[Bug target/13722] [3.4/3.5 regression] [ia64] ICE in push_secondary_reload
------- Additional Comments From wilson at specifixinc dot com 2004-01-25 07:40 -------
Subject: Re: PR 13722 candidate fix
My latest bootstrap succeeded. I didn't run the testsuite, and I still
had some debug code in there just to be safe, but I don't think either
of those issues should matter. With the following patch on top of your
patches, the IA-64 gcc port bootstrap again including Ada. This patch
adds the REG_INC notes for auto-inc addresses in the IN operands. There
is also the potential problem I pointed out earlier where we use INTVAL
without checking to see if we have a CONST_INT. That isn't in this
patch, but I think it should go in also.
At this point, I would like to ask a favor. I have 3 IA-64 binutils
bugs which need to be fixed, two of which are over a week old now, and 2
IA-64 gcc bugs that I need to respond to. I was hoping to work on them
this week and/or weekend, but I ended up spending a lot of time helping
you with your patch. I would appreciate being given some time to work
on these problems without having to worry about the IA-64 compiler
breaking. So what I am asking here is that if you check in a patch that
breaks the IA-64 compiler, and you are not able to solve the problem
yourself, that you revert the patch until I am able to help you. I am
willing to help you with these kinds of things, but it isn't fair to
others to let you monopolize my time, and it isn't fair to others to
leave the IA-64 compiler broken for long periods of time.
If you want to be really helpful, you could try looking at some of the
IA-64 gcc bug reports in bugzilla. PR 7198 is on my list, and is one
that you could handle.
------- Additional Comments From wilson at specifixinc dot com 2004-01-25 07:40 -------
Created an attachment (id=5570)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=5570&action=view)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13722
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Reply to: