--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2009-01-17 19:40 ---
Testcase:
#include
#include
#ifndef MUL
#define MUL mul
#endif
void mul(float in1[4], float in2[4], float out[4])
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 4; i++)
out[i] = in1[i] * in2[i];
}
void m
intrinsics
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tbm at cyrius dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown
--- Comment #3 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2009-01-03 14:13 ---
You're right that it works with trunk. I was wrong when I said it still
shows up with trunk. However, it's not fixed with 4.3 from SVN, so this
bug should be left open.
--
tbm at cyrius dot c
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-12-27 17:15 ---
Forgot to say that this only happens with ARM EABI, not with ARM old ABI.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38643
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-12-27 16:50 ---
Created an attachment (id=16991)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16991&action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38642
--- You are receiving this mail
--- Comment #3 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-12-17 13:53 ---
Created an attachment (id=16916)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16916&action=view)
Preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38553
--- You are receiving th
--- Comment #2 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-12-17 13:51 ---
When I add -fno-tree-vrp, I get:
libmpcodecs/ad_imaadpcm.c:155: internal compiler error: in c_expand_expr, at
c-common.c:4543
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38553
--- You are receiving this mail
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-12-17 13:51 ---
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x1006cda0 in ggc_set_mark (p=0x4) at gcc/ggc-page.c:605
605 return base[L1][L2];
(gdb) where
#0 0x1006cda0 in ggc_set_mark (p=0x4) at gcc/ggc-page.c:605
#1
with -maltivec
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tbm at cyrius dot com
GCC target triplet: powerpc-l
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33263
--- Comment #18 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-02-02 20:08 ---
I see regressions with the patch too.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33410
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
--- Comment #10 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-01-30 11:34 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> How did you configure gcc (i.e. command line)? What is the output if you
> compile with -v?
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Debian 20080113-1'
--with-bu
--- Comment #7 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-01-30 03:16 ---
This definitely still ICEs on Alpha:
(sid)[EMAIL PROTECTED]:$ /usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/bin/gcc -Wall -O3 -c test.c
test.c: In function 'f':
test.c:9: internal compiler error: in iv_analyze_expr, at loop-iv.c:935
Ple
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tbm at cyrius dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33410
--- Comment #15 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-01-22 10:49 ---
I've now successfully bootstrapped and regtested this change with trunk on
ARM. I enabled c,c++,fortran,objc,obj-c++,treelang.
There are no regressions and the segfault is gone.
Eric, can you please submit the
--- Comment #13 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-01-21 12:31 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Created an attachment (id=14907)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14907&action=view) [edit]
> Lightly tested fix.
>
> I'll give it a whirl on IA-64
--- Comment #12 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-01-11 22:01 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Created an attachment (id=14907)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14907&action=view) [edit]
> Lightly tested fix.
>
> I'll give it a whirl on IA-64
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-01-06 18:23 ---
Created an attachment (id=14887)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14887&action=view)
preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34688
--- You are receiving th
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zippel at linux-m68k dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
4.2.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tbm at cyrius dot com
GCC target triplet: m68k-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34688
--- Yo
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-01-03 18:27 ---
This happens with 4.1, 4.2 and trunk on old ABI. Apparently it doesn't
happen with EABI.
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #6 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-01-03 18:22 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I see different IL for 4.2 compared to 4.3, is the bug present in 4.3? Can
> you
> attach the optimized tree dump?
I also get a segfault with the testcase and 4.3.0 20070916.
The
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34628
--- You
--- Comment #5 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-01-03 18:07 ---
Created an attachment (id=14870)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14870&action=view)
optimized tree dump (4.2)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34628
--- You are receiving th
--- Comment #4 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-01-03 18:03 ---
Bugzilla wraps the testcase in a way that some commented out is no longer
commented out and so you don't see the segfault. Here's the testcase again
with proper wrapping:
typedef unsigned short u16;
typedef uns
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--- Comment #6 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-12-19 02:34 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Breakpoint 1, fancy_abort (file=0x803da8 "gcc/reload1.c", line=1086,
> function=0x803be1 "reload") at gcc/diagnostic.c:640
This was with 4.2 (from SVN).
--
h
--- Comment #7 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-12-19 02:34 ---
Works with 4.3.0 20071219.
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.1
--- Comment #5 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-12-19 02:33 ---
works with 4.3.0 20071219.
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.0
--- Comment #6 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-12-19 02:07 ---
(gdb) run -O -fPIC -quiet ~/vtk-vtkImageMaskBits.ii
Starting program: /home/tbm/tmp/gcc/gcc-4.2-m68k-20071218-r131051/gcc/cc1plus
-O -fPIC -quiet ~/vtk-vt
kImageMaskBits.ii
/home/tbm/vtk-vtkImageMaskBits.ii: In function รข
--- Comment #4 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-12-19 02:04 ---
Breakpoint 1, fancy_abort (file=0x803da8 "gcc/reload1.c", line=1086,
function=0x803be1 "reload") at gcc/diagnostic.c:640
640 {
(gdb) where
#0 fancy_abort (file=0x803da8 "gcc/reload1.c&
--- Comment #2 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-12-16 02:45 ---
Apparently it works with 4.3 now, but 4.2 definitely still has the ICE.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34493
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-12-16 01:21 ---
Created an attachment (id=14774)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14774&action=view)
preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34493
--- You are receiving th
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tbm at cyrius dot com
GCC target triplet: powerpc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34493
--- Yo
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uros at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--- Comment #2 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-11-16 19:14 ---
This was introduced between 20070422 and 20070515.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34123
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--- Comment #3 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-11-14 08:53 ---
Created an attachment (id=14552)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14552&action=view)
Reduced testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34091
--- You are receiving this mail
--- Comment #2 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-11-14 08:52 ---
Created an attachment (id=14551)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14551&action=view)
preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34091
--- You are receiving th
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-11-14 08:52 ---
Forgot to say that this is Debian bug http://bugs.debian.org/451047
Just for the reference.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34091
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--- Comment #17 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-11-02 08:02 ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> Reopen if it starts to fail again.
Okay, but you said in comment #13 that the testcase should be added and that
was never done. Maybe you could do that?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzi
--- Comment #9 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-10-23 09:06 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Can you try the patch that is in PR 33755 ?
Richard, can you do this? Since you wrote that patch I'm sure you have
a GCC with it applied (whereas I don't at the moment).
--- Comment #7 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-10-22 20:36 ---
(sid)264:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~] gcc-4.2 erlang-beam_emu.c
(sid)265:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~] gcc-4.2 -O1 erlang-beam_emu.c
/tmp/ccIjYBHl.o: In function `main':
erlang-beam_emu.c:(.text+0x11c): undefined reference to `$L24&#x
--- Comment #6 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-10-22 20:35 ---
/* Testcase by Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> */
typedef struct erl_node_
{
long *htop;
long tracer_proc;
long trace_flags;
long freason;
}
Process;
int hibernate ()
{
return 1;
}
int main ()
{
P
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.2 Regression] undefined |[4.2 Regression] reference
|reference to `$L2120' at -
--- Comment #5 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-10-21 10:44 ---
Trying to reduce...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33848
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
--- Comment #4 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-10-21 10:15 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> This will help you find the pass during/after which the label disappears.
It's there from 104r (expand) to 139r (postreload) but not anymore in 141r
(flow2).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/
--- Comment #2 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-10-21 09:46 ---
Created an attachment (id=14380)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14380&action=view)
preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33848
--- You are receiving th
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-10-21 09:46 ---
The problem is that gcc-4.2 generates a bne instruction that references a
label that doesn't exist. This happens with -O1 or higher. It doesn't
happen with gcc 4.1 or current trunk.
If you compile th
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.3.0
Known to work||4.1.3
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ddaney at avtrex dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33848
duct: gcc
Version: 4.2.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tbm at cyrius dot com
GCC target triplet: mips-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bu
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--- Comment #9 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-10-20 06:10 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Would you do the following for the failing assert?
> p debug_rtx (insn)
> p debug_rtx (i1)
> p debug_rtx (substed)
Breakpoint 3, delete_output_reload (insn=0x2ab2d757c140, j=1,
last_r
--- Comment #7 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-10-19 21:36 ---
Breakpoint 1, fancy_abort (file=0x7c02a8 "gcc-4.2/gcc/reload1.c", line=7932,
function=0x7c01f0 "delete_output_reload") at gcc-4.2/gcc/diagnostic.c:640
640 {
(gdb) where
#0 fancy_abort (file=0
--- Comment #6 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-10-19 21:33 ---
Here's the reduced testcase from delta. I can try to reduce it further
manually
tomorrow.
typedef unsigned long int ulong;
typedef unsigned int uint;
typedef unsigned char uchar;
typedef unsigned long long int ulon
--- Comment #4 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-10-19 21:29 ---
Adding Dave.
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tbm at cyrius dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32889
--- Comment #10 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-10-19 21:12 ---
I forgot to mention that this is on Linux (Debian).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29209
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tbm at cyrius dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29209
--- Comment #9 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-10-19 21:10 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Whether or not an ICE occurs depends to some extent
> on checking being enabled. With checking enabled, I see this on 4.1
> and the trunk.
>
> The ICE is here:
>
>
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33410
--- Comment #2 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-09-07 14:11 ---
Here's a smaller testcase:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/bin/gcc -c -O mxb.c
mxb.c: In function 'mxb_probe':
mxb.c:30: error: unrecognizable insn:
(insn 10 9 11 3 mxb.c:29 (parallel [
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-09-07 14:11 ---
Created an attachment (id=14168)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14168&action=view)
preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2
--- You are receiving th
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-09-02 08:40 ---
I can reproduce this with
gcc-4.1 -c -mabi=64 -msym32 -mno-abicalls -O
using Debian's gcc.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33256
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are o
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dave dot anglin at nrc dot
||ca
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pbrook at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
--- Comment #4 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-04-22 11:13 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> In fact, the problem cannot be reproduced on ia64, with current mainline.
I tried revision 123217, just a few revisions before C++/30500. Glad to
hear it's no longer there.
--
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||krebbel1 at de dot ibm dot
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand at de dot ibm dot
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28077
--- Comment #14 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-03-28 11:51 ---
Results are in, and it looks good. A bootstrap with the following languages
works fine: --enable-languages=c,c++,java,fortran,objc,obj-c++,ada,treelang
The test results with --enable-secureplt actually look better than
--- Comment #13 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-03-28 04:04 ---
Bootstrap is successful with your patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31364
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is
--- Comment #12 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-03-27 20:44 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> +
> LINK_REGISTER_REGNUM;
This should be: LINK_REGISTER_REGNUM)));
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31364
-
--- Comment #7 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-03-27 18:01 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> It must be related to "--enable-secureplt" which I don't enable.
You are, of course, correct. You can reproduce it with:
--enable-languages=c --enable-secureplt powerpc-linux
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--- Comment #5 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-02-03 09:45 ---
I don't see this with Linux on HPPA hardware. Steve Ellcey, can you try on
HPUX please?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29209
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||debian-gcc at lists dot
--- Comment #6 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-12-12 10:57 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> The problem is EXECUTE_IF_SET_IN_BITMAP does not like the bitmap to change
> from
> underneath it.
>
> I have a patch which fixes this issue.
Wow, nice you tracked this down. I t
--- Comment #3 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-10-16 15:38 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> ehm, this is the same with any warning/error message? why would this case be
> special?
I never noticed before, but it would still be nice to get this changed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bu
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #13 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-10-15 09:01 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> I can trivially fix this, but the code isn't going to do what you want when
> i'm
> done, since it is an aliasing violation :)
>
> The assert in question just happens to
--- Comment #8 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-10-15 08:43 ---
Created an attachment (id=12436)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12436&action=view)
testcase
another testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28181
--- You are receivi
--- Comment #3 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-10-15 08:37 ---
Created an attachment (id=12435)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12435&action=view)
preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29474
--- You are receiving th
1 - 100 of 230 matches
Mail list logo
