[Bug c/20652] rejects code with an error: aliased to undefined symbol
--- Additional Comments From aj at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 08:16 --- glibc needs to be changed for this, for details chech the thread starting at: http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-hacker/2005-03/msg00061.html -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20652
[Bug rtl-optimization/20653] New: 3.4 assembler error - value too large for field on k6-2
This error only seems to occur when "-O2 -march=k6-2 -ftracer" are used together. Removing -ftracer causes the error to go away. This problem does not seem to exist in the GCC4.0 branch. i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I../include -O20 -ffast-math -D_REENTRANT -fsigned-char -march=k6-2 -ftracer -O2 -mno-sse2 -fPIC -DUSE_MEMORY_H -MT psy.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/psy.Tpo -c psy.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/psy.o -save-temps psy.s: Assembler messages: psy.s:6581: Error: value of ff7f too large for field of 1 bytes at 0428 gcc -v Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.4.3-20050110/specs Configured with: /var/tmp/portage/gcc-3.4.3.20050110-r1/work/gcc-3.4.3/configure --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs --prefix=/usr --bindir=/usr/i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-bin/3.4.3-20050110 --includedir=/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.4.3-20050110/include --datadir=/usr/share/gcc-data/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.4.3-20050110 --mandir=/usr/share/gcc-data/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.4.3-20050110/man --infodir=/usr/share/gcc-data/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.4.3-20050110/info --with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.4.3-20050110/include/g++-v3 --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu --disable-altivec --enable-nls --without-included-gettext --enable-__cxa_atexit --disable-sjlj-exceptions --enable-clocale=gnu --with-system-zlib --disable-checking --disable-werror --disable-libunwind-exceptions --disable-multilib --disable-libgcj --enable-languages=c,c++ --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix Thread model: posix gcc version 3.4.3-20050110 (Gentoo Linux 3.4.3.20050110-r1, ssp-3.4.3.20050110-0, pie-8.7.7) -- Summary: 3.4 assembler error - value too large for field on k6-2 Product: gcc Version: 3.4.4 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: rtl-optimization AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: halcy0n at gentoo dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20653
[Bug rtl-optimization/20653] 3.4 assembler error - value too large for field on k6-2
--- Additional Comments From halcy0n at gentoo dot org 2005-03-27 08:50 --- Created an attachment (id=8461) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8461&action=view) Preprocessed file for above failure -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20653
[Bug rtl-optimization/20376] The missed-optimization of general induction variables in the new rtl-level loop optimizer cause performance degradation.
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 10:19 --- Two things: 1) Test case? No test case, no way to reproduce it without re-doing the investigating you have already done. Stop work duplication, provide test cases to your fellow GCC hackers. I don't think anyone will confirm this bug until there is a self-contained test case (that you can add to this PR as an attachment), preferably with an annotated RTL dump to show the problem (also as an attachment). See also the bug reporting guide, "http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html#report";. 2) Try compiling with -fweb, it may result in the code you are looking for. It basically is live range splitting, and it is a known problem that we don't do that after unrolling. Really, his is a job for the register allocator, but since the existing one in GCC can not do this, we need a live range splitting pass after unrolling. (And no, we do not need this pass in the general case because when going out of SSA form from trees we already do live range splitting too, and web is a surprisingly expensive pass). -- What|Removed |Added CC||stevenb at suse dot de http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20376
[Bug tree-optimization/20626] [4.1 Regression] vect-80.c and vect-96.c fail on ia64-hpux
--- Additional Comments From dorit at il dot ibm dot com 2005-03-27 12:36 --- patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-03/msg02442.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20626
[Bug java/20654] New: exception.o is not included in libgcj.a due to case-insensitivity
binutils ar was recently changed to exclude path when comparing object filenames, to agree with POSIX. This combines with Windows' case-insensitive filesystem to cause java/lang/Exception.o to replace exception.o in the following command while creating libgcj.a. ar rc .libs/libgcj0_convenience.a prims.o jni.o exception.o ... java/lang/Exception.o ... This causes bootstrap to fail when linking jv-convert. make[4]: Entering directory `/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw- head/20050325/build/gcc/i686-pc-mingw32/libjava' /bin/sh ./libtool --tag=GCJ --mode=link /aaronwl/cs/env/mingw- head/20050325/build/gcc/./gcc/gcj -B/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw- head/20050325/build/gcc/./gcc/ -B/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/i686-pc- mingw32/bin/ -B/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/i686-pc-mingw32/lib/ - isystem /aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/i686-pc-mingw32/include - isystem /aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-include - L/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/build/gcc/i686-pc-mingw32/libjava -ffloat- store -fno-omit-frame-pointer -g -O2 -o jv-convert.exe -- main=gnu.gcj.convert.Convert -rpath /aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/lib - shared-libgcc -L/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/build/gcc/i686-pc- mingw32/libjava/.libs libgcj.la /aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/build/gcc/./gcc/gcj - B/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/build/gcc/./gcc/ -B/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw- head/20050325/i686-pc-mingw32/bin/ -B/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/i686- pc-mingw32/lib/ -isystem /aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/i686-pc- mingw32/include -isystem /aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/i686-pc- mingw32/sys-include -ffloat-store -fno-omit-frame-pointer -g -O2 -o jv- convert.exe --main=gnu.gcj.convert.Convert -shared-libgcc - L/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/build/gcc/i686-pc-mingw32/libjava - L/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/build/gcc/i686-pc- mingw32/libjava/.libs ./.libs/libgcj.a -L/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw- head/20050325/build/gcc/i686-pc-mingw32/libstdc++-v3/src - L/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/build/gcc/i686-pc-mingw32/libstdc++- v3/src/.libs -L/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/build/gcc/./gcc - L/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/i686-pc-mingw32/bin - L/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/i686-pc-mingw32/lib - L/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/lib/../i686-pc-mingw32/lib - L/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/lib -L/mingw/lib -lmingw32 -lgcc - lmoldname -lmingwex -lmsvcrt -luser32 -lkernel32 -ladvapi32 -lshell32 - lmingw32 -lgcc -lmoldname -lmingwex -lmsvcrt -Wl,--rpath - Wl,/aaronwl/cs/env/mingw-head/20050325/lib ./.libs/libgcj.a(prims.o): In function `Z17_Jv_ThrowNoMemoryv': /aaronwl/cs/compilers/gcc/src/cvs/head/gcc/libjava/prims.cc:369: undefined reference to `_Jv_Throw' ./.libs/libgcj.a(prims.o): In function `Jv_Malloc': /aaronwl/cs/compilers/gcc/src/cvs/head/gcc/libjava/prims.cc:1276: undefined reference to `_Jv_Throw' ... Since, depending on how you look at it, 'ar' is doing the right thing, I think the easiest way to fix this to rename exception.cc to exceptions.cc. -- Summary: exception.o is not included in libgcj.a due to case- insensitivity Product: gcc Version: 4.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: build Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: java AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: aaronavay62 at aaronwl dot com CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,java-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC target triplet: i?86-pc-mingw32 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20654
[Bug java/20654] exception.o is not included in libgcj.a due to case-insensitivity
-- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-03-27 13:01:38 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20654
[Bug target/11180] [avr-gcc] Optimization decrease performance of struct assignment.
--- Additional Comments From andrewhutchinson at cox dot net 2005-03-27 14:33 --- The problem here is that gcc is using a DImode register to handle 6 byte (int+long) structure. Why I have no idea! Since the target has no insn for DI move, gcc turns this into individual QImode byte moves (subregs all over the place!). The 'stacked' 6 byte structure is 'popped' into DI register (6 bytes ). Two other byte registers are explicitely cleared (making our 8 byte DI register) What then follows is a large amount of shuffling. i.e. Moving from intermediate virtual DI register (8 bytes) into correct place for a 6 byte return. Which seems to surpass the abilities of the register allocator (DI and return registers overlap). Smaller structures (<=4 bytes) are optimally handled. Larger structure >8 are also much better since they are returned in memory. So in summary, it would appear that the root cause is allocation of a DI mode register for structures >4 and <=8 bytes. A secondary factor is the use of QImode moves (when SI,HImode are available and more efficient) The problem can be partially alleviated by defining DImode moves (that a hell of a change though). Poor code still remains - for example clearing unused padding bytes and extra register usage. PS -fpack-struct does not change this bug. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11180
[Bug c/20655] New: Attempt to use undefined structure tag triggers no diagnostic
/*** SNIP ***/
/*
Place this file into `bug.c' (the code between the SNIP comments).
Then try `gcc -c -Wall bug.c'
The compiler silently transforms the type of the structure component
below to some kind of a generic pointer or something.
However it should output a diagnostic on the `UndefinedTag' identifier,
especially when -Wall is specified (as you can see above).
It is OK what the compiler does with this code but a warning should be
produced when the user really cares about them.
Without such a warning things often become confusing when someone
changes the tag in the declaration and forgets to update the tag name
in the pointers.
*/
typedef struct tagType {
struct UndefinedTag *Pointer;
} TType;
/*** SNIP ***/
--
Summary: Attempt to use undefined structure tag triggers no
diagnostic
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jozef dot behran at krs dot sk
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20655
[Bug c/9049] No support for selective enabling/disabling of warnings
--- Additional Comments From david dot nospam dot hopwood at blueyonder dot co dot uk 2005-03-27 15:48 --- This is particularly bad for some warnings, such as -Wpadded, that really only make sense when applied to a subset of code. This came up for the Xen virtual machine manager: we want structures used in public interfaces to avoid padding, but for private/internal structures it doesn't matter. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9049
[Bug c/20655] Attempt to use undefined structure tag triggers no diagnostic
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27
16:15 ---
This is still valid code because the struct could be defined below still.
For an example:
struct a
{
struct b *c;
};
struct b
{
int i;
struct a *c;
};
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution||INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20655
[Bug libgcj/20654] exception.o is not included in libgcj.a due to case-insensitivity
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 16:21 --- This is why POSIX ar is bad. Oh well. -- What|Removed |Added Component|java|libgcj http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20654
[Bug target/20653] value too large for field on k6-2 (loop instruction)
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 16:36 --- Confirmed, there might be a testcase for 4.0.0 which can reproduce this too but I don't know of any. Anyways the problem looks like not taking into counting some alignment or something into the length so get the loop instruction but we should not. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Component|rtl-optimization|target Ever Confirmed||1 Keywords||wrong-code Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-03-27 16:36:40 date|| Summary|3.4 assembler error - value |value too large for field on |too large for field on k6-2 |k6-2 (loop instruction) http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20653
[Bug debug/9963] [CygWin] g++ -gcoff report "C_EFCN symbol out of scope"
--- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com 2005-03-27 17:14 --- This bug appears to still exists in mainline. When I compile the test case without optimization, I get both these lines .def_Test; .val_Test; .scl2; .type 044;.endef .def_Test; .scl3; .type 32; .endef The second line is incorrect. When it happens to be emitted first, it doesn't matter. When it is emitted second, it does matter. The note closing this PR says "GCC 3.3.1 (cygming special) is ok." Does the "cygming special" refer to a patched compiler? -- What|Removed |Added CC||ian at airs dot com Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9963
[Bug debug/9963] [CygWin] g++ -gcoff report "C_EFCN symbol out of scope"
-- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|3.3.1 |--- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9963
[Bug middle-end/20648] [4.1 regression] ICE in cfg_layout_redirect_edge_and_branch_force
--- Additional Comments From schwab at suse dot de 2005-03-27 18:14 --- Triggered by this patch from PR15242: 2005-02-01 Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR optimization/15242 * params.def (PARAM_MAX_GOTO_DUPLICATION_INSNS): New param. * basic-block.h (duplicate_computed_gotos): Add prototype. * bb-reorder.c (duplicate_computed_gotos): New function to duplicate sufficiently small blocks ending in a computed jump. * passes.c (rest_of_compilation): Call duplicate_computed_gotos if not optimizing for size. * cfgcleanup.c (try_crossjump_bb): If not optimizing for size, never do tail merging for blocks ending in a computed jump. * doc/invoke.texi: Document the max-goto-duplication-insns param. -- What|Removed |Added CC||stevenb at suse dot de OtherBugsDependingO||15242 nThis|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20648
[Bug middle-end/20648] [4.1 regression] ICE in cfg_layout_redirect_edge_and_branch_force
-- What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20648
[Bug debug/9963] [CygWin] g++ -gcoff report "C_EFCN symbol out of scope"
--- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com 2005-03-27 18:54 --- Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-03/msg02460.html -- What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9963
[Bug tree-optimization/20656] New: No strength reduction for a simple testcase
The following two function should be equivalent:
int f(int offset, int len, int num_bytes)
{
int i;
num_bytes = 0;
for (i = 0; i < len; i++) num_bytes ++;
return num_bytes;
}
int f1(int offset, int len, int num_bytes)
{
if (len<0)
return 0;
return len;
}
Why don't we strength reduce the loop in f?
Then we just need to remove the loop and two functions would be equivalent.
The orginal code which was found in real code (I think java code in classpath):
int f(int offset, int len, int num_bytes)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < len; i++) num_bytes +=2;
return num_bytes;
}
int f1(int offset, int len, int num_bytes)
{
if (len<0)
return num_bytes;
return num_bytes+len*2;
}
--
Summary: No strength reduction for a simple testcase
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20656
[Bug middle-end/20225] [4.0/4.1 regression] ICE during GC
--- Additional Comments From hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 19:35 --- This regression should be solved by the patch so I guess I will close it and move on the new regression :( -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20225
[Bug tree-optimization/20492] [tcb] update_ssa (..., true) places an invalid PHI node.
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-03-27 19:38 --- Fixed with Diego's recent updates to incremental SSA updates. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20492
[Bug tree-optimization/20657] New: VRP does not get rid of a redundant "if" statement.
Consider
int
foo (int a)
{
if (a == 0)
if (a == 0)
return 1;
return 0;
}
Note that the second "if" statement is redundant.
--
Summary: VRP does not get rid of a redundant "if" statement.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: kazu at cs dot umass dot edu
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=20657
[Bug tree-optimization/20657] [tcb] VRP does not get rid of a redundant "if" statement.
-- What|Removed |Added Summary|VRP does not get rid of a |[tcb] VRP does not get rid |redundant "if" statement. |of a redundant "if" ||statement. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20657
[Bug middle-end/20635] [4.0/4.1 Regression] ICE in cgraph_mark_reachable_node
--- Additional Comments From hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 19:41 --- How this is supposed to be failing? I do get undefined reference to baz, but same I do get with my system compiler here and it seem to be right as baz is extern inline function -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20635
[Bug middle-end/20635] [4.0/4.1 Regression] ICE in cgraph_mark_reachable_node
-- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20635
[Bug tree-optimization/20657] [tcb] VRP does not get rid of a redundant "if" statement.
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-03-27 19:42 --- Created an attachment (id=8462) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8462&action=view) Patch -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20657
[Bug c++/20658] New: warning on minimum integer values
long long a=-9223372036854775808ll; int b=-2147483648; test2.cpp:1:14: warning: integer constant is so large that it is unsigned it is not. test2.cpp:1: warning: this decimal constant is unsigned only in ISO C90 test2.cpp:2: warning: this decimal constant is unsigned only in ISO C90 huh? unsigned? example with sizeof(int) == 4 && sizeof(long long) == 8 -- Summary: warning on minimum integer values Product: gcc Version: 3.4.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: sstrasser at systemhaus-gruppe dot de CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20658
[Bug middle-end/20635] [4.0/4.1 Regression] ICE in cgraph_mark_reachable_node
--- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 20:47 --- LC_ALL=C ./xgcc -B ./ pr20635.c -O2 -v Reading specs from ./specs Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Configured with: ../configure --enable-languages=c,c++ : (reconfigured) ../configure --enable-languages=c,c++ --no-create --no-recursion Thread model: posix gcc version 4.1.0 20050327 (experimental) ./cc1 -quiet -v -iprefix /usr/src/gcc/obj/gcc/../lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.1.0/ -isystem ./include pr20635.c -quiet -dumpbase pr20635.c -mtune=k8 -auxbase pr20635 -O2 -version -o /tmp/ccmjI4n7.s ignoring nonexistent directory "/usr/src/gcc/obj/gcc/../lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.1.0/include" ignoring nonexistent directory "/usr/src/gcc/obj/gcc/../lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.1.0/../../../../x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/include" ignoring nonexistent directory "NONE/include" ignoring nonexistent directory "/usr/local/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.1.0/include" ignoring nonexistent directory "/usr/local/lib/../x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/include" #include "..." search starts here: #include <...> search starts here: ./include /usr/local/include /usr/include End of search list. GNU C version 4.1.0 20050327 (experimental) (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) compiled by GNU C version 3.4.3 20050221 (Red Hat 3.4.3-20). GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=30 --param ggc-min-heapsize=4096 pr20635.c: In function 'bar': pr20635.c:24: internal compiler error: in cgraph_mark_reachable_node, at cgraph.c:473 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. Similarly on gcc-4_0-branch: ... GNU C version 4.0.0 20050325 (prerelease) (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) compiled by GNU C version 3.4.3 20050221 (Red Hat 3.4.3-20). GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=98 --param ggc-min-heapsize=128053 pr20635.c: In function 'bar': pr20635.c:24: internal compiler error: in cgraph_mark_reachable_node, at cgraph.c:477 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. -- What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW Last reconfirmed|2005-03-25 14:12:19 |2005-03-27 20:47:43 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20635
[Bug middle-end/20635] [4.0/4.1 Regression] ICE in cgraph_mark_reachable_node
--- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 20:55 --- Forgot to add, this testcase was meant for gcc.c-torture/compile, i.e. an compile test only. It of course won't link, because baz is extern inline. But it should compile. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20635
[Bug java/20659] New: gcj: Can't reference 'this' before the superclass constructor
gcc version 4.0.0 20041213
javac Bla.java works.
gcj -C Bla.java (or -c)
Bla.java: In class 'Bla$B':
Bla.java: In constructor '(Bla)':
Bla.java:18: error: Can't reference 'this' before the superclass constructor
has been called.
super(doit());
^
1 error
--
public class Bla {
protected int doit() {
return 1;
}
public class A {
public A(int i) {
}
}
public class B extends A {
public B() {
super(doit());
}
}
}
--
Summary: gcj: Can't reference 'this' before the superclass
constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: java
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: ovidr at users dot sourceforge dot net
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,java-prs at gcc dot gnu
dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20659
[Bug middle-end/20635] [4.0/4.1 Regression] ICE in cgraph_mark_reachable_node
--- Additional Comments From hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 21:42 --- I see I forgot my tree with checking enabled. This is obviously latent bug in handling extern inline functions, I am looking into it. -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jh at suse dot cz |dot org | Status|NEW |ASSIGNED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20635
[Bug c++/20658] warning on minimum integer values
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 21:46 --- No, the warning is correct - is an operator and not part of the number, -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20658
[Bug fortran/20660] New: INQUIRE incorrectly reports the existence of UNITS
This is Walt Brainerd's fc001.f95 INQUIRE says only units 5, 6 exist, but open(11... works. This is wrong. Units 5 and 6 are preconnected, which means that they are open, but all units that can be used should exist. -- Summary: INQUIRE incorrectly reports the existence of UNITS Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20660
[Bug fortran/20660] INQUIRE incorrectly reports the existence of UNITS
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 21:56 --- Created an attachment (id=8463) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8463&action=view) Walt's program -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20660
[Bug libfortran/20660] INQUIRE incorrectly reports the existence of UNITS
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 21:59 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Component|fortran |libfortran Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-03-27 21:59:44 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20660
[Bug fortran/20661] New: End of record not detected
This fc002.f95 from Walt Brainerd. ! End of record is not detected !on second READ ! iostats should be 0, 0, -2, -1 -- Summary: End of record not detected Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20661
[Bug fortran/20661] End of record not detected
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 22:00 --- Created an attachment (id=8464) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8464&action=view) Walt's program -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20661
[Bug libfortran/20661] End of record not detected
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 22:02 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Component|fortran |libfortran Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-03-27 22:02:41 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20661
[Bug fortran/20662] New: Problem with bounds in gfc_conv_intrinsic_bound
This is Walt Brainerd's fc004.f95. A trace of f951 shows (gdb) run fc004.f95 Starting program: /home/kargl/work/41/libexec/gcc/i386-unknown-freebsd6.0/4.1.0/f951 fc004.f95 zero MAIN__ to_sub Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x0809b832 in gfc_conv_intrinsic_bound (se=0xbfbfe490, expr=0x8575180, upper=0) at ../../gcc41/gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.c:679 679 gcc_assert (i >= 0 && i < GFC_TYPE_ARRAY_RANK (TREE_TYPE (desc))); This is probably related to the other PR's that involve lbound and ubound -- Summary: Problem with bounds in gfc_conv_intrinsic_bound Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20662
[Bug fortran/20662] Problem with bounds in gfc_conv_intrinsic_bound
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 22:08 --- Created an attachment (id=8465) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8465&action=view) Walt's program -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20662
[Bug fortran/20663] New: Generic function is not resolved
This is Walt Brainerd's fc005.f95. kargl[227] gfc41 -static -o z fc005.f95 In file fc005.f95:23 if (.not. close(rx, rr)) then 1 Error: Symbol 'close' at (1) has no IMPLICIT type -- Summary: Generic function is not resolved Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20663
[Bug fortran/20663] Generic function is not resolved
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 22:12 --- Created an attachment (id=8466) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8466&action=view) Walt's program -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20663
[Bug fortran/20662] Problem with bounds in gfc_conv_intrinsic_bound
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 22:13 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-03-27 22:13:48 date|| Summary| Problem with bounds in |Problem with bounds in |gfc_conv_intrinsic_bound|gfc_conv_intrinsic_bound http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20662
[Bug fortran/20664] New: gfc_conv_descriptor_dtype, at fortran/trans-array.c:177
This is Walt's fc006.f95. It uses lbound and ubound, so it may be related to other PRs. kargl[231] gfc41 -static -o z fc006.f95 fc006.f95: In function 'fcn': fc006.f95:33: internal compiler error: in gfc_conv_descriptor_dtype, at fortran/trans-array.c:177 -- Summary: gfc_conv_descriptor_dtype, at fortran/trans-array.c:177 Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20664
[Bug fortran/20663] Generic function is not resolved
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 22:15 --- Confirmed, but I think this is a dup of bug 20482. -- What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||20482 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Keywords||rejects-valid Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-03-27 22:15:34 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20663
[Bug fortran/20664] gfc_conv_descriptor_dtype, at fortran/trans-array.c:177
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 22:15 --- Created an attachment (id=8467) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8467&action=view) Walt's program -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20664
[Bug java/20659] gcj: Can't reference 'this' before the superclass constructor
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 22:17 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 4695 *** -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE Summary|gcj: Can't reference 'this' |gcj: Can't reference 'this' |before the superclass |before the superclass |constructor |constructor http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20659
[Bug java/4695] Error calling method from enclosing context in constructor
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 22:17 --- *** Bug 20659 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added CC||ovidr at users dot ||sourceforge dot net http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4695
[Bug fortran/20664] gfc_conv_descriptor_dtype, at fortran/trans-array.c:177
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 22:20 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 17202 *** -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE Summary| gfc_conv_descriptor_dtype, |gfc_conv_descriptor_dtype, |at fortran/trans-array.c:177|at fortran/trans-array.c:177 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20664
[Bug fortran/17202] ice-on-valid-code, trans-array.c:217: gfc_conv_descriptor_dtype Assertion failed
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 22:20 --- *** Bug 20664 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17202
[Bug target/20650] [4.1 Regression] float.c fails to build with weird error message
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27
22:32 ---
Small testcase:
int f(double a, double b)
{
int a1 = a;
int b1 = b;
return a1+b1;
}
You can reproduce this on powerpc-darwin with -mcpu=601
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Component|middle-end |target
Ever Confirmed||1
Keywords|rejects-valid |ice-on-valid-code
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-03-27 22:32:23
date||
Summary|float.c fails to build with |[4.1 Regression] float.c
|weird error message |fails to build with weird
||error message
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20650
[Bug target/20650] [4.1 Regression] float.c fails to build with weird error message
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 22:34 --- This was caused by: 2005-03-25 Geoffrey Keating <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * config/rs6000/rs6000.md (UNSPEC constants): Add UNSPEC_STFIWX. (fix_truncdfsi2): Allow registers or memory as destination. When TARGET_PPC_GFXOPT, generate simplified pattern. (fix_truncdfsi2_internal): Use define_insn_and_split. (fix_truncdfsi2_internal_gfxopt): New. (fctiwz): Don't confuse register allocation by giving it no choices. (stfiwx): New. * config/rs6000/rs6000.h (EXTRA_CONSTRAINT): Add 'Z'. (EXTRA_MEMORY_CONSTRAINT): Likewise. * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (indexed_or_indirect_operand): New. * config/rs6000/rs6000-protos.h (indexed_or_indirect_operand): New. There are a large number of regressions on powerpc-linux and powerpc-aix because of this change. 2127-1.c is one of the regressions. -- What|Removed |Added CC||dje at gcc dot gnu dot org, ||geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20650
[Bug tree-optimization/20657] [tcb] VRP does not get rid of a redundant "if" statement.
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-27 22:35 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-03-27 22:35:28 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20657
[bug fmodulo-sched/gcc]
- 源邮件 -
主题: [bug fmodulo-sched/gcc]
发件人: "zouq" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
日期: Mon, 三月 28, 2005 8:09 am
收件人: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
1.i build a cross-compiler for powerpc
the version of gcc is gcc-4.1-20050306
../../source/gcc-4.1-20050306/configure -target=powerpc-unknown-eabi
-disable-shared --enable-languages=c -prefix=/opt/crosstool-2 -v :
(reconfigured) ../../source/gcc-4.1-20050306/configure
-target=powerpc-unknown-eabi -prefix=/opt/crosstool-2/ -enable-languages=c -v
2.the source file
int main (void)
{
int i,j;
int u[100][100], v[100][100],
p[100][100], unew[100][100],
vnew[100][100],pnew[100][100],
uold[100][100],vold[100][100],
pold[100][100],cu[100][100],
cv[100][100],z[100][100],h[100][100],psi[100][100];
int tdts8=2;
int tdtsdx=3;
int tdtsdy=4;
for (i=0;i<100;i++)
for (j=0;j<100;j++)
{
unew[i+1][j]=uold[i+1][j]+tdts8*(z[i+1][j]+z[i+1][j])*
(cv[i+1][j+1]+cv[i][j+1]+cv[i][j]+cv[i+1][j])
-tdtsdx*(h[i+1][j]-h[i][j]);
/*vnew[i][j+1]=vold[i][j+1]-tdts8*(z[i+1][j+1]+z[i][j+1])
*(cu[i+1][j+1]+cu[i][j+1]+cu[i][j]+cu[i+1][j])
-tdtsdy*(h[i][j+1]-h[i][j]);*/
/*pnew[i][j]=pold[i][j]-tdtsdx*(cu[i+1][j]-cu[i][j])-
tdtsdy*(cv[i][j+1]-cv[i][j]);*/
}
for (i=0;i<100;i++)
for (j=0;j<100;j++)
printf ("%d\n%d\n%d\n",unew[i][j], vnew[i][j], pnew[i][j]);
return 1;
}
3.the flags i use
powerpc-unknown-eabi-gcc -O2 testcom.c -fmodulo-sched -mtune=power5 -mads
and it goes like this:
testcom.c:34: internal compiler error: in schedule_insns, at
sched-rgn.c:2549 Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
and i also have another experiment:
powerpc-unknown-eabi-gcc -O2 testcom.c -mads
i will be all right.
Re: [bug fmodulo-sched/gcc]
On Mar 27, 2005, at 8:06 PM, zouq wrote:
- ~{T4SJ<~~} -
~{VwLb~}: [bug fmodulo-sched/gcc]
~{7"<~HK~}: "zouq" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
~{HUFZ~}: Mon, ~{H}TB~} 28, 2005 8:09 am
~{JU<~HK~}: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
---
1.i build a cross-compiler for powerpc
the version of gcc is gcc-4.1-20050306
../../source/gcc-4.1-20050306/configure -target=powerpc-unknown-eabi
-disable-shared --enable-languages=c -prefix=/opt/crosstool-2 -v :
(reconfigured) ../../source/gcc-4.1-20050306/configure
-target=powerpc-unknown-eabi -prefix=/opt/crosstool-2/
-enable-languages=c -v
This was fixed by:
2005-03-21 Mostafa Hagog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR middle-end/20177
* ddg.c (create_ddg_dependence): Ignore reg-anti dependency.
* modulo-sched.c (const_iteration_count): Return on NULL
pre-header.
(print_node_sched_params): Return on NULL dump_file.
(generate_reg_moves): Handle reg-anti dependencies and disregard
closing branch when generating register moves.
(sms_schedule): Mark the SMSed block dirty.
* passes.c (rest_of_handle_sms): Call update_life_info for all
basic-blocks.
* testsuite/gcc.dg/20050321-1.c: New test.
-- Pinski
[Bug c++/20665] New: poor diagnostic
In:
template class foo {}
enum A{b, c};
gets you:
~/ootbc/members/bin$ g++ foo.cc
foo.cc:2: error: template declaration of `enum A'
foo.cc:2: confused by earlier errors, bailing out
The actual error is a missing semicolon.
Ivan
--
Summary: poor diagnostic
Product: gcc
Version: 3.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: igodard at pacbell dot net
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20665
[Bug c++/20665] poor diagnostic
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-28 02:07 --- On the mainline I get: t.cc:1: error: template declaration of 'enum' t.cc:2: error: multiple types in one declaration There might be a dup of this bug somewhere. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20665
[Bug target/20666] New: SPARC builtins should be folded if possible
Right now now folding opportunities are taken for sparc builtin functions. This should be fixed by implementing sparc_fold_builtin. -- Summary: SPARC builtins should be folded if possible Product: gcc Version: 4.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: target AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: phython at gcc dot gnu dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: sparc*-- GCC host triplet: sparc*-- GCC target triplet: sparc*-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20666
[Bug target/20666] SPARC builtins should be folded if possible
-- What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Keywords||missed-optimization http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20666
[Bug target/20666] SPARC builtins should be folded if possible
--- Additional Comments From phython at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-28 05:57 --- Created an attachment (id=8468) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8468&action=view) ignored result testcase -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20666
[Bug target/20666] SPARC builtins should be folded if possible
--- Additional Comments From phython at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-28 05:58 --- Created an attachment (id=8469) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8469&action=view) fold fexpand -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20666
[Bug target/20666] SPARC builtins should be folded if possible
--- Additional Comments From phython at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-28 06:00 --- Created an attachment (id=8470) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8470&action=view) initial folding of fexpand -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20666
[Bug libgcj/20654] exception.o is not included in libgcj.a due to case-insensitivity
--- Additional Comments From aaronavay62 at aaronwl dot com 2005-03-28 06:09 --- This also happens with gnu/java/security/OID.o and org/ietf/jgss/Oid.o, again causing build to break in jv-collect. These files are less easily renamed, though. I don't know how to fix this. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20654
[Bug libgcj/20654] exception.o is not included in libgcj.a due to case-insensitivity
--- Additional Comments From aaronavay62 at aaronwl dot com 2005-03-28 07:40 --- I just checked against "Microsoft (R) Library Manager Version 7.10.3052" and binutils's case-insensitivity replacement semantics are consistant with Microsoft's implementation. LIB also has the same path-preserving semantics of the previous non-POSIX ar. I think a better way to fix this would be to check if the P to ar is availible, and use it, if it is. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20654
