[Bug testsuite/46895] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/max-stack-align.c

2010-12-12 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46895 Uros Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Component|middle-end |testsuite --- Comment #1 from Uros Bizjak

[Bug testsuite/46895] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/max-stack-align.c

2010-12-12 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46895 --- Comment #2 from Uros Bizjak 2010-12-12 09:30:35 UTC --- /* { dg-do compile } */ /* { dg-options "-fomit-frame-pointer" } */ #ifdef __x86_64__ # define BP_REG "%rbp" #else # define BP_REG "%ebp" #endif void foo (void) { __asm__ volatile (

[Bug testsuite/46895] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/max-stack-align.c

2010-12-13 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46895 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 f

[Bug testsuite/46895] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/max-stack-align.c

2010-12-13 Thread asharif at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46895 asharif at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||asharif at gcc dot gnu.org --

[Bug testsuite/46895] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/max-stack-align.c

2010-12-13 Thread asharif at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46895 --- Comment #5 from asharif at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-13 18:49:50 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > Yeah, if #c2 tests what the test meant to test, then it is much preferrable > > over the thing that got committed, wh

[Bug testsuite/46895] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/max-stack-align.c

2021-08-05 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46895 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|---