https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61210
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61210
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #5)
> I'll try again in a few days time.
Richard S. is preparing a patch at [1], perhaps you can help to test it?
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-05/msg0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61210
--- Comment #5 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> Can you try to use -O0 with clang as it is otherwise the default for the host
> compiler invocations?
>
> Thus, it may very well be a miscompilation by clang.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61210
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61210
--- Comment #3 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #2)
> (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #1)
> > In which sense are they interesting?
>
> They show bugs in gcc trunk.
>
> Same as running cppcheck
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61210
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #1)
> In which sense are they interesting?
They show bugs in gcc trunk.
Same as running cppcheck over gcc trunk shows bugs.
Both both cases, I've reported th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61210
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
