[Bug gas/13084] x86 assembler silently truncates 64bit value

2012-09-23 Thread michael.v.zolotukhin at gmail dot com
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13084 Michael Zolotukhin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||michael.v.zolotukhin at

[Bug gas/13084] x86 assembler silently truncates 64bit value

2012-09-23 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13084 --- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu 2012-09-23 14:08:46 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > What is expected output for x32 case? > Should AS produce 64-bit symbols or should it emit an error (like it should do > in 32-bit case)? Assembler c

[Bug gas/13084] x86 assembler silently truncates 64bit value

2012-09-23 Thread michael.v.zolotukhin at gmail dot com
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13084 --- Comment #4 from Michael Zolotukhin 2012-09-23 14:21:16 UTC --- If working with 64-bit values is incorrect in x32-mode, then we also need to fix tests from gas/i386/ilp32/x86-64.s - as they are mostly copied from 64-bit tests, they c

[Bug gas/13084] x86 assembler silently truncates 64bit value

2012-09-23 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13084 --- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu 2012-09-23 14:48:35 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > If working with 64-bit values is incorrect in x32-mode, then we also need to > fix tests from gas/i386/ilp32/x86-64.s - as they are mostly copied from 64

[Bug gas/13084] x86 assembler silently truncates 64bit value

2012-09-23 Thread michael.v.zolotukhin at gmail dot com
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13084 --- Comment #6 from Michael Zolotukhin 2012-09-23 15:17:07 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > If working with 64-bit values is incorrect in x32-mode, then we also need to > > fix tests from gas/i386/ilp32/x

[Bug gas/13084] x86 assembler silently truncates 64bit value

2012-09-23 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13084 --- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu 2012-09-23 15:22:24 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > Oh, I see. I just changed integer_constant function to disallow 64-bit > constant > in x32 mode and got fails on instructions like this: > movq %rax,0x

[Bug ld/12762] LTO on Windows is broken (C++)

2012-09-23 Thread vanboxem.ruben at gmail dot com
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12762 vanboxem.ruben at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|lto produces multiple |LTO on Windows

[Bug ld/12762] LTO on Windows is broken (C++)

2012-09-23 Thread vanboxem.ruben at gmail dot com
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12762 --- Comment #30 from vanboxem.ruben at gmail dot com 2012-09-23 20:33:53 UTC --- The original problem has shifted somewhat. Using GCC 4.7.2 and ld 2.23.51.20120920, the first link error I get now when compiling Qt (where I originally met