[Bug testsuite/40532] FAIL: gcc.dg/builtins-65.c (test for excess errors)
--- Comment #7 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 09:02 --- Subject: Bug 40532 Author: uros Date: Fri Jun 26 09:02:04 2009 New Revision: 148967 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148967 Log: PR testsuite/40532 * gcc.dg/builtins-65.c: Require c99 runtime. Modified: trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/builtins-65.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40532
[Bug bootstrap/40558] New: [4.5 Rgression] At revision 148962 bootstrap fails on powerpc-apple-darwin9
At revision 148962 bootstrap fails on powerpc-apple-darwin9 with:
...
./gcc/config/rs6000/darwin-tramp.asm
/opt/gcc/darwin_buildw/./gcc/xgcc -B/opt/gcc/darwin_buildw/./gcc/
-B/opt/gcc/gcc4.5w/powerpc-apple-darwin9/bin/
-B/opt/gcc/gcc4.5w/powerpc-apple-darwin9/lib/ -isystem
/opt/gcc/gcc4.5w/powerpc-apple-darwin9/include -isystem
/opt/gcc/gcc4.5w/powerpc-apple-darwin9/sys-include-g -O2 -m64 -O2 -g -O2
-DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wstrict-prototypes
-Wmissing-prototypes -Wold-style-definition -isystem ./include
-Wa,-force_cpusubtype_ALL -pipe -mmacosx-version-min=10.4 -g
-DHAVE_GTHR_DEFAULT -DIN_LIBGCC2 -D__GCC_FLOAT_NOT_NEEDED -I. -I.
-I../../.././gcc -I../../../../gcc-4.5-work/libgcc
-I../../../../gcc-4.5-work/libgcc/. -I../../../../gcc-4.5-work/libgcc/../gcc
-I../../../../gcc-4.5-work/libgcc/../include -DHAVE_CC_TLS -o ppc64-fp.o -MT
ppc64-fp.o -MD -MP -MF ppc64-fp.dep -fexceptions -c
../../../../gcc-4.5-work/libgcc/../gcc/config/rs6000/ppc64-fp.c
-fvisibility=hidden -DHIDE_EXPORTS
{standard input}:801:Parameter error: r0 not allowed for parameter 2 (code as 0
not r0)
{standard input}:813:Parameter error: r0 not allowed for parameter 2 (code as 0
not r0)
{standard input}:848:Parameter error: r0 not allowed for parameter 2 (code as 0
not r0)
{standard input}:860:Parameter error: r0 not allowed for parameter 2 (code as 0
not r0)
make[5]: *** [ppc64-fp.o] Error 1
make[4]: *** [multi-do] Error 1
make[3]: *** [all-multi] Error 2
make[2]: *** [all-stage1-target-libgcc] Error 2
make[1]: *** [stage1-bubble] Error 2
make: *** [all] Error 2
See also http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/2009-06/msg00197.html.
--
Summary: [4.5 Rgression] At revision 148962 bootstrap fails on
powerpc-apple-darwin9
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
GCC build triplet: powerpc-apple-darwin9
GCC host triplet: powerpc-apple-darwin9
GCC target triplet: powerpc-apple-darwin9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40558
[Bug testsuite/40532] FAIL: gcc.dg/builtins-65.c (test for excess errors)
--- Comment #8 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-06-26 09:04 --- Fixed. -- ubizjak at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40532
[Bug middle-end/40554] [4.5 Regression] Revision 148941 miscompiled 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006
-- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40554
[Bug tree-optimization/40556] [4.5 Regression] ICE in IPA-CP with recursion
-- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Component|middle-end |tree-optimization Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40556
[Bug c++/40557] [4.5 Regression] ICE with template union
-- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40557
[Bug fortran/39695] [F03] ProcPtr function results: wrong name in error message
--- Comment #1 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 12:18 --- Another test case for this can be found in PR40541: program test procedure(real), pointer :: p p => f() ! << Invalid f() returns a LOGICAL(1) function, but p is a REAL one contains function f() pointer :: f interface logical(1) function f() end function end interface f = .true._1 end function f end program test -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39695
[Bug target/38091] [Patch] H8SX: Bit instructions enhancement
--- Comment #3 from prafullat at kpitcummins dot com 2009-06-26 13:12 --- There is no change to this patch for gcc-4.5-20090402. Do we I still need to repost it? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38091
[Bug target/38091] [Patch] H8SX: Bit instructions enhancement
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 13:51 --- patches need to be sent to gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org together with a ChangeLog entry that follows existing practice and a note on how the patch was tested. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38091
[Bug tree-optimization/40556] [4.5 Regression] ICE in IPA-CP with recursion
--- Comment #2 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 13:53 --- This is some sort of cgraph consistency check. Honza added it and he also said he will look into this :-) -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jh at suse dot cz http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40556
[Bug target/38091] [Patch] H8SX: Bit instructions enhancement
--- Comment #5 from prafullat at kpitcummins dot com 2009-06-26 13:54 --- Ok, I will do that asap. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38091
[Bug target/38900] ICE: unable to find a register to spill
--- Comment #5 from d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com 2009-06-26 14:57 --- Perhaps there are two bugs, not one, as my more elaborate testcases show. Though they are seemingly equivalent, one triggers the bug, while another don't. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38900
[Bug middle-end/40554] [4.5 Regression] Revision 148941 miscompiled 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006
--- Comment #1 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 14:59 --- OK, I have finally managed to reproduce this and the patch does indeed result into a segfault. I will keep looking into this, even though probably won't be able to do much until Monday. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC|mjambor at suse dot cz |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot ||org AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-06-26 14:59:53 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40554
[Bug middle-end/40554] [4.5 Regression] Revision 148941 miscompiled 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006
--- Comment #2 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 15:08 --- The miscompiled file seems to be derivative_approximation.o -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40554
[Bug tree-optimization/19831] Missing DSE/malloc/free optimization
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 15:12 --- I have a patch for the DSE part. The malloc part shouldn't be too difficult. The free part is more interesting. Basically the pointer use in free (p) should mark the malloc necessary but really nothing is there to mark the free necessary if it is (the free is necessary iff the malloc is necessary but nothing provides this link to provide easy integration with the DCE worklist implementation). Maybe a two-stage implementation would work where we replace an unnecessary malloc () with a NULL assignment (so the free becomes a no-op and is eventually folded away after CCP). A little bit hackish - and dependent on free (NULL) (if it happens to persist) to not fault. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2007-07-01 00:25:55 |2009-06-26 15:12:33 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19831
[Bug tree-optimization/19831] Missing DSE/malloc/free optimization
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 15:23 --- Hm, it's not _that_ simple. A fab hack is easier I guess. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19831
[Bug tree-optimization/19831] Missing DSE/malloc/free optimization
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 15:39 ---
And we want to optimize
void *malloc(__SIZE_TYPE__);
void free(void*);
void abort(void);
int f(void)
{
char *i = malloc(1);
if (i == (void *)0)
abort ();
*i = 1;
free (i);
}
the same (removing the check and the abort() call).
Which asks for doing the task all at once. Somewhere.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19831
[Bug libfortran/40330] [4.5 Regression] incorrect IO
--- Comment #31 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 15:50 --- I am working on some ideas here. We are getting double free or corruption related to free_format_data. I think it is because we have two pointers to pay attention to. The one in the hash table and dtp->u.p.fmt which is copied. My biggest issue is time to do this, so patience please. -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2009-06-03 17:39:10 |2009-06-26 15:50:47 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40330
[Bug c/40528] Add a new ifunc attribute
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-26 16:14 ---
For C++:
class Foo
{
private:
virtual void foo1 ()
{
printf ("I am %s\n", __PRETTY_FUNCTION__);
}
public:
virtual void __attribute__ ((ifunc)) foo ()
{
return &Foo::foo1;
}
};
class Bar : public Foo
{
private:
void foo1 ()
{
printf ("I am %s\n", __PRETTY_FUNCTION__);
}
public:
void foo ()
{
return &Bar::foo1;
}
};
Should Bar::foo inherit the ifun attribute from Foo::foo?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40528
[Bug middle-end/40559] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 148947 failed gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90
Revision 148947: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-06/msg00931.html caused: FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 -O2 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 -O3 -g execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 -Os execution test -- Summary: [4.5 Regression] Revision 148947 failed gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 Product: gcc Version: 4.5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40559
[Bug c++/40560] New: Erroneous aliasing rules message
When I compile the following code with gcc-4.4.0 with "-O3 -Wall" flags I get
the messages below.
Testcase has 'union' between Z and char types therefore such type conversion
should be allowed by aliasing rules.
--- error message ---
pr.C: In member function Z& X::get():
pr.C:12: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing
rules
--- testcase ---
struct Z {int ii;};
struct X {
union {
Z objs[1];
char bb[20];
};
Z& get() {
return (*(Z*)&bb[0]); // <--- error message here
}
};
--
Summary: Erroneous aliasing rules message
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: yuri at tsoft dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40560
[Bug c++/40560] Erroneous aliasing rules message
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 16:47 --- I don't think this is a bogus warning message as you reading a character via Z which is undefined. (the opposite way is defined though). -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Erroneous aliasing rules|Erroneous aliasing rules |message |message http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40560
[Bug c++/40560] Erroneous aliasing rules message
--- Comment #2 from yuri at rawbw dot com 2009-06-26 17:16 --- Subject: Re: Erroneous aliasing rules message pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > --- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 16:47 > --- > I don't think this is a bogus warning message as you reading a character via Z > which is undefined. (the opposite way is defined though) ISO/IEC 9899, chapter 6.5 paragraph 7 says: --- begin quote --- An object shall have its stored value accessed only by an lvalue expression that has one of the following types:74) a type compatible with the effective type of the object, a qualified version of a type compatible with the effective type of the object, a type that is the signed or unsigned type corresponding to the effective type of the object, a type that is the signed or unsigned type corresponding to a qualified version of the effective type of the object, an aggregate or union type that includes one of the aforementioned types among its members (including, recursively, a member of a subaggregate or contained union), or a character type. --- end quote --- So in my example char and Z are unioned. Therefore I believe typecast should be allowed. Yuri -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40560
[Bug c++/40561] New: code does not compile -- compiles fine when replacing != with !(==)
In file included from /usr/include/boost/config.hpp:35, from /usr/include/boost/variant/detail/config.hpp:16, from /usr/include/boost/variant/variant.hpp:20, from /usr/include/boost/variant.hpp:17, from tmp.cpp:16: /usr/include/boost/config/compiler/gcc.hpp:92:7: warning: #warning "Unknown compiler version - please run the configure tests and report the results" tmp.cpp: In constructor 'VamsSystemFunction<__ID__, __PCHECK_ARGS__, __PSET_ID__, __PDUMP__, __GET_TYPE__, __GET_DEP__>::VamsSystemFunction(const std::string&, int, const std::list >&) [with SySystemFunction::enumSystemFunctions __ID__ = epredef_error_with_pos_math, void (VamsFnct::* __PCHECK_ARGS__)(const std::string&, int) = &VamsFnct::empty_check, void (VamsFnct::* __PSET_ID__)(SyModule*) = &VamsFnct::empty_setId, void (VamsFnctSystem::* __PDUMP__)(CWriteIfc*, int, const VamsBase*)const = &VamsFnctSystem::predef_error_with_pos_math_dump, const TyBase* (VamsFnctSystem::* __GET_TYPE__)()const = &VamsFnctSystem::empty_getType, std::set, std::allocator > (VamsFnct::* __GET_DEP__)()const = &VamsFnct::getNullDependencies]': tmp.cpp:2259: instantiated from here tmp.cpp:581: error: invalid operands of types 'bool' and 'int' to binary 'operator==' -- Summary: code does not compile -- compiles fine when replacing != with !(==) Product: gcc Version: 4.3.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: peter_foelsche at agilent dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40561
[Bug bootstrap/40338] [4.5 Regression] bootstrap comparision fails on 32 bit PA when comparing libgcc objects
--- Comment #12 from sje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 17:28 --- Subject: Bug 40338 Author: sje Date: Fri Jun 26 17:28:40 2009 New Revision: 148978 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148978 Log: 2009-06-26 Steve Ellcey PR bootstrap/40338 * configure.ac (comparestring): Create new variable. * Makefile.tpl (comparestring): Use to skip some comparisions. * configure: Regenerate. * Makefile.in: Regenerate. Modified: trunk/ChangeLog trunk/Makefile.in trunk/Makefile.tpl trunk/configure trunk/configure.ac -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40338
[Bug c++/40561] code does not compile -- compiles fine when replacing != with !(==)
--- Comment #1 from peter_foelsche at agilent dot com 2009-06-26 17:29 --- Created an attachment (id=18074) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18074&action=view) gpperror.cpp -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40561
[Bug bootstrap/40338] [4.5 Regression] bootstrap comparision fails on 32 bit PA when comparing libgcc objects
--- Comment #13 from sje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 17:31 --- Subject: Bug 40338 Author: sje Date: Fri Jun 26 17:30:55 2009 New Revision: 148979 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148979 Log: 2009-06-26 Steve Ellcey PR bootstrap/40338 * config/pa/t-pa-hpux10 (TARGET_LIBGCC2_CFLAGS): Add -frandom-seed. * config/pa/t-pa-hpux11 (TARGET_LIBGCC2_CFLAGS): Ditto. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/config/pa/t-pa-hpux10 trunk/gcc/config/pa/t-pa-hpux11 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40338
[Bug c++/40561] code does not compile -- compiles fine when replacing != with !(==)
--- Comment #2 from peter_foelsche at agilent dot com 2009-06-26 17:36 --- Created an attachment (id=18075) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18075&action=view) gpperror.cpp -- peter_foelsche at agilent dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #18074|0 |1 is obsolete|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40561
[Bug bootstrap/40338] [4.5 Regression] bootstrap comparision fails on 32 bit PA when comparing libgcc objects
--- Comment #14 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2009-06-26 17:36 --- Bug has been resolved, we use -frandom-seed to make most objects identical on hppa and extended the comparision exclusions to include the two files we coudln't make identical. -- sje at cup dot hp dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40338
[Bug target/38886] [4.3 Regression] ICE move_insn, at haifa-sched.c:1786
--- Comment #8 from breiten at lexmark dot com 2009-06-26 18:06 --- (In reply to comment #7) > Fails with 4.5.0 20090513. I noticed that bug 31979 appears to be the same thing - reported against a slightly newer openssl, 0.9.8e, oscp.c, also a ppc target. Solved by fixing ill-defined code in openssl. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38886
[Bug c/35712] decimal float literal constant zero loses significant trailing zeroes
-- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.3.2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35712
[Bug c/39902] x * 1.0DF gets wrong value
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 18:27 --- Subject: Bug 39902 Author: janis Date: Fri Jun 26 18:27:30 2009 New Revision: 148982 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148982 Log: PR c/39902 * tree.c (real_zerop, real_onep, real_twop, real_minus_onep): Special-case decimal float constants. * gcc.dg/dfp/pr39902.c: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/dfp/pr39902.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39902
[Bug middle-end/40559] [4.5 Regression] Revision 148947 failed gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90
--- Comment #1 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-06-26 18:35 --- Subject: Re: New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 148947 failed gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 On Fri, 26 Jun 2009, hjl dot tools at gmail dot com wrote: > Revision 148947: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-06/msg00931.html > > caused: > > FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 -O2 execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer execution > test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer > -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer > -funroll-loops execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 -O3 -g execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 -Os execution test Do you ever read mails before filing bugs? That testcase is invalid. Richard. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40559
[Bug middle-end/40559] [4.5 Regression] Revision 148947 failed gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 18:45 --- A patch has been posted that fixes this problem. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2009-06/msg00269.html Hopefully, Janus does not mind that I assigned this bug to him. -- kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |janus at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40559
[Bug c++/40560] Erroneous aliasing rules message
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 19:39 --- Z is not a union type. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40560
[Bug target/38886] [4.3 Regression] ICE move_insn, at haifa-sched.c:1786
--- Comment #9 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-06-26 19:49 --- I believe this is the same issue as in PR39254. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38886
[Bug c++/40562] New: Error message when running preprocessor only is incoherent
$ g++ -E typed_factory.hpp g++: typed_factory.hpp: linker input file unused because linking not done That any code path when running with -E could cause an error to appear about *compiling* let alone *linking* doesn't make any sense. As it turns out renaming typed_factory.hpp to typed_factory.h fixes the problem. This is actually 3 bugs: 1. .hpp should be a recognized extension. It's fairly common, boost uses it 2. The error should be "unrecognized extension" 3. You should never get an error about the compiler or the linker when only running the preprocessor -- Summary: Error message when running preprocessor only is incoherent Product: gcc Version: 4.2.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: joseph dot h dot garvin at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40562
[Bug c++/40562] Error message when running preprocessor only is incoherent
--- Comment #1 from joseph dot h dot garvin at gmail dot com 2009-06-26 20:01 --- Actually, make that 4 bugs. 4. The extension shouldn't matter. I said run the preprocessor on it. So run the preprocessor on it. G++ is bending over backwards to do the wrong thing :P -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40562
[Bug c++/40562] Error message when running preprocessor only is incoherent
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 20:11 --- Fixed in gcc 4.3.x -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40562
[Bug c/40528] Add a new ifunc attribute
--- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-26 20:20 --- Created an attachment (id=18076) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18076&action=view) Ifunc examples in C and C++ Here are some C/C++ examples with valid and invalid cases. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #18060|0 |1 is obsolete|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40528
[Bug c/40528] Add a new ifunc attribute
--- Comment #10 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-26 20:39 --- Created an attachment (id=18077) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18077&action=view) A C++ program with ifunc attribute -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40528
[Bug c/40528] Add a new ifunc attribute
--- Comment #11 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-26 20:41 --- Created an attachment (id=18078) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18078&action=view) Static Linux/ia32 binary of prog.C I got [...@gnu-6 c++]$ ./static I have SSE4.2 I support 64bit. I have SSE4.2 I support 64bit. I have SSE4.2 I support 64bit. I have SSE4.2 I support 64bit. I have SSE4.2 I support 64bit. I am virtual void Foo::foo1() I am virtual void Bar::foo() I am virtual void X::foo1() I am virtual void Y::foo() [...@gnu-6 c++]$ -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40528
[Bug c/40563] New: -Wc++-compat does not warn about uninitialized const field in struct
This program
struct s { const int i; };
int foo () { struct s v; }
is invalid C++:
foo.c: In function int foo():
foo.c:2: error: structure v with uninitialized const members
However, no warning is issued when compiling the program as C using
-Wc++-compat. -Wc++-compat should issue a warning for this case, along the
lines of the warning for an initialized const variable.
--
Summary: -Wc++-compat does not warn about uninitialized const
field in struct
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: ian at airs dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40563
[Bug c/40564] New: Invalid -Wc++-compat warning about stringized C++ operator name
This code is valid C++: #define S(a) #a const char* s = S(and); However, the C frontend gives a warning with -Wc++-compat: foo.c:2:19: warning: identifier "and" is a special operator name in C++ This warning should not be given if the preprocessor token is simply stringified. -- Summary: Invalid -Wc++-compat warning about stringized C++ operator name Product: gcc Version: 4.5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: ian at airs dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40564
[Bug bootstrap/40558] [4.5 Rgression] At revision 148962 bootstrap fails on powerpc-apple-darwin9
-- dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |blocker http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40558
[Bug bootstrap/40558] [4.5 Rgression] At revision 148962 bootstrap fails on powerpc-apple-darwin9
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 21:39 --- I am going to be looking at this over the weekend for Michael. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40558
[Bug middle-end/40559] [4.5 Regression] Revision 148947 failed gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 21:49 --- > Hopefully, Janus does not mind that I assigned this > bug to him. Not at all ;) Will commit my patch in a sec ... -- janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-06-26 21:49:01 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40559
[Bug middle-end/40565] New: [4.5 Regression] Extra failures
On Linux/ia32, revision 48982 got FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/O3-vect-pr34223.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1 FAIL: gcc.target/i386/local.c scan-assembler magic[^\\n]*eax Revision 148981: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-06/msg00966.html may be the cause. -- Summary: [4.5 Regression] Extra failures Product: gcc Version: 4.5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40565
[Bug fortran/40541] Assignment checking for proc-pointer => proc-ptr-returning-function()
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 22:11 --- Subject: Bug 40541 Author: janus Date: Fri Jun 26 22:11:15 2009 New Revision: 148996 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148996 Log: 2009-06-26 Janus Weil PR fortran/39997 PR fortran/40541 * decl.c (add_hidden_procptr_result): Copy the typespec to the hidden result. * expr.c (gfc_check_pointer_assign): Enable interface check for procedure pointer assignments where the rhs is a function returning a procedure pointer. * resolve.c (resolve_symbol): If an external procedure with unspecified return type can not be implicitly typed, it must be a subroutine. 2009-06-26 Janus Weil PR fortran/39997 PR fortran/40541 * gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_15.f90: Fixed and extended. * gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_common_1.f90: Fixed invalid test case. * gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90: Ditto. * gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_5.f90: New. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_5.f90 Modified: trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/fortran/decl.c trunk/gcc/fortran/expr.c trunk/gcc/fortran/resolve.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_15.f90 trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_common_1.f90 trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40541
[Bug fortran/39997] Procedure(), pointer & implicit typing: rejects-valid / accepts-invalid?
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 22:11 --- Subject: Bug 39997 Author: janus Date: Fri Jun 26 22:11:15 2009 New Revision: 148996 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148996 Log: 2009-06-26 Janus Weil PR fortran/39997 PR fortran/40541 * decl.c (add_hidden_procptr_result): Copy the typespec to the hidden result. * expr.c (gfc_check_pointer_assign): Enable interface check for procedure pointer assignments where the rhs is a function returning a procedure pointer. * resolve.c (resolve_symbol): If an external procedure with unspecified return type can not be implicitly typed, it must be a subroutine. 2009-06-26 Janus Weil PR fortran/39997 PR fortran/40541 * gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_15.f90: Fixed and extended. * gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_common_1.f90: Fixed invalid test case. * gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90: Ditto. * gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_5.f90: New. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_5.f90 Modified: trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/fortran/decl.c trunk/gcc/fortran/expr.c trunk/gcc/fortran/resolve.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_15.f90 trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_common_1.f90 trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39997
[Bug fortran/40541] Assignment checking for proc-pointer => proc-ptr-returning-function()
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 22:12 --- Fixed in r148996. Closing. -- janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40541
[Bug middle-end/40559] [4.5 Regression] Revision 148947 failed gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 22:17 --- Fixed in r148996. Closing. -- janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40559
[Bug middle-end/40565] [4.5 Regression] Extra failures
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 22:23 --- Confirmed, I saw them as well. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-06-26 22:23:50 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40565
[Bug c/40564] Invalid -Wc++-compat warning about stringized C++ operator name
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-06-26 22:44 --- Subject: Re: New: Invalid -Wc++-compat warning about stringized C++ operator name A closely related case is: #define foo not used There is no important difference in the meaning of this between C and C++ if the macro is not expanded, so a warning for "not" is inappropriate. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40564
[Bug c++/40274] [4.5 Regression] ICE in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:9289
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-27 00:43 --- It was introduced revision 145565 and 145569. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40274
[Bug c++/40274] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145566 caused ICE in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:9289
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-27 00:45 --- It is caused by revision 145566: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-04/msg00188.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at redhat dot com Summary|[4.5 Regression] ICE in |[4.5 Regression] Revision |tsubst, at cp/pt.c:9289 |145566 caused ICE in tsubst, ||at cp/pt.c:9289 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40274
[Bug c++/40274] [4.5 Regression] Revision 145566 caused ICE in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:9289
-- jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jason at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org | Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2009-06-26 06:19:13 |2009-06-27 00:47:33 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40274
[Bug debug/40012] [4.5 Regression] Revision 146817 generated bad debug info for local variables
--- Comment #12 from ppluzhnikov at google dot com 2009-06-27 00:49 ---
This appears to still be broken in 32-bit mode.
I just built GCC @148996 on x86_64, and compiled the attached test case with
'-m32':
(gdb) start
Breakpoint 1 at 0x80483d9: file gcc-pr40012-test.c, line 24.
main () at gcc-pr40012-test.c:24
24list a3 = { 0 };
(gdb) n
25f0(0, 0, 0, &a3);
(gdb) p &a3
$1 = (list *) 0xccb4
(gdb) s
f0 (a=0x0, b=0x0, c=0x0, d=0xcc8c) at gcc-pr40012-test.c:15
15 for(problem = d; problem; problem = problem->next) {
Clearly GDB and GCC are in disagreement about the location of a3.
Disassebly shows:
0x080483d0 :push %ebp
0x080483d1 :mov%esp,%ebp
0x080483d3 :and$0xfff0,%esp
0x080483d6 :sub$0x20,%esp
0x080483d9 :movl $0x0,0x1c(%esp)
0x080483e1 : lea0x1c(%esp),%eax
0x080483e5 : mov%eax,0xc(%esp)
0x080483e9 : movl $0x0,0x8(%esp)
0x080483f1 : movl $0x0,0x4(%esp)
0x080483f9 : movl $0x0,(%esp)
0x08048400 : call 0x8048394
0x08048405 : mov$0x0,%eax
0x0804840a : leave
0x0804840b : ret
readelf -w:
<1><1ee>: Abbrev Number: 12 (DW_TAG_subprogram)
<1ef> DW_AT_external: 1
<1f0> DW_AT_name: (indirect string, offset: 0xf5): main
<1f4> DW_AT_decl_file : 1
<1f5> DW_AT_decl_line : 22
<1f6> DW_AT_type: <0x1df>
<1fa> DW_AT_low_pc : 0x80483d0
<1fe> DW_AT_high_pc : 0x804840c
<202> DW_AT_frame_base : 0x38(location list)
<206> DW_AT_sibling : <0x218>
<2><20a>: Abbrev Number: 13 (DW_TAG_variable)
<20b> DW_AT_name: a3
<20e> DW_AT_decl_file : 1
<20f> DW_AT_decl_line : 24
<210> DW_AT_type: <0x161>
<214> DW_AT_location: 2 byte block: 91 14 (DW_OP_fbreg: 20)
And
0038 080483d0 080483d1 (DW_OP_breg4: 4)
0038 080483d1 080483d3 (DW_OP_breg4: 8)
0038 080483d3 0804840b (DW_OP_breg5: 8)
0038 0804840b 0804840c (DW_OP_breg4: 4)
0038
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40012
[Bug testsuite/40565] [4.5 Regression] Extra failures
--- Comment #2 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-27 01:06 --- Hmph. Buggy tests. -- rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org | Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Component|middle-end |testsuite Last reconfirmed|2009-06-26 22:23:50 |2009-06-27 01:06:02 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40565
[Bug testsuite/40565] [4.5 Regression] Extra failures
--- Comment #3 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-27 01:13 --- Subject: Bug 40565 Author: rth Date: Sat Jun 27 01:13:11 2009 New Revision: 149002 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149002 Log: PR testsuite/40565 * gcc.dg/vect/vect.exp: Add -fno-ipa-cp-clone to -O3 tests. * gcc.target/i386/local.c: Pass a non-constant to T. Modified: trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect.exp trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/local.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40565
[Bug other/40302] [4.5 Regression] GCC must hard-require MPC before release
--- Comment #4 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-27 06:23 --- Delete all the cpp HAVE_mpc goo. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40302
