turns out that this is "just" an
ICE-on-invalid, then we might downgrade the priority.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-27 01:00 ---
Hmm, 3.3.x did not define __float128 at all. 3.4 and 4.0 did not ICE at -O1
-mmmx but did at -O2 -mmmx (that means it is unit-at-a-time related). I am
going to mark this as a regression as anything to an ICE should
