[Bug target/55721] -mabi=64 compilation results in unknown UNSPEC note

2015-08-05 Thread rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug target/55721] -mabi=64 compilation results in unknown UNSPEC note

2013-01-10 Thread rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721 --- Comment #14 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10 21:32:24 UTC --- (In reply to comment #12) Here is another testcase that looks different then the others, it is cutdown from

[Bug target/55721] -mabi=64 compilation results in unknown UNSPEC note

2013-01-09 Thread rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721 rsand...@gcc.gnu.org rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

[Bug target/55721] -mabi=64 compilation results in unknown UNSPEC note

2013-01-09 Thread sje at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721 --- Comment #7 from Steve Ellcey sje at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 20:24:51 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) OK, I've got a patch for this, but probably won't be able to test it until the weekend. If you want to attach it to this

[Bug target/55721] -mabi=64 compilation results in unknown UNSPEC note

2013-01-09 Thread rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721 --- Comment #8 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 20:32:25 UTC --- Created attachment 29132 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29132 prototype patch Here's the current version of

[Bug target/55721] -mabi=64 compilation results in unknown UNSPEC note

2013-01-09 Thread rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721 --- Comment #9 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 20:39:18 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) (In reply to comment #6) OK, I've got a patch for this, but probably won't be able to test it until the

[Bug target/55721] -mabi=64 compilation results in unknown UNSPEC note

2013-01-09 Thread sje at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721 --- Comment #10 from Steve Ellcey sje at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 21:15:53 UTC --- I am still seeing some UNSPEC notes during my mipt-mti-elf build, here is a testcase cut down from newlib/libc/misc/init.c, (ps and pe were originally

[Bug target/55721] -mabi=64 compilation results in unknown UNSPEC note

2013-01-09 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721 --- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 21:20:48 UTC --- (In reply to comment #10) I am still seeing some UNSPEC notes during my mipt-mti-elf build, here is a testcase cut down from

[Bug target/55721] -mabi=64 compilation results in unknown UNSPEC note

2013-01-09 Thread sje at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721 --- Comment #12 from Steve Ellcey sje at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 21:52:59 UTC --- Here is another testcase that looks different then the others, it is cutdown from newlib/libm/math/k_rem_pio2.c. % cat bug3.c static const int

[Bug target/55721] -mabi=64 compilation results in unknown UNSPEC note

2013-01-09 Thread sje at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721 --- Comment #13 from Steve Ellcey sje at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 23:09:15 UTC --- Here is a C++ test case in case it involves differences from the C examples. This comes from libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/pointer_type_info.cc % cat bug4.cc

[Bug target/55721] -mabi=64 compilation results in unknown UNSPEC note

2012-12-18 Thread steven at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721 --- Comment #4 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-18 22:47:15 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) Actually the MIPS backend does have an UNSPEC 230. It is one of the SYMBOL_64_* unspecs. Then, why is symbol_type not

[Bug target/55721] -mabi=64 compilation results in unknown UNSPEC note

2012-12-18 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-19 00:04:57 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) (In reply to comment #1) Actually the MIPS backend does have an UNSPEC 230. It is one of the SYMBOL_64_* unspecs.

[Bug target/55721] -mabi=64 compilation results in unknown UNSPEC note

2012-12-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug target/55721] -mabi=64 compilation results in unknown UNSPEC note

2012-12-17 Thread sje at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721 --- Comment #2 from Steve Ellcey sje at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17 18:55:30 UTC --- Thanks for the pointer. Unfortunately, this note also happens when compiling testsuite_abi during the libstdc++ testsuite, that is where I first noticed

[Bug target/55721] -mabi=64 compilation results in unknown UNSPEC note

2012-12-17 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17 19:00:17 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) Thanks for the pointer. Unfortunately, this note also happens when compiling testsuite_abi during the libstdc++