[Bug target/22134] [4.1 Regression] vf_hue.c:54: internal compiler error: in final_scan_insn, at final.c:2419

--- Additional Comments From uros at kss-loka dot si 2005-06-22 06:08 --- Uh, it was a cut-n-pasto... -- What|Removed |Added URL||

[Bug target/22134] [4.1 Regression] vf_hue.c:54: internal compiler error: in final_scan_insn, at final.c:2419

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-22 03:53 --- Confirmed, reduced testcase: double rint (double __x) __attribute__ ((__nothrow__)); void process_C(unsigned char *udst, unsigned char *usrc, int w, float hue) { int i; int c = rint(hue);

[Bug ada/20593] [4.0/4.1 Regression] Simple array of string access miscompiled on x86 and x86_64 and PPC

--- Additional Comments From kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu 2005-06-22 01:51 --- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 Regression] Simple array of string access miscompiled on x86 and x86_64 and PPC Kenner may I ask what happened to this patch, it never went in, I still have it in m

[Bug c++/21799] [4.0/4.1 regression] Spurious ambiguity with pointers to members

--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-06-22 01:24 --- For mainline, my patch has to be reworked as suggested by Jason in the review. It is not a difficult work, but I am working on another couple of big patches so don't hold your breath. As for the release br

[Bug target/20569] [ gcc 3.4.3 ] glibc 2.3.4 ldconfig segv when building with -march=pentium-m

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-22 00:23 --- Again no feedback in 3 months :(. -- What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING

[Bug libgcj/6996] gij needs assertion-related command-line options

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-22 00:21 --- Any news on the patch? -- What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2005-03-22 20:37:42

[Bug target/20497] Building Code on AMD 64bits c

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-22 00:19 --- No feedback in 3 months. -- What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING

[Bug ada/20593] [4.0/4.1 Regression] Simple array of string access miscompiled on x86 and x86_64 and PPC

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-22 00:18 --- Kenner may I ask what happened to this patch, it never went in, may I test it and apply it? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20593

[Bug c++/22139] [4.0/4.1 regression] Segfault

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 23:43 --- This is the reason why ggc_free is considered a bad idea, because if this was really dead, it would have been GC'd already but it is not dead. And isn't the reason why we moved alway from what 2.95.3 did

[Bug c++/22139] [4.0/4.1 regression] Segfault

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 23:15 --- We still reference the old decl in DECL_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATIONS of the template_decl determinant in this case. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22139

[Bug c++/22139] [4.0/4.1 regression] Segfault

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 23:07 --- (In reply to comment #12) > This was most likely caused by: > 2004-12-30 Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > * decl.c (duplicate_decls): Call ggc_free on declarations we will > not be ne

[Bug c++/22139] [4.0/4.1 regression] Segfault

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 23:04 --- This was most likely caused by: 2004-12-30 Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * decl.c (duplicate_decls): Call ggc_free on declarations we will not be needing any longer. The FUNCTION_DECL

[Bug c++/22139] [4.0/4.1 regression] Segfault

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 21:57 --- (In reply to comment #10) > Actually it is not a stack overflow but I real bug in the C++ front-end. > Hmm, we are chaning the TREE_CHAIN of error_mark node, wtf. "I" should "a", for some reason I missed typ

[Bug tree-optimization/21959] [4.1 Regression] vrp miscompiles Ada front-end, drops loop exit test in well-defined wrap-around circumstances

--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-06-21 21:06 --- Still an infinite loop on bootstrap as of LAST_UPDATED Tue Jun 21 20:10:50 UTC 2005 stage2/xgcc -Bstage2/ -B/home/guerby/work/gcc/install/install-20050621T221553/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ -c -g -O2 -gn

[Bug fortran/22010] Namelists defined in modules not handled properly

--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 21:05 --- Fixed in mainline. Waiting to commit to 4.0 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22010

[Bug c++/19203] [3.4/4.0 Regression] [DR 214] Partial ordering failure between function reference and generic const reference

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-06-21 20:58 --- Unfortunately, the patch to this PR has caused the regression reported in PR 21799 :-( W. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19203

[Bug c++/21799] [4.0/4.1 regression] Spurious ambiguity with pointers to members

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-06-21 20:58 --- Good idea. So I tried it, and indeed this patch 2005-05-10 Nathan Sidwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR c++/20723 * pt.c (more_specialized_fn): Member functions are unordered wrt non-m

[Bug c++/21799] [4.0/4.1 regression] Spurious ambiguity with pointers to members

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2005-06-21 20:45 --- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 regression] Spurious ambiguity with pointers to members On Jun 21, 2005, at 4:43 PM, bangerth at ices dot utexas dot edu wrote: > > --- Additional Comments From bangerth at i

Re: [Bug c++/21799] [4.0/4.1 regression] Spurious ambiguity with pointers to members

On Jun 21, 2005, at 4:43 PM, bangerth at ices dot utexas dot edu wrote: --- Additional Comments From bangerth at ices dot utexas dot edu 2005-06-21 20:43 --- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 regression] Spurious ambiguity with pointers to members I think this was exposed by the patch for P

[Bug c++/21799] [4.0/4.1 regression] Spurious ambiguity with pointers to members

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at ices dot utexas dot edu 2005-06-21 20:43 --- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 regression] Spurious ambiguity with pointers to members > I think this was exposed by the patch for PR 19203 (aka DR 214), could you > double check that, that patch makes sense

[Bug middle-end/19985] [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] executables created with -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage segfault in gcov_exit ()

--- Additional Comments From matz at suse dot de 2005-06-21 20:31 --- This patch seems to be the reason for warnings like: In file included from ../../gcc/gcov-io.h:239, from ../../gcc/libgcov.c:51: ./auto-host.h:23:1: warning: "DEFAULT_USE_CXA_ATEXIT" redefine

[Bug tree-optimization/22026] [4.1 Regression] ACATS FAIL C45331A fixed point wrong code (VRP related)

--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-06-21 20:10 --- Kazu, your patch does fix the problem, thanks! http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-06/msg01293.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22026

[Bug tree-optimization/21959] [4.1 Regression] vrp miscompiles Ada front-end, drops loop exit test in well-defined wrap-around circumstances

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 19:49 --- Still wrong: i_2: VARYING i.0_6: [0, +INF] EQUIVALENCES: { } (0 elements) # i_2 = PHI <0(0), i_9(2)>; :; i.0_6 = (signed char) i_2; if (i.0_6 < 0) goto ; else goto ; -- What|Removed

[Bug ada/22140] [4.1 Regression] ACATS ICE c37213j c37213l do_structure_copy, at tree-ssa-structalias.c:2372

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 19:47 --- Reduced testcase from 22019 since it was just a related bug: WITH REPORT; USE REPORT; PROCEDURE C37213J IS BEGIN DECLARE SUBTYPE SM IS INTEGER RANGE 1..10; TYPE REC (D1, D2 : SM) IS

[Bug ada/22140] New: ACATS ICE c37213j c37213l do_structure_copy, at tree-ssa-structalias.c:2372

+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+ | 4.1.0 20050621 (experimental) (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) GCC error: | | tree check: expected integer_cst, have cond_expr in | |do_structure_copy, at tree-ssa-structalias.c:2372

[Bug c++/22139] [4.0/4.1 regression] Segfault

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 19:11 --- Actually it is not a stack overflow but I real bug in the C++ front-end. Hmm, we are chaning the TREE_CHAIN of error_mark node, wtf. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22139

[Bug java/21540] switch stmt problem

--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 19:05 --- I'm testing a patch. -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |t

[Bug c++/22139] [4.0/4.1 regression] Segfault

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 18:55 --- > Attached is another testcase that has only half as many lines (~40k) and > that may be simpler to reduce... Well it takes a long to reduce because I am also running the Ada/ACATS testsuite in the backgro

[Bug c++/22139] [4.0/4.1 regression] Segfault

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-06-21 18:48 --- Created an attachment (id=9126) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9126&action=view) Smaller testcase Attached is another testcase that has only half as many lines (~40k) and that may be simple

[Bug c++/22139] [4.0/4.1 regression] Segfault

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 18:43 --- I am starting to think this is just a stack overflow and a defect in how the GC works (or someone forgot chain_next which should have reduced the stack usage). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.c

[Bug c++/22139] [4.0/4.1 regression] Segfault

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 18:41 --- I am going to try to reduce this with "--param ggc-min-expand=0 --param ggc-min-heapsize=0" which takes a long time on my poor machine. -- What|Removed |Added -

[Bug c++/22139] [4.0/4.1 regression] Segfault

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 18:36 --- This worked with "3.5.0 20040909" and "4.0.0 20041124" but not with "4.0.0 20050225". -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug java/21540] switch stmt problem

--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 18:36 --- The bug here is that the semantic analysis for a case expression, in parse.y:java_complete_lhs(), just does this: /* First, the case expression must be constant. Values of final fields are acc

[Bug c++/22139] [4.0/4.1 regression] Segfault

-- What|Removed |Added Summary|[4.1 regression] Segfault |[4.0/4.1 regression] ||Segfault http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sho

[Bug c++/22139] [4.1 regression] Segfault

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 18:12 --- Hmm, pr22139.ii:7996: internal compiler error: in ggc_set_mark, at ggc-page.c:1259 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions

[Bug tree-optimization/22033] [4.1 Regression] ACATS ICE cd1c04e create_variable_info_for, at tree-ssa-structalias.c:2789

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 18:04 --- Fixed by: 2005-06-20 Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * c-typeck.c (build_function_call): Set fundecl = function again. * tree-ssa-alias.c (find_used_portions): Address taking causes the

[Bug c++/22139] [4.1 regression] Segfault

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-06-21 18:03 --- I also get essentially the same backtrace (with the call to ggc_set_mark (p=0x14) at the top) from the 4.0.1pre CVS as of 2005-05-31, although this happens at a different place in the source code. I'm pret

[Bug tree-optimization/22033] [4.1 Regression] ACATS ICE cd1c04e create_variable_info_for, at tree-ssa-structalias.c:2789

--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-06-21 18:02 --- PASS on x86 and x86_64-linux as of LAST_UPDATED: Tue Jun 21 11:01:31 UTC 2005 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22033

[Bug c++/22139] [4.1 regression] Segfault

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-06-21 18:00 --- This looks like a memory problem -- the backtrace is this: (gdb) r -quiet step-18.ii -o /dev/null Starting program: /home/bangerth/bin/gcc-4.1-pre/libexec/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.0/cc1plus -quiet step-1

[Bug c++/22139] [4.1 regression] Segfault

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-06-21 17:58 --- Created an attachment (id=9125) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9125&action=view) Preprocessed sources -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22139

[Bug c++/22139] [4.1 regression] Segfault

-- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22139

[Bug c++/22139] New: [4.1 regression] Segfault

With attached file, I get the following segfault with mainline: examples/step-18> /home/bangerth/bin/gcc-4.1-pre/bin/c++ -c step-18.ii step-18.ii:7102: warning: ‘__malloc__’ attribute ignored step-18.ii: In constructor ‘std::_Vector_base<_Tp, _Alloc>::_Vector_base(size_t, const _Alloc&) [wit

[Bug tree-optimization/22019] [4.1 Regression] do_structure_copy ICE on Ada gnatlib

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 17:08 --- The g-socket.o is not fixed, please file a new bug for the testsuite failures if they have not been fixed. -- What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug c++/22138] Better error message for rejecting local template decleration.

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 17:04 --- Confirmed, 3.3 and before gave a worse error message (at least to me): t.cc:3: parse error before `template' -- What|Removed |Added -

[Bug c++/22132] Wrong code: upcasting a const class pointer to struct the class derives from

--- Additional Comments From scott dot tupaj at line6 dot com 2005-06-21 17:01 --- Yes, agreeably this is 'bad' c++ practice in my example. However, if wrong code is produced, I think it would be prudent for at least a compiler warning or error be produced if the reason for wrong code

[Bug c++/22138] New: Better error message for rejecting local template decleration.

Given: void f(void) { template class A { }; } g++ 4.0/3.4 gives: bug.cpp:4: error: expected primary-expression before 'template' A better error message would be something like "Local template declarations is not allowed" or something similar, instead of what is now basicly a "Syntax e

[Bug c++/22137] Internal error: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 16:56 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 20789 *** -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/20789] [4.0 regression] ICE with incomplete type in template

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 16:56 --- *** Bug 22137 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/22137] Internal error: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)

-- What|Removed |Added Severity|critical|normal Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code Known to work|

[Bug c++/22137] Internal error: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)

--- Additional Comments From Woebbeking at web dot de 2005-06-21 16:51 --- Created an attachment (id=9124) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9124&action=view) preprocessed code -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22137

[Bug c++/22137] New: Internal error: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)

Hi, the following code causes GCC to crash (without any options): #include class Bla; int main() { boost::optional test; } I can reproduce it with GCC 4 but not with GCC 3.3.6. Without ulimit -s this error crashes even the whole system. Smells like kind of endless recursion.

[Bug c++/22136] [4.1 regression] Rejects old-style using declaration

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 16:28 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW E

[Bug c++/22136] [4.1 regression] Rejects old-style using declaration

-- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22136

[Bug c++/22136] New: [4.1 regression] Rejects old-style using declaration

This used to compile but doesn't any more on mainline (ok on 4.0.x branch): --- struct B { void foo(); }; template class I : public B {}; template class D : private I { I::B::foo; }; -- g/x> /home/bangerth/bin/gcc-4.0.1-pre/bin/c

[Bug c++/21799] [4.0/4.1 regression] Spurious ambiguity with pointers to members

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-06-21 16:14 --- I don't have the time to check it today, but could try tomorrow. It certainly sounds plausible. Nathan, could you comment on this problem? Thanks Wolfgang -- What|Removed

[Bug c++/21799] [4.0/4.1 regression] Spurious ambiguity with pointers to members

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 16:07 --- I think this was exposed by the patch for PR 19203 (aka DR 214), could you double check that, that patch makes sense if it exposes this bug. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21799

[Bug c++/8271] Templates and pointers to const member functions

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-06-21 16:03 --- I just verified that Giovanni's patch linked to in comment #4 also fixes the regression reported in PR 21799. Apparently some unrelated change exposed the problem in 21799, but the underlying issue is the one

[Bug c++/21799] [4.0/4.1 regression] Spurious ambiguity with pointers to members

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 16:01 --- Confirmed in 4.0.1 20050610 also. Hmm. -- What|Removed |Added Known to fail|

[Bug c++/21799] [4.1 regression] Spurious ambiguity with pointers to members

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-06-21 16:00 --- Giovanni, I can confirm that your patch for PR 8271 also fixes the problem in this PR. I would be extremely grateful if it would move somewhere... Cheers Wolfgang -- What|Removed

[Bug c/8268] no compile time array index checking

--- Additional Comments From trt at acm dot org 2005-06-21 15:55 --- Since there is mudflap, it is especially important to avoid false positives. One type occurs in code that never actually executes, e.g. conditional lookup: #define LOOKUP(i) (i < XSIZE ? x[i]: 0) To defend against th

[Bug c++/21799] [4.1 regression] Spurious ambiguity with pointers to members

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-06-21 15:55 --- I also see this problem on the 4.0 branch now, with gcc version 4.0.1 20050531 (prerelease) I am pretty sure that it wasn't there in 4.0.0, but don't know for sure any more... W. -- http://gcc.gnu.

[Bug rtl-optimization/22129] [3.4 only] Optimization stomps const, initialized local array

--- Additional Comments From cnewbold at mathworks dot com 2005-06-21 15:50 --- Subject: Re: [3.4 only] Optimization stomps const, initialized local array On Mon, 2005-06-20 at 20:48 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > Also note this is not a full testcase and canno

[Bug target/22134] vf_hue.c:54: internal compiler error: in final_scan_insn, at final.c:2419

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 15:06 --- (In reply to comment #3) > Source of vf_hue.c : We don't want that source, add -save-temps and attach the .i file instead. And attach it, don't inline it because it is easy to get at that way. -- http

[Bug target/22134] vf_hue.c:54: internal compiler error: in final_scan_insn, at final.c:2419

--- Additional Comments From webmaster at toshsoft dot de 2005-06-21 15:02 --- Source of vf_hue.c : #include #include #include #include #include #include "../config.h" #include "../mp_msg.h" #include "../cpudetect.h" #include "img_format.h" #include "mp_image.h" #include "vf.h"

[Bug target/22134] vf_hue.c:54: internal compiler error: in final_scan_insn, at final.c:2419

--- Additional Comments From webmaster at toshsoft dot de 2005-06-21 14:59 --- cc -v output: Using built-in specs. Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: /var/tmp/portage/gcc-4.1.0_beta20050604/work/gcc-4.1-20050604/configure --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs --prefix=/usr --bi

[Bug target/21760] [4.1 Regression] Powerpc atomic builtins missing PPC405 errata

--- Additional Comments From dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 14:57 --- This is a bug introduced by the sync patch, not an enhancement request. I have created a patch to restore the functionality. -- What|Removed |Added -

[Bug tree-optimization/22117] [4.1 Regression] VRP thinks + is always nonnull.

-- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |kazu at cs dot umass dot edu |dot org | Status|NEW

[Bug target/18830] bootstrap of a biarch compiler fails in libstdc++.

--- Additional Comments From debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org 2005-06-21 14:10 --- yes, this one is fixed in 4.0 CVS -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIR

[Bug c/8268] no compile time array index checking

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 14:05 --- (In reply to comment #10) > The idea was to get a compile-time error whenever possible. It has to be a diagnostic/warning as this is just undefined and undefined code still has to compile as one of the DR

[Bug c/8268] no compile time array index checking

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at ices dot utexas dot edu 2005-06-21 14:02 --- Subject: Re: no compile time array index checking > Doesn't -fmudflap handle this? The idea was to get a compile-time error whenever possible. W. ---

[Bug libstdc++/22130] fstream fails to create a file in ios::in| ios::out mode.

--- Additional Comments From rohit_goel at ml dot com 2005-06-21 13:43 --- Is there a way to open the file in "a+" mode using fstream. Meaning, if the file exists, open in append mode, else create the file. Thanks. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22130

[Bug target/19530] MMX load intrinsic produces SSE superfluous instructions (movlps)

--- Additional Comments From guardia at sympatico dot ca 2005-06-21 13:26 --- Hum, it will be interesting to test this (it will have to wait a couple of weeks), but the problem with this here is that there is no "mov" instructions that can move stuff between MMX registers and SSE registe

[Bug target/22076] Strange code for MMX register moves

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 13:06 --- I think this is more related to PR 14552 which was shown by me that we regressed because we did not output emms at all before so not emmiting mmx instructions without use of the functions in mmintrin.h

[Bug java/22128] [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] Cyclic inheritance hangs jc1

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 13:01 --- Confirmed, this is a regression from 3.0.4 where we errored out and that is it and no infinite loop. -- What|Removed |Added -

[Bug target/22134] vf_hue.c:54: internal compiler error: in final_scan_insn, at final.c:2419

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 12:55 --- Can you attach the preprocessing source as requested by the web site: and also the output of "cc -v"? -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/22122] [4.1 Regression] -ftree-vectorize ICE get_loop_body, at cfgloop.c:819

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 12:51 --- Hmm, reconfirmed, then. -- What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED

[Bug tree-optimization/22135] The gcc-4.1-20050611 compiler ICE's using -ftree-vectorize in conjunction with -fdump-tree-all-details-stats

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 12:48 --- This is a dup of bug 22029 which I reported. Thanks for your bug report, hopefully someone will fix this soon. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 22029 *** -- What|Removed

[Bug tree-optimization/22029] [4.1 Regression] ICE with -fdump-tree-copyprop3-details

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 12:48 --- *** Bug 22135 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/21981] __m64 return value should be returned in %mm0

--- Additional Comments From uros at kss-loka dot si 2005-06-21 12:09 --- Fixed on mailine for 4.1.0, what about branches? -- What|Removed |Added Known to fail|3.2.3 3.

[Bug target/22076] Strange code for MMX register moves

--- Additional Comments From uros at kss-loka dot si 2005-06-21 12:04 --- New testcase (everything is initialized this time): --cut here-- #include __v8qi test () { __v8qi mm0 = {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8}; __v8qi mm1 = {11,22,33,44,55,66,77,88}; volatile __m64 x; x = _mm_add_pi8 (mm0,

[Bug target/15492] floating-point arguments are loaded too early to x87 stack

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 11:31 --- The first one is still producing the same old stupid code. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/15492] floating-point arguments are loaded too early to x87 stack

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 11:24 --- reg-stack has been reworked quite a bit recently. Where do we stand on this one now? -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/19161] No emms or femms emitted between MMX and FP instructions

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 11:20 --- Uros, also for you it seems... (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-06/msg01724.html) -- What|Removed |Added -

[Bug target/19530] MMX load intrinsic produces SSE superfluous instructions (movlps)

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 11:18 --- Is the emms issue mentioned in comment #14 fixed with Uros' patch proposed here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-06/msg01724.html? -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/19561] [gfortran] wrong code generation for pointers to derived types

--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 08:41 --- Works on both the 4.0 branch and the mainline. Testcase forthcoming. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/19766] wrong results or crash from PURE function

-- Bug 19766 depends on bug 19561, which changed state. Bug 19561 Summary: [gfortran] wrong code generation for pointers to derived types http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19561 What|Old Value |New Value --

[Bug tree-optimization/22135] The gcc-4.1-20050611 compiler ICE's using -ftree-vectorize in conjunction with -fdump-tree-all-details-stats

--- Additional Comments From Ralf_Recker at gmx dot de 2005-06-21 07:25 --- To all attendants of the developer summit: Greet the elks (moose?) from me ;-) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22135

[Bug tree-optimization/22135] New: The gcc-4.1-20050611 compiler ICE's using -ftree-vectorize in conjunction with -fdump-tree-all-details-stats

gcc-4.1-200506011 compiler ICE's using -ftree-vectorize AND -fdump-tree-all-details-stats in conjunction. Leave out one of both options and you got a successful compilation. Command: /opt/gcc-4.1-20050611/bin/gcc -O3 -march=pentium4 -msse3 -save-temps test.c -o test -ftree-vectorize -ftree-vecto