GMP and clang bugginess

[Torbjörn Granlund]

Marc Glisse <marc.glisse at inria.fr> writes:
  
  Now I've found it (and reported
  https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=23646 ). Note that the same (?)
  instruction is spelled differently in the same file:
  
  	bc+	12, 28, L(9)
  vs.
  	blt+	cr7, L(24)
  
Note that the former form works with clang 3.5 installs.  A 3.6
regression?

  (there is also a mix of using "7" vs "cr7")
  and llvm is happy with the second form.

Please point me to the place where "7" is used.

-- 
Torbjörn
Please encrypt, key id 0xC8601622