http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48773
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48773
--- Comment #8 from froydnj at codesourcery dot com 2011-05-04 16:47:52 UTC ---
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 04:25:19PM +, mfortune at gmail dot com wrote:
> Can anyone speculate as to which passes consume REG_DEAD notes or is it a case
> of trawli
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48773
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou 2011-05-04
16:38:54 UTC ---
> Can anyone speculate as to which passes consume REG_DEAD notes or is it a case
> of trawling the source? invoking df_note_add_problem in the final pass should
> resolve the bug I hav
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48773
--- Comment #6 from Matthew Fortune 2011-05-04
16:19:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> This is a known issue introduced by the DF merge. I think that the current
> state of affairs is that the passes consuming REG_DEAD/REG_UNUSED notes have
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48773
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48773
Matthew Fortune changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.3.5 |4.6.0
--- Comment #4 from Matthew Fortu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48773
--- Comment #2 from Matthew Fortune 2011-04-28
12:00:01 UTC ---
Created attachment 24125
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24125
ce3 dump
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48773
--- Comment #3 from Matthew Fortune 2011-04-28
12:01:17 UTC ---
Created attachment 24126
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24126
nothrow dump
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48773
--- Comment #1 from Matthew Fortune 2011-04-28
11:59:09 UTC ---
Created attachment 24124
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24124
testcase
