https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
Royi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||royiavital at yahoo dot com
--- Comment #16 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
Joseph Coffland changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc at joe dot coffland.com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
c...@spin-digital.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||c...@spin-digital.com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
--- Comment #13 from Roland Schulz ---
But this problem is limited to GCC. ICC, Clang and MSVC don't have the problem
with compiling 64bit AVX code. Thus they must have some kind of work-around for
ABI and GCC should be able to use a work-around
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |SUSPENDED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
--- Comment #11 from R Copley ---
On 20 September 2014 07:08, roland at rschulz dot eu
wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
>
> --- Comment #10 from Roland Schulz ---
> Created attachment 33520
> --> https://gcc.gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
--- Comment #10 from Roland Schulz ---
Created attachment 33520
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33520&action=edit
Slightly modified testcase
This slightly modified testcase in which the return value isn't stored, still
segfa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
--- Comment #9 from R Copley ---
Heh, sorry. I don't really know C, I assumed it had an implicit "return 0;"
like C++. Apparently C99 has this but earlier C standards do not. So, not
bizarre at all.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
--- Comment #8 from R Copley ---
No, I use the mingw-builds distro too.
gcc --version
gcc (x86_64-win32-seh-rev0, Built by MinGW-W64 project) 4.9.1
Bizarrely, the attached program exits with a random error code unless I add a
"return 0;" statem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
--- Comment #7 from Roland Schulz ---
For me the problem isn't fixed with gcc 4.9.1. I tried two build a)
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw-w64/files/Toolchains%20targetting%20Win32/Personal%20Builds/mingw-builds/installer/mingw-w64-install.e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
--- Comment #6 from R Copley ---
As I mentioned in the description, this request was indeed related to that bug.
The test-case no longer crashes with recent MinGW-W64 toolchains (GCC 4.9.1).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
--- Comment #5 from Roland Schulz ---
This seems to me to be a duplicate of 49001.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
--- Comment #4 from R Copley ---
(In reply to Kai Tietz from comment #1)
> MS' abi doesn't allow this. So I doubt we will be able to implement that
> for this target. If we want to re-align stack on function-base we will run
> into troubles with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
--- Comment #3 from R Copley ---
Created attachment 30794
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30794&action=edit
Assembly-language code compiled from attachment 1
Compiled with GCC 4.7.2 from the MinGW-w64 toolchain.
Compile comman
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
--- Comment #2 from R Copley ---
Created attachment 30793
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30793&action=edit
As before, but with explicitly 32-byte aligned variables
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from
16 matches
Mail list logo
