On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 1:17 PM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 Feb 2023 at 11:49, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 22 Feb 2023, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 09:52:06AM +, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > > > The following testcase ICEs because
On Wed, 22 Feb 2023 at 12:16, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 Feb 2023 at 11:49, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 22 Feb 2023, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 09:52:06AM +, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > > > The following testcase ICEs because we still have some
On Wed, 22 Feb 2023 at 11:49, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 Feb 2023, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 09:52:06AM +, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > > The following testcase ICEs because we still have some spots that
> > > > treat BUILT_IN_UNREACHABLE specially but not BUI
On Wed, 22 Feb 2023, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 09:52:06AM +, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > The following testcase ICEs because we still have some spots that
> > > treat BUILT_IN_UNREACHABLE specially but not BUILT_IN_UNREACHABLE_TRAP
> > > the same.
>
> This patch uses (fnd
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 09:52:06AM +, Richard Biener wrote:
> > The following testcase ICEs because we still have some spots that
> > treat BUILT_IN_UNREACHABLE specially but not BUILT_IN_UNREACHABLE_TRAP
> > the same.
This patch uses (fndecl_built_in_p (node, BUILT_IN_UNREACHABLE)