[Bug target/116625] [15 regression] regressions on arm-eabi since r15-1619-g3b9b8d6cfdf593

2024-09-05 Thread thiago.bauermann at linaro dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116625 --- Comment #4 from Thiago Jung Bauermann --- Thank you for the explanation! I must confess that most of it went over my head... (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > So yes this is just a testcase issue. Just needs a small testcase ch

[Bug target/116625] [15 regression] regressions on arm-eabi since r15-1619-g3b9b8d6cfdf593

2024-09-05 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116625 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-09-06 Target Milestone|---

[Bug target/116625] [15 regression] regressions on arm-eabi since r15-1619-g3b9b8d6cfdf593

2024-09-05 Thread thiago.bauermann at linaro dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116625 --- Comment #2 from Thiago Jung Bauermann --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > Since the difference is in main, I suspect if the function was named > differently there would be no difference. That is main is known to be called > on

[Bug target/116625] [15 regression] regressions on arm-eabi since r15-1619-g3b9b8d6cfdf593

2024-09-05 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116625 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Since the difference is in main, I suspect if the function was named differently there would be no difference. That is main is known to be called once so the frequence of this is being taken into account. I