[Bug ada/19488] RTEMS Ada RTS doesn't compile
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-02-06 09:50 --- Fixed by last commit --- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-02-06 09:57 --- Fixed by last commit -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19488
[Bug ada/19489] gnat tools not buildable cross
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-02-06 10:02 --- (In reply to comment #19) Nathanel I confirm your small patch (+autoconf) restores Ada cross x86 to powerpc-rtems build, and I've even been able to powerpc-rtems-gnatmake Ada examples and run them on gdb psim. It also does not break native bootstrap as far as I can tell, so all looks good for commit testing wise. Thanks for helping! -- Bug 19489 depends on bug 19488, which changed state. Bug 19488 Summary: RTEMS Ada RTS doesn't compile http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19488 What|Old Value |New Value Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19489
[Bug tree-optimization/19786] New: Aliasing optimisation bug
The attached C++ program triggers an assertion violation when compiled with -O2 (it should not). The assertion is not triggered when adding -fno-strict-aliasing, or when removing -O2. It is also working when slight changes to the program are made (see comments in the source). It is the smallest version of the program which allowed me to reproduce the bug, but I did not try to look into the header. It might be an aliasing bug in , I don't know. Note that g++ 3.4 works fine. -- Summary: Aliasing optimisation bug Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: critical Priority: P2 Component: tree-optimization AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19786
[Bug tree-optimization/19786] Aliasing optimisation bug
--- Additional Comments From sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr 2005-02-06 10:20 --- Created an attachment (id=8135) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8135&action=view) Compile with -O2 and execute It is not preprocessed, but uses (and for illustration). I can send a preprocessed version if needed. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19786
[Bug other/19525] [4.0 Regression] In-build-directory multilib testing broken
--- Additional Comments From aj at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 10:27 --- See also http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-12/msg01142.html This appears also on x86-64. -- What|Removed |Added CC||aj at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19525
[Bug c++/19787] New: Internal compiler error with ambiguous conversion functions
struct H {
operator char();
operator short();
};
int const& ref = H();
output:
oref.cpp:7: error: conversion from 'H' to 'const int' is ambiguous
oref.cpp:4: note: candidates are: H::operator short int()
oref.cpp:3: note: H::operator char()
oref.cpp:7: internal compiler error: tree check: expected class 'type', have
'exceptional' (error_mark) in initialize_reference, at cp/call.c:6586
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
using:
$ g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc/configure --enable-languages=c++,c --enable-
threads=posix
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.0.0 20050203 (experimental)
This is a regression from earlier versions. There does not seem to be any
problems if I do the reference binding in block scope.
Mikael
--
Summary: Internal compiler error with ambiguous conversion
functions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: belz at kolumbus dot fi
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19787
[Bug c/19664] libstdc++ headers should have pop/push of the visibility around the declarations
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-02-06 13:11 --- So this is both a compiler bug and a v3 bug. HJL provided a patch for the C++ frontend here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg00180.html Notice that the patch is incomplete because it is missing a testcase. -- What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19664
[Bug tree-optimization/19788] New: Inconsistent handling of -1.
Consider:
int
foo (void)
{
return -1;
}
int
bar (void)
{
unsigned int a = 0x;
return a;
}
int
baz (void)
{
int a = -1;
unsigned int b = 0x;
return a == (int) b;
}
Here is what I get:
;; Function foo (foo)
foo ()
{
:
return -1;
}
;; Function bar (bar)
bar ()
{
int D.1124;
:
D.1124 = -1;
return D.1124;
}
;; Function baz (baz)
baz ()
{
int b.0;
:
b.0 = -1;
return b.0 == -1;
}
Note that -1 is represented in two different ways in foo and bar.
Worse yet, the tree optimizers do not know that they are equal in baz.
baz is optimized as expected at RTL level.
--
Summary: Inconsistent handling of -1.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization, TREE
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: kazu at cs dot umass dot edu
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19788
[Bug c/19664] libstdc++ headers should have pop/push of the visibility around the declarations
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-02-06 13:19 --- A testcase suitably distilled from #11 should do. For the libstdc++ side of the problem, we are missing a testcase. Probably, it's better opening a separate, complete libstdc++ PR: then fixing the latter will be straightforward (just add push/pop everywhere, I have a draft ready). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19664
[Bug tree-optimization/19789] New: tree optimizers do not know that constant global variables do not change
Consider:
void abort (void) __attribute__ ((noreturn));
union node
{
int dummy;
union node *ptr;
};
extern void bar (union node *tree);
extern const int global_constant;
void
foo (union node *p)
{
if (global_constant == 1)
abort ();
bar (p->ptr);
if (global_constant == 1)
abort ();
}
Note that if we get to the second "if", we know that global_constant != 1,
so we could remove the second "if".
The tree optimizers do not take this opportunity, but the RTL optimizers do.
--
Summary: tree optimizers do not know that constant global
variables do not change
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization, TREE
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: kazu at cs dot umass dot edu
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19789
[Bug c/19664] libstdc++ headers should have pop/push of the visibility around the declarations
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-02-06 13:22 --- But, on second thought, sorry, I think we have also a third problem, target dependent, for R_X86_64_PC32 relocaltions wrongly emitted for global symbols on x86_64. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19664
[Bug c/19664] libstdc++ headers should have pop/push of the visibility around the declarations
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-02-06 13:24 --- Actually, the testcase in comment #11 is about the *third* issue, AFAICS. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19664
[Bug tree-optimization/19790] New: equality not noticed when signedness differs.
Consider:
extern void bar (int);
foo (int *array)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i <= 10; i++)
{
bar (i + 1);
array[i / ((unsigned) 32)] |= ((unsigned long) 1) << (i % ((unsigned)
(32)));
}
}
The last tree SSA dump looks like so:
foo (array)
{
unsigned int D.1154;
unsigned int D.1152;
unsigned int D.1153;
unsigned int ivtmp.5;
int pretmp.4;
unsigned int pretmp.3;
int pretmp.2;
int i;
int D.1136;
long unsigned int D.1135;
long unsigned int D.1134;
int D.1133;
long unsigned int D.1132;
int D.1131;
int * D.1130;
int * D.1129;
unsigned int D.1128;
unsigned int D.1127;
unsigned int i.0;
int D.1125;
:
# i_24 = PHI ;
:;
D.1152_7 = (unsigned int) i_24;
D.1153_20 = D.1152_7 + 1;
i_1 = (int) D.1153_20;
bar (i_1);
D.1154_27 = (unsigned int) i_1;
i.0_28 = D.1154_27 + 0;
D.1127_5 = i.0_28 >> 5;
D.1128_10 = D.1127_5 * 4;
D.1129_11 = (int *) D.1128_10;
D.1130_12 = array_8 + D.1129_11;
D.1131_13 = *D.1130_12;
D.1132_14 = (long unsigned int) D.1131_13;
D.1133_15 = i_24 & 31;
D.1134_16 = 1 << D.1133_15;
D.1135_17 = D.1132_14 | D.1134_16;
D.1136_18 = (int) D.1135_17;
*D.1130_12 = D.1136_18;
if (D.1153_20 != 11) goto ; else goto ;
:;
return;
}
Note that D.1152_7 == i.0_28, but this equality is not noticed
at tree level due to signedness changes in between.
We should replace the definition of i.0_28 as
i.0_28 = D.1152_7;
and the copy propagation should take care of the rest.
The rtl optimizers catch this opportunity.
--
Summary: equality not noticed when signedness differs.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization, TREE
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: kazu at cs dot umass dot edu
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19790
[Bug tree-optimization/19791] New: [tcb] A constant not fully propagated
Consider:
extern void abort (void) __attribute__ ((__noreturn__));
extern int bar (int, int);
int
foo (int mode, int size, unsigned int align)
{
int align0;
int iftmp1;
if (mode == 0)
{
if (align != 128)
abort ();
}
align0 = (int) align;
if (mode == 0)
{
int D1131 = align0 / 8;
int D1132 = D1131 + size;
int D1133 = D1132 - 1;
int D1134 = D1131 - 1;
int D1135 = ~D1134;
iftmp1 = D1133 & D1135;
}
else
{
iftmp1 = size;
}
return bar (iftmp1, align0);
}
Note that if we get to the basic block that starts with "int D1131",
we know that align0 == 128, which can be propagated.
The last tree SSA dump looks like so:
foo (mode, size, align)
{
int prephitmp.1;
int pretmp.0;
int D1135;
int D1134;
int D1133;
int D1132;
int D1131;
int iftmp1;
int align0;
int D.1134;
int D.1133;
:
if (mode_4 == 0) goto ; else goto ;
:;
if (align_6 != 128) goto ; else goto ;
:;
abort ();
:;
align0_5 = (int) align_6;
Invalid sum of outgoing probabilities 0.0%
Invalid sum of incoming frequencies 5000, should be 0
# align0_2 = PHI ;
:;
Invalid sum of incoming frequencies 0, should be 9950
# align0_7 = PHI ;
# iftmp1_3 = PHI ;
:;
D.1133_8 = bar (iftmp1_3, align0_7) [tail call];
return D.1133_8;
Invalid sum of incoming frequencies 4950, should be 0
# align0_9 = PHI <128(1)>;
:;
D1131_13 = align0_9 / 8;
D1132_14 = size_11 + D1131_13;
D1133_15 = D1132_14 - 1;
D1134_16 = D1131_13 - 1;
D1135_17 = ~D1134_16;
iftmp1_18 = D1133_15 & D1135_17;
goto ();
}
Notice
# align0_9 = PHI <128(1)>;
which means we are missing the obvious constant propagation opportunity.
This opportunity is picked up at the RTL level.
On mainline, the opportunity is not as obvious, but the RTL optimizers do
take care of this.
--
Summary: [tcb] A constant not fully propagated
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization, TREE
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: kazu at cs dot umass dot edu
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19791
[Bug tree-optimization/19792] New: Missed optimizations due to signedness in the way
Consider:
extern unsigned char size_lookup[257];
int
foo (unsigned int t)
{
return (size_lookup [(int) t] == size_lookup[t]);
}
int
bar (unsigned int t)
{
int a = t;
return a == t;
}
Both functions should return 1, and in fact that's what the RTL optimizers
notice, but the tree optimizers don't.
This is somewhat related to PR 19790.
--
Summary: Missed optimizations due to signedness in the way
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization, TREE
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: kazu at cs dot umass dot edu
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19792
[Bug tree-optimization/19790] equality not noticed when signedness differs.
-- What|Removed |Added CC||stevenb at suse dot de http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19790
[Bug tree-optimization/19792] Missed optimizations due to signedness in the way
-- What|Removed |Added CC||stevenb at suse dot de http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19792
[Bug tree-optimization/19789] tree optimizers do not know that constant global variables do not change
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 15:04 --- Can you see if global_constant is marked call-clobbered, or alias global_var? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19789
[Bug c++/19787] [4.0 Regression] Internal compiler error with ambiguous conversion functions
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 15:19 --- Confirmed, I think is a regression (even though it does not show up with checking). -- What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |minor Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Keywords||error-recovery, ice- ||checking, ice-on-invalid- ||code Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-06 15:19:13 date|| Summary|Internal compiler error with|[4.0 Regression] Internal |ambiguous conversion|compiler error with |functions |ambiguous conversion ||functions Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19787
[Bug tree-optimization/19786] Aliasing optimisation bug
-- What|Removed |Added Attachment #8135|application/octet-stream|text/plain mime type|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19786
[Bug bootstrap/19793] New: testing pr
testing due to a bug report i got about not being able to file new bugs. -- Summary: testing pr Product: gcc Version: 2.95 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: bootstrap AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19793
[Bug rtl-optimization/19786] [4.0 Regression] Aliasing optimisation bug
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 15:29 --- Hmm, interesting. On PPC I need -O3. What is more interesting is that I could not see where the problems were in the tree dumps, therfor I am moving this into the rtl optimization component. It might turn out that this is C++ front-end bug or a libstdc++ one. -- What|Removed |Added Severity|critical|normal Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Component|tree-optimization |rtl-optimization Ever Confirmed||1 Keywords||wrong-code Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-06 15:29:08 date|| Summary|Aliasing optimisation bug |[4.0 Regression] Aliasing ||optimisation bug Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19786
[Bug tree-optimization/19788] Inconsistent handling of -1.
-- What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||19721 nThis|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19788
[Bug tree-optimization/19791] [tcb] A constant not fully propagated
-- What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||19721 nThis|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19791
[Bug tree-optimization/19789] tree optimizers do not know that constant global variables do not change
-- What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||19721 nThis|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19789
[Bug tree-optimization/19790] equality not noticed when signedness differs.
-- What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||19721 nThis|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19790
[Bug tree-optimization/19792] Missed optimizations due to signedness in the way
-- What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||19721 nThis|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19792
[Bug bootstrap/19793] testing pr
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 15:53 --- Person having trouble has confirmed it is fixed now -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19793
[Bug rtl-optimization/8361] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] C++ compile-time performance regression
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06
16:04 ---
All compilers were bootstrapped, with the following flags:
"--disable-{nls,checking} --enable-languages=c,c++"
Below, gcc40 is CVS HEAD. This was on a 1.6GHz Opteron, with -m32.
The machine has 4GB of memory so garbage collection times are zero,
which may account for some of the rather unexpected results.
For gcc34 and gcc40 I used generate-3.4.ii.bz2 (attachment 3) and
for the other two I used the latest generate.ii.bz2 (attachment 4).
gcc32 gcc33 gcc34 gcc40
-O0 16.439s 16.172s 15.223s 6.674s
-O1 30.265s 25.115s 20.678s 20.305s
-O2 42.678s 34.908s 34.526s 27.418s
-O3 47.469s 47.538s 35.706s 27.896s
I'll try to get numbers on a 32bits machine (i686) as well.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8361
[Bug tree-optimization/19788] Inconsistent handling of -1.
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 16:04 --- Confirmed. The problem is from TREE_OVERFLOW/TREE_CONSTANT_OVERFLOW. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-06 16:04:44 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19788
[Bug tree-optimization/19790] equality not noticed when signedness differs.
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 16:12 --- Confirmed but guess what my tree combiner fixes the problem: # i_24 = PHI ; :; D.1165_26 = (unsigned int) i_24; D.1166_25 = D.1165_26 + 1; i_9 = (int) D.1166_25; bar (i_9); D.1121_5 = D.1165_26 >> 5; D.1122_10 = D.1121_5 * 4; D.1123_11 = (int *) D.1122_10; D.1124_12 = array_8 + D.1123_11; D.1125_13 = *D.1124_12; D.1126_14 = (long unsigned int) D.1125_13; D.1127_15 = i_24 & 31; D.1128_16 = 1 << D.1127_15; D.1129_17 = D.1126_14 | D.1128_16; D.1130_18 = (int) D.1129_17; *D.1124_12 = D.1130_18; if (D.1166_25 != 11) goto ; else goto ; Guess that means I need to work more on it. -- What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot ||org BugsThisDependsOn||15459 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-06 16:12:50 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19790
[Bug tree-optimization/19792] Missed optimizations due to signedness in the way
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 16:17 --- Confirmed, For bar, my tree combiner fixes the missed optimization. Not for foo. -- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||15459 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-06 16:17:02 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19792
[Bug c/19664] libstdc++ headers should have pop/push of the visibility around the declarations
--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2005-02-06 16:23 --- I don't think emitting R_X86_64_PC32 is a bug since -fvisibility=hidden -fvisibility-inlines-hidden is used and the undefined function can be defined in another .o file. The real bug is gcc doesn't emit .hidden foo when foo is marked hidden and undefined. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19664
[Bug tree-optimization/19791] [tcb] A constant not fully propagated
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 16:25 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-06 16:25:18 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19791
[Bug tree-optimization/19789] tree optimizers do not know that constant global variables do not change
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 16:26 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-06 16:26:15 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19789
[Bug rtl-optimization/8361] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] C++ compile-time performance regression
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 16:49 --- Similar numbers on a 1.4GHz Xeon (i686): gcc32 gcc33 gcc34 gcc40 -O0 18.865s 15.107s 13.286s 10.193s -O1 33.511s 30.096s 24.693s 23.543s -O2 46.527s 42.657s 42.618s 33.549s -O3 49.537s 43.887s 44.056s 33.917s -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8361
[Bug rtl-optimization/8361] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] C++ compile-time performance regression
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 16:54 --- Considering the numbers from #44, #48, and #49, I think we can conclude that we are back to the compile times GCC 3.0 used to have. It should be noted that we have a significantly larger memory foot print though, and some of the speedups (especially from GCC 3.2 to GCC 3.3) came from smaller hacks to the GC system (collect less often, etc.). But then, most people just use the compiler with -O[0123] and no fancy --params and similar hacks, so from a user POV this bug really is fixed, mostly. I'm not sure if it is useful to keep this bug open any longer. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8361
[Bug tree-optimization/19788] Inconsistent handling of -1.
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-02-06 17:14 --- (In reply to comment #1) - as I'm curious as to what the "proper" interpretation/handling of target dependant constant value casts should be; it seems that in the provided example, the optimized transformations of 0x to an (int)-1 intermediate value in bar & baz are consistent, assuming: (((0x) >> ((sizeof(int) * BITS_PER_UNIT)) & 1) however would have expected the comparison between a & b in baz to have been optimized away; is this a reasonable expectation? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19788
[Bug tree-optimization/19788] Inconsistent handling of -1.
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 17:17 --- (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) Really TREE_OVERFLOW/TREE_CONSTANT_OVERFLOW should go away, there has been some talk about removing them. on the tree level, having that flag set we really say the constant is no longer be able to prograte which causes the real problem. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19788
[Bug middle-end/19721] [meta-bug] optimizations that CSE still catches
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 17:41 --- Arguably, PR16961 is not directly related. But if we fix that bug and the similar "long long" issues on 32 bits hosts, then the "64 bits arith on 32 bits hosts" thing should be a non-issue (assuming the tree optimizers do well). -- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||16961 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19721
[Bug tree-optimization/19516] missed optimization (bool)
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-02-06 17:49 --- Hi Richard, I didn't say that load elimination is the *only* way to take this optimization opportunity. DOM *can* thread incoming edges to a basic block with more than COND_EXPR or SWITCH_EXPR in limited circumstances. One problem here is that upon taking edge from to , DOM does not record that D.1317_2 == 0. Once we fix that, then D.1317_4 = *flag_1; is folded to D.1317_4 = 0;, but DOM wants to see an SSA_NAME on rhs on every MODIFY_EXPR leading up to COND_EXPR or SWITCH_EXPR. If DOM also knew that D.1317_2 == D.1317_4, it could thread the edge in question, but I cannot think of an easy way of teaching DOM how to figure out equivalences of two SSA_NAMEs when we already have a known constant value. CCing Jeff as he is the DOM person. -- What|Removed |Added CC||law at redhat dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19516
[Bug tree-optimization/19794] New: [meta-bug] Jump threading related bugs
Please make jump threading related bugs block this meta bug. -- Summary: [meta-bug] Jump threading related bugs Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: meta-bug Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: tree-optimization AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: kazu at cs dot umass dot edu CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,law at redhat dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19794
[Bug tree-optimization/19794] [meta-bug] Jump threading related bugs
-- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||15352 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19794
[Bug tree-optimization/19794] [meta-bug] Jump threading related bugs
-- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||16538 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19794
[Bug tree-optimization/19794] [meta-bug] Jump threading related bugs
-- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||17116 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19794
[Bug tree-optimization/19794] [meta-bug] Jump threading related bugs
-- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||18046 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19794
[Bug tree-optimization/19794] [meta-bug] Jump threading related bugs
-- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||18076 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19794
[Bug tree-optimization/19794] [meta-bug] Jump threading related bugs
-- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||18832 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19794
[Bug tree-optimization/19794] [meta-bug] Jump threading related bugs
-- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||19516 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19794
[Bug tree-optimization/19794] [meta-bug] Jump threading related bugs
-- What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-06 17:57:10 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19794
[Bug tree-optimization/19789] tree optimizers do not know that constant global variables do not change
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-02-06 18:08
---
Yes, global_constant is considered call clobbered.
Here is the full dump of .t18.alias1.
;; Function foo (foo)
foo: Total number of aliased vops: 1
Referenced variables in foo: 5
Variable: global_constant.0, UID 0, const int
Variable: global_constant, UID 1, const int, is an alias tag, is global, call
clobbered, default def: global_constant_1
Variable: D.1128, UID 2, union node *, type memory tag: TMT.1
Variable: p, UID 3, union node *, type memory tag: TMT.1, default def: p_3
Variable: TMT.1, UID 4, union node, is addressable, is global, call clobbered,
may aliases: { global_constant }
Pointed-to sets for pointers in foo
p_3, is dereferenced, points-to anything
D.1128_4, is dereferenced, its value escapes, points-to anything
Flow-insensitive alias information for foo
Aliased symbols
global_constant, UID 1, const int, is an alias tag, is global, call clobbered,
default def: global_constant_1
TMT.1, UID 4, union node, is addressable, is global, call clobbered, may
aliases: { global_constant }
Dereferenced pointers
D.1128, UID 2, union node *, type memory tag: TMT.1
p, UID 3, union node *, type memory tag: TMT.1, default def: p_3
Type memory tags
TMT.1, UID 4, union node, is addressable, is global, call clobbered, may
aliases: { global_constant }
Flow-sensitive alias information for foo
SSA_NAME pointers
Name memory tags
foo (p)
{
union node * D.1128;
const int global_constant.0;
:
# VUSE ;
global_constant.0_2 = global_constant;
if (global_constant.0_2 == 1) goto ; else goto ;
:;
# VUSE ;
abort ();
:;
# VUSE ;
D.1128_4 = p_3->ptr;
# global_constant_6 = V_MAY_DEF ;
bar (D.1128_4);
# VUSE ;
global_constant.0_5 = global_constant;
if (global_constant.0_5 == 1) goto ; else goto ;
:;
# VUSE ;
abort ();
:;
return;
}
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19789
[Bug rtl-optimization/8361] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] C++ compile-time performance regression
--- Additional Comments From ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 18:08 --- If you want to compare how the memory footprint has affected performance, use these flags in 3.3 and later: --param ggc-min-expand=30 --param ggc-min-heapsize=4096 Those are the hardcoded values that 3.2 uses to tune how often the collector runs. I would be interested to see how later versions behave when supplied these flags, this will simulate how fast we compile on memory constrained boxes relative to 3.2. Another perhaps more interesting test (but one which will take slightly more effort for you) would be to see how raising these values in 3.2 will affect performance. Some distros (RH?) did in fact raise them in their releases so users may be comparing their cranked distro gcc-3.2 to our FSF releases. Of course since these values are hardcoded in 3.2, you'd have to rebuild that compiler, however I think an apples-to-apples comparsion is in order before closing this PR. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8361
[Bug fortran/19754] Shape conformance not checked
--- Additional Comments From sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu 2005-02-06 18:12 --- An updated patch that does not have the regression is here http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-02/msg00039.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19754
[Bug tree-optimization/19785] New: Aliasing optimisation bug
The attached C++ program triggers an assertion violation when compiled with -O2 (it should not). The assertion is not triggered when adding -fno-strict-aliasing, or when removing -O2. It is also working when slight changes to the program are made (see comments in the source). It is the smallest version of the program which allowed me to reproduce the bug, but I did not try to look into the header. It might be an aliasing bug in , I don't know. Note that g++ 3.4 works fine. --- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 18:34 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19786 *** -- Summary: Aliasing optimisation bug Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: RESOLVED Severity: critical Priority: P2 Component: tree-optimization AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19785
[Bug rtl-optimization/19786] [4.0 Regression] Aliasing optimisation bug
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 18:34 --- *** Bug 19785 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19786
[Bug tree-optimization/19784] New: Aliasing optimisation bug
The attached C++ program triggers an assertion violation when compiled with -O2 (it should not). The assertion is not triggered when adding -fno-strict-aliasing, or when removing -O2. It is also working when slight changes to the program are made (see comments in the source). It is the smallest version of the program which allowed me to reproduce the bug, but I did not try to look into the header. It might be an aliasing bug in , I don't know. Note that g++ 3.4 works fine. --- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 18:34 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19786 *** -- Summary: Aliasing optimisation bug Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: RESOLVED Severity: critical Priority: P2 Component: tree-optimization AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19784
[Bug tree-optimization/19783] New: Aliasing optimisation bug
The attached C++ program triggers an assertion violation when compiled with -O2 (it should not). The assertion is not triggered when adding -fno-strict-aliasing, or when removing -O2. It is also working when slight changes to the program are made (see comments in the source). It is the smallest version of the program which allowed me to reproduce the bug, but I did not try to look into the header. It might be an aliasing bug in , I don't know. Note that g++ 3.4 works fine. --- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 18:34 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19786 *** -- Summary: Aliasing optimisation bug Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: RESOLVED Severity: critical Priority: P2 Component: tree-optimization AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19783
[Bug rtl-optimization/19786] [4.0 Regression] Aliasing optimisation bug
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 18:34 --- *** Bug 19784 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** --- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 18:34 --- *** Bug 19783 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19786
[Bug rtl-optimization/19786] [4.0 Regression] Aliasing optimisation bug
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 18:35 --- *** Bug 19782 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19786
[Bug rtl-optimization/19786] [4.0 Regression] Aliasing optimisation bug
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 18:34 --- *** Bug 19784 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19786
[Bug tree-optimization/19782] New: Aliasing optimisation bug
The attached C++ program triggers an assertion violation when compiled with -O2 (it should not). The assertion is not triggered when adding -fno-strict-aliasing, or when removing -O2. It is also working when slight changes to the program are made (see comments in the source). It is the smallest version of the program which allowed me to reproduce the bug, but I did not try to look into the header. It might be an aliasing bug in , I don't know. Note that g++ 3.4 works fine. --- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 18:34 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19786 *** -- Summary: Aliasing optimisation bug Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: RESOLVED Severity: critical Priority: P2 Component: tree-optimization AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19782
[Bug fortran/19777] -fbounds-check catches non-existent bounds violation
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 18:38 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Keywords||wrong-code Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-06 18:38:47 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19777
[Bug fortran/18003] Parser failure in printing of array intrisics (lbound)
-- What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Last reconfirmed|2004-11-06 16:09:59 |2005-02-06 18:44:13 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18003
[Bug other/18961] Large output causes testsuite failure
--- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 18:46 --- Does your version of expect include the patch in bug 12096? If not, and if using a version with that patch fixes your problem, then this would be a duplicate of that bug. -- What|Removed |Added CC||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18961
[Bug tree-optimization/18219] [4.0 Regression] gcc-4.0.0 bloats code by 31%
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 18:47 --- Subject: Bug 18219 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-06 18:47:14 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c Log message: PR tree-optimization/18219 * tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c (get_computation_at): Produce computations in distributed form. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.7394&r2=2.7395 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.42&r2=2.43 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18219
[Bug tree-optimization/19789] tree optimizers do not know that constant global variables do not change
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 18:51 --- This dump shows a number of problems. For starters, global_constant should not be call clobbered. This is something diego should look at. -- What|Removed |Added CC||dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19789
[Bug c/19795] New: GCC needs mechanism to expose compile-time declared reserved global registers to asm programs.
If such a mechanism existed, asm programs would able to be structured to honor their declaration as such; thereby enable implementations of set/longjump to exclude them from being otherwise improperly save/restored, for example, etc. -- Summary: GCC needs mechanism to expose compile-time declared reserved global registers to asm programs. Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: c AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: schlie at comcast dot net CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: *-*-* GCC host triplet: *-*-* GCC target triplet: *-*-* http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19795
[Bug c/19795] GCC needs mechanism to expose compile-time declared reserved global registers to asm programs.
-- What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19795
[Bug other/7549] gcc3.1: Documentation glitches in info-files
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 19:37 --- Subject: Bug 7549 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-06 19:37:25 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog gcc/doc: invoke.texi gcc.texi Log message: PR other/7549 * doc/invoke.texi: Mention for each option included in -Wall that it is included in -Wall. * doc/gcc.texi: Update copyright and last modification date. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.7396&r2=2.7397 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/doc/invoke.texi.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.573&r2=1.574 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/doc/gcc.texi.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.65&r2=1.66 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7549
[Bug other/7549] gcc3.1: Documentation glitches in info-files
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 19:42 --- Fixed in 4.0.0. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7549
[Bug tree-optimization/17790] [4.0 Regression] Significant compile time increases for sixtrack with tree LICM and IV optimization
--- Additional Comments From rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-06 20:25 --- Updated version of the patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg00205.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17790
[Bug tree-optimization/19686] [4.0 Regression] loop performance decrease, not comparing against 0
--- Additional Comments From andrewhutchinson at cox dot net 2005-02-06 23:06 --- Taking X as the initial value of x on function entry. The loop is defined as i=X to 0, step -1. Which is a simple do loop. It gets "optimized" as i=0 to -X, step -1. (Which is something bizarre!) The code increase is due to 1) Computation of -X and 2) compare said -X -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19686
[Bug bootstrap/19796] New: Bootstrap fails: Unresolved data symbol "set_fpc_csr"
My mips-sgi-irix6.5 bootstraps have been failing since 25 Jan. (I have been travelling and didn't notice). - The last successful build was 2005-01-24 09:07 UTC - First failure was approx 2005-01-25 09:00 UTX I suspect that the problem is due to: 2005-01-24 Richard Sandiford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * config/mips/irix-csr.c: New file. * config/mips/t-iris6 (irix-csr.o): New rule to build it. (EXTRA_MULTILIB_PARTS): Add irix-csr.o. * config/mips/iris6.h (ENDFILE_SPEC): Include it in n32 and n64 executables. The error I see is: stage1/xgcc -Bstage1/ -B/disk4/billingd/tmp/gcc/mips-sgi-irix6.5/bin/ -g - O2 -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing- prototypes -pedantic -Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros -Wold-style- definition -Werror -fno-common -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DGENERATOR_FILE -o build/genmodes \ build/genmodes.o build/errors.o ../build-mips-sgi- irix6.5/libiberty/libiberty.a ld32: ERROR 33 : Unresolved data symbol "get_fpc_csr" -- 1st referenced by stage1/irix-csr.o. Use linker option -v to see when and which objects, archives and dsos are loaded. ld32: ERROR 33 : Unresolved data symbol "set_fpc_csr" -- 1st referenced by stage1/irix-csr.o. Use linker option -v to see when and which objects, archives and dsos are loaded. ld32: INFO152: Output file removed because of error. collect2: ld returned 2 exit status Configured with: configure flags: --enable-shared --enable-haifa --enable-threads=single -- enable-libjava --with-as=/disk4/billingd/tmp/binutils/bin/as --disable-nls -- with-gmp=/usr/local --disable-libmudflap --prefix=/disk4/billingd/tmp/gcc -- enable-languages=c,c++,f95,java,objc -- Summary: Bootstrap fails: Unresolved data symbol "set_fpc_csr" Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: bootstrap AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: billingd at gcc dot gnu dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,rsandifo at redhat dot com GCC build triplet: mips-sgi-irix6.5 GCC host triplet: mips-sgi-irix6.5 GCC target triplet: mips-sgi-irix6.5 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19796
[Bug c++/19797] New: [4.0 Regression] g++.dg/abi/inline1.C fails on hppa*-*-hpux*
The test g++.dg/abi/inline1.C scan-assembler-not _ZTV1S
fails on hppa{2.0w,64}-hp-hpux11.{11,23}. This is a regression
from 3.4.x.
--
Summary: [4.0 Regression] g++.dg/abi/inline1.C fails on hppa*-*-
hpux*
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: hppa*-*-hpux11.*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19797
[Bug c/19798] New: Prefix ++ doing wrong in an addition
A program as simple as:
int b = 10;
int a;
a = (++b) + (++b) + (++b);
printf("%d", a);
shows the wrong answer.
It should be 36, it shows 37. Optimisations on or off throw the same result.
Source of the problem: Generated code.
Pseudo C/asm code:
++b;
++b;
%eax = b;
%edx = b;
%edx += %eax;
++b;
%edx += b
a = %edx
So, when it should be doing "a = 11 + 12 + 13;" it's doing "a = 12 + 12 + 13;".
--
Summary: Prefix ++ doing wrong in an addition
Product: gcc
Version: 3.4.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: ceniza666 at yahoo dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19798
[Bug rtl-optimization/19799] New: sibcall-3.c and sibcall-4.c fail on hppa64-*-hpux*
The tests gcc.dg/sibcall-3.c and gcc.dg/sibcall-4.c (execution tests)
fail on hppa64-hp-hpux11.{11,23}. Not a regression relative to 3.4.x.
--
Summary: sibcall-3.c and sibcall-4.c fail on hppa64-*-hpux*
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: hppa64-*-hpux11.*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19799
[Bug c/19798] Prefix ++ doing wrong in an addition
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-02-07 00:19 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 11751 *** -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19798
[Bug c/11751] wrong evaluation order of an expression
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-02-07 00:19 --- *** Bug 19798 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added CC||ceniza666 at yahoo dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11751
[Bug other/18871] Should use -Wextra instead of -W during bootstrap
--- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-07 01:02 --- I see no reason we'd ever want to carry the deprecation of the -W name through to removing it or making it warn that it is deprecated; synonyms for warning options don't cause any implementation problems or complexity in the way the sort of features that are deprecated and then removed do. Accordingly, I don't see any benefit to adding configure checks and using a different name for the same option if compiling with newer GCC, rather than just unconditionally using the older compatible name in bootstrap. -- What|Removed |Added CC||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18871
[Bug other/14402] gccbug confusion
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-07 01:10 --- Subject: Bug 14402 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-07 01:10:14 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog gcc/doc: invoke.texi Log message: PR other/14402 * doc/invoke.texi: Don't mention gccbug. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.7399&r2=2.7400 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/doc/invoke.texi.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.574&r2=1.575 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14402
[Bug target/19800] New: mmix-knuth-mmixware broken
With LAST_UPDATED: "Mon Feb 7 00:40:47 UTC 2005" I get: /home/hp/combined/mmixware-sim/gcc/xgcc -B/home/hp/combined/mmixware-sim/gcc/ -nostdinc -B/home/hp/combined/mmixware-sim/mmix-knu\ th-mmixware/gnuabi/newlib/ -isystem /home/hp/combined/mmixware-sim/mmix-knuth-mmixware/gnuabi/newlib/targ-include -isystem /home/\ hp/combined/combined/newlib/libc/include -B/usr/local/mmix-knuth-mmixware/bin/ -B/usr/local/mmix-knuth-mmixware/lib/ -isystem /us\ r/local/mmix-knuth-mmixware/include -isystem /usr/local/mmix-knuth-mmixware/sys-include -L/home/hp/combined/mmixware-sim/ld -mab\ i=gnu -DPACKAGE=\"newlib\" -DVERSION=\"1.13.0\" -I. -I/home/hp/combined/combined/newlib/libc/stdlib -O2 -DCOMPACT_CTYPE -fno-bu\ iltin -O2 -g -O2 -mabi=gnu -c /home/hp/combined/combined/newlib/libc/stdlib/ldtoa.c /home/hp/combined/combined/newlib/libc/stdlib/ldtoa.c: In function 'eiisnan': /home/hp/combined/combined/newlib/libc/stdlib/ldtoa.c:711: internal compiler error: in gen_lowpart_general, at rtlhooks.c:58 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. make[9]: *** [ldtoa.o] Error 1 make[9]: Leaving directory `/home/hp/combined/mmixware-sim/mmix-knuth-mmixware/gnuabi/newlib/libc/stdlib' Last known to work on: "Thu Feb 3 17:34:05 UTC 2005". -- Summary: mmix-knuth-mmixware broken Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: target AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: hp at gcc dot gnu dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: mmix-knuth-mmixware http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19800
[Bug target/19800] [regression 4.0] mmix-knuth-mmixware broken
-- What|Removed |Added Summary|mmix-knuth-mmixware broken |[regression 4.0] mmix-knuth- ||mmixware broken http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19800
[Bug preprocessor/19801] New: cppinternals.texi references old file names
cppinternals.texi refers to old file names cpphash.h, cpplex.c, cppfiles.c. In 4.0 the files have been renamed. -- Summary: cppinternals.texi references old file names Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: preprocessor AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19801
[Bug target/19800] [regression 4.0] mmix-knuth-mmixware broken
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-07 01:23 --- Adding CC:s based on the accusation and description in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg00220.html>. To repeat, build a combined tree for mmix-knuth-mmixware (simtest-howto.html yadda yadda no simulator needed). -- What|Removed |Added CC||roger at eyesopen dot com, ||paolo dot bonzini at lu dot ||unisi dot ch, pinskia at ||physics dot uc dot edu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19800
[Bug rtl-optimization/19800] [4.0 regression] mmix-knuth-mmixware broken, building newlib/libm/common/s_fmax.c
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-07 01:49 --- (In reply to comment #1) > Adding CC:s based on the accusation and description in > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg00220.html>. > To repeat, build a combined tree for mmix-knuth-mmixware > (simtest-howto.html yadda yadda no simulator needed). Note I only recommened the optimization and nothing else. -- What|Removed |Added Component|target |rtl-optimization Summary|[regression 4.0] mmix-knuth-|[4.0 regression] mmix-knuth- |mmixware broken |mmixware broken, building ||newlib/libm/common/s_fmax.c http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19800
[Bug rtl-optimization/19800] [4.0 regression] mmix-knuth-mmixware broken, building newlib/libm/common/s_fmax.c
-- What|Removed |Added CC|pinskia at physics dot uc |pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot |dot edu |org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19800
[Bug other/14402] gccbug confusion
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-07 01:52 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14402
[Bug other/17135] -freorder-functions mis-documented
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-07 01:52 --- Subject: Bug 17135 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-07 01:52:27 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog gcc/doc: invoke.texi Log message: PR other/17135 * doc/invoke.texi: Correct documentation of -freorder-functions. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.7400&r2=2.7401 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/doc/invoke.texi.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.575&r2=1.576 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17135
[Bug c++/19797] [4.0 Regression] g++.dg/abi/inline1.C fails on hppa*-*-hpux*
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-07 01:54 --- I want to say this is target bug, because there was a change to move hppa*-*-hpux* over to weak symbol support. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19797
[Bug target/19799] sibcall-3.c and sibcall-4.c fail on hppa64-*-hpux*
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-07 01:58 --- Hmm, for sibcall-3.c (likewise for 4) we have the following comment: This test is xfailed on targets without sibcall patterns (except targets where the test does not work due to the return address not saved on the regular stack). And in pa.c, we find this: /* Sibcalls are not ok because the arg pointer register is not a fixed register. This prevents the sibcall optimization from occurring. In addition, there are problems with stub placement using GNU ld. This is because a normal sibcall branch uses a 17-bit relocation while a regular call branch uses a 22-bit relocation. As a result, more care needs to be taken in the placement of long-branch stubs. */ if (TARGET_64BIT) return false; So these tests should be just xfailed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Component|rtl-optimization|target Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-07 01:58:21 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19799
[Bug other/17135] -freorder-functions mis-documented
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-07 02:04 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17135
[Bug preprocessor/19801] [4.0 Regression] cppinternals.texi references old file names
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-07 02:05 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added CC||bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Keywords||documentation Summary|cppinternals.texi references|[4.0 Regression] |old file names |cppinternals.texi references ||old file names http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19801
[Bug rtl-optimization/19800] [4.0 regression] mmix-knuth-mmixware broken, building newlib/libm/common/s_fmax.c
--- Additional Comments From roger at eyesopen dot com 2005-02-07 02:08 --- Untested fix here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg00223.html HP, could you check whether it fixes mmix-knuth-mixware for you? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19800
[Bug other/19802] New: scan-not-hidden breaks with unknown object format
testsuite/lib/scanasm.exp:hidden-scan-for returns an empty string for object formats other than elf and mach-o. This causes any tests using scan-not-hidden to fail. Instead, they should be UNRESOLVED when how to test for hidden symbols on that object format is not known. Likewise, scan-hidden should also yield UNRESOLVED in this case. The problem arises for systems where objdump is unavailable or fails to identify the file format - which may in fact be ELF with visibility support but no working ELF objdump. It can also be reproduced on ELF systems with working objdump by changing the regexp in hidden-scan-for to "" for ELF. -- Summary: scan-not-hidden breaks with unknown object format Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: other AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,janis187 at us dot ibm dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19802
[Bug rtl-optimization/19800] [4.0 regression] mmix-knuth-mmixware broken, building newlib/libm/common/s_fmax.c
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-07 02:13 --- In reply to comment #3, will do, as soon as that machine is done with cris-elf testing. (In the meantime, let me remind that anyone, including you, can check out a combined tree and try it.) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19800
[Bug tree-optimization/19686] [4.0 Regression] loop performance decrease, not comparing against 0
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-02-07 02:42 --- (In reply to comment #2) Might it be possible to change the severity to at least "normal" and possibly reclassify it as a "mis-optimization", as it's very typical for folks who know processors to intentionally write code such that compairs are agaisnt zero, as they are typically free; having the compiler de-optimize an otherwise more effecient explicit code fragment would seem like something that would be fairly critical to remedy? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19686
[Bug tree-optimization/19686] [4.0 Regression] loop performance decrease, not comparing against 0
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-07 02:46 --- (In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #2) It is minor because it is a missed optimization. (this really is a target dependent bug in that different cost matrixes give different answers so it might be just avr's cost does not work at all which is a different bug too). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19686
[Bug tree-optimization/19686] [4.0 Regression] loop performance decrease, not comparing against 0
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-02-07 03:01 --- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) Understood, Thanks (apparently it' becomming more important to get the costs more correct). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19686
[Bug tree-optimization/19803] New: __builtin_expect doesnt modify branch prediction for power4 target
gcc version 4.0.0 20050203 (experimental)
The following code snippet shows how branch prediction isnt used even when
specifying builtin_expect. flags used: -O2 -mcpu=power4
#if 1
#define likely(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), 1)
#else
#define likely(x) x
#endif
int i;
void foo(void)
{
while (likely(i--)) {
bar();
}
}
...
b .L2
.p2align 4,,15
.L3:
bl bar
nop
.L2:
lwz 9,0(31)
addi 9,9,-1
extsw 9,9
cmpwi 7,9,-1
stw 9,0(31)
bne 7,.L3
--
Summary: __builtin_expect doesnt modify branch prediction for
power4 target
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: anton at samba dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19803
[Bug tree-optimization/19794] [meta-bug] Jump threading related bugs
-- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||19804 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19794
