https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108240
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE in |[13 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108240
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #3)
> With the culprit commit r13-4894, we always implicitly enable powerpc64 for
> both explicit and implicit 64 bit, it's the same as before for the explicit
> 64 b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108240
--- Comment #5 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #4)
> (In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #3)
> > With the culprit commit r13-4894, we always implicitly enable powerpc64 for
> > both explicit and implicit 64 bit, i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108240
--- Comment #6 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #5)
> (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #4)
> > (In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #3)
> > > With the culprit commit r13-4894, we always implicitly enable powerpc6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108240
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
-m64 requires 64-bit instructions. We will ICE if we try to generate code
for -m64 without support for 64-bit insns enabled in the compiler. For
example, the stdu insn is required to implement the ABI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108240
--- Comment #8 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #7)
> -m64 requires 64-bit instructions. We will ICE if we try to generate code
> for -m64 without support for 64-bit insns enabled in the compiler. For
> example,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108240
--- Comment #9 from Kewen Lin ---
I filed one new bug PR108415 for the ICE itself to avoid the confusion here.
This ICE is not a regression, it's a latent bug, because:
1) Without the culprit commit r13-4894 (like using r13-4893 or reverting i
