--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #7 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-06 07:39 ---
Both the "gcc --version" and "gfortran --version" problems are fixed on 4.3 and
4.2, and as per Steve Kargl's commit, the gfortran version bug is fixed on 4.1.
The gcc --version bug is still outstanding on 4.1, howev
--- Comment #6 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-06 07:35 ---
Subject: Bug 31050
Author: brooks
Date: Tue Mar 6 07:35:28 2007
New Revision: 122597
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122597
Log:
PR 31050
* gfortranspec.c (lang_specific_driver): Update progra
--- Comment #37 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-06 07:03
---
> Thanks for investigating. The above code is illegal as per the ISO C standard
> because it violates the type-based aliasing rules: you're not allowed to read
> a void** object through a zval** lvalue
I meant
--- Comment #36 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-06 06:59
---
As per previous analysis.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #35 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-06 06:59
---
> The problem looks like a bug in GCC's optimisation in 4.1.1 - for the
> following code:
>
> 152 while (--delete_count>=0) {
> 153 zval *q = *(zval **)(--p);
> 154
--
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
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-06 06:08
---
Well we have not had one of these for a while. I will look into it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31051
--- Comment #34 from gcc at troy dot rollo dot name 2007-03-06 03:51
---
The problem looks like a bug in GCC's optimisation in 4.1.1 - for the following
code:
152 while (--delete_count>=0) {
153 zval *q = *(zval **)(--p);
154 *p = NUL
$ cat fpu.c
long double emit_fldlg2()
{ return 0.3010299956639811952256464283594894482L; }
long double emit_fldln2()
{ return 0.6931471805599453094286904741849753009L; /* or M_LN2l */ }
long double emit_fldl2e()
{ return 1.4426950408889634073876517827983434472L; /* or M_LOG2El */ }
long double emit
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 23:56 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 23:54 ---
Subject: Bug 31050
Author: kargl
Date: Mon Mar 5 23:54:46 2007
New Revision: 122584
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122584
Log:
2007-03-05 Brooks Moses <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR 31050
--- Comment #6 from sje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 23:52 ---
Subject: Bug 29614
Author: sje
Date: Mon Mar 5 23:52:09 2007
New Revision: 122583
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122583
Log:
Backported from mainline
PR debug/29614
* cgr
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 23:27 ---
The value 5008 is listed in libgfortran.h as ERROR_ENDFILE. The
-1 corresponds to ERROR_END. So, the return value of 5008 is
telling you that you are trying to (initiate a?) read beyond
the end of the file, which yo
--- Comment #6 from simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 23:05
---
Subject: Bug 30895
Author: simartin
Date: Mon Mar 5 23:05:29 2007
New Revision: 122579
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122579
Log:
2007-03-05 Simon Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
--- Comment #5 from simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 22:56
---
Subject: Bug 30895
Author: simartin
Date: Mon Mar 5 22:55:58 2007
New Revision: 122578
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122578
Log:
2007-03-05 Simon Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
--- Comment #8 from amacleod at redhat dot com 2007-03-05 22:52 ---
Created an attachment (id=13150)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13150&action=view)
proposed patch for 4.2
This is the same patch for the 4.2 compiler. Unfortunately, its not quite good
enough becau
--- Comment #7 from amacleod at redhat dot com 2007-03-05 22:43 ---
Created an attachment (id=13149)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13149&action=view)
proposed patch for 4.3
This patch removes one of the temporary copies. With this minor tuning of one
of TERs heuri
On Windows, if a file is open in Excel, one cannot write to it in a Fortran
program. So if "junk.csv" is opened in Excel and I compile and run the code
program xopen
! check what happens when program tries to open file already open
implicit none
integer, parameter :: iu = 20
character (len=*), par
--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gmx dot de 2007-03-05 22:26 ---
Created an attachment (id=13148)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13148&action=view)
Demo code
The namelist file is here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13088
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugz
Hi,
the attached problem showed up after PR 30918 got fixed.
(Thanks, Jerry!)
When reading a namelist again and again, even after EOF,
then suddenly the IOSTAT values jumps from -1 to 5008.
This does not happen with other compilers.
The namelist file fort.10 is the same as in PR 30918.
Output of
Windows 20061021 version, and
linux-X86_64 20070305 version of gfortran.
---
C:\source\test>type tft.f95
program t
integer, parameter :: N = 9
character(len=40) :: fmt
character(len=2), dimension(N) :: y
y = 'a
--- Comment #4 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 22:08 ---
Subject: Bug 30675
Author: jsm28
Date: Mon Mar 5 22:08:03 2007
New Revision: 122577
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122577
Log:
PR libstdc++/30675
* testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp
--- Comment #3 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 22:07 ---
Subject: Bug 30675
Author: jsm28
Date: Mon Mar 5 22:07:09 2007
New Revision: 122576
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122576
Log:
PR libstdc++/30675
* testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp
--- Comment #4 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 21:36 ---
An identical bug also affects gfortran --version.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31050
--- Comment #9 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 20:58 ---
This is really important. We need to be able to
support mingw for gfortran, at least.
Setting priority.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 20:43 ---
Fixed in 4.2; currently regtesting in mainline.
--
brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #2 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 20:37 ---
Subject: Bug 31050
Author: brooks
Date: Mon Mar 5 20:37:05 2007
New Revision: 122574
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122574
Log:
PR 31050
* gcc.c: Correct copyright date in --version output.
--- Comment #13 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 20:20 ---
As of now, -fmax-errors has been backported to 4.2; it was committed to trunk
some months ago. This at least masks this bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23538
--- Comment #12 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 20:18 ---
Fixed in 4.2.
--
brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|bro
--- Comment #11 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 20:17 ---
Subject: Bug 30437
Author: brooks
Date: Mon Mar 5 20:17:23 2007
New Revision: 122572
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122572
Log:
fortran/
PR fortran/30437
Backport from trunk:
2007-01-25 Man
--- Comment #5 from dorit at il dot ibm dot com 2007-03-05 20:15 ---
I'm travelling now, but can prepare a fix when I'm back (next week).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31041
--- Comment #7 from ian at airs dot com 2007-03-05 19:55 ---
Fixed on mainline.
--
ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 19:44 ---
No feedback in over 3 months so closing.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 19:43 ---
No feedback in 3 months so closing.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 19:42 ---
No feedback in over 3 months so closing.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 19:39 ---
Note the patch is obvious.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31050
--
brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfir
As per a message by David Taylor on gcc-patches, "gcc --version" reports the
wrong copyright year:
> ../bin-4.2/bin/gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.2.0 20070305 (prerelease)
Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.
--
brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |brooks at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 18:31 ---
Actually this is not a bug. The overloaded set for foo in doit is only the
template foo and nothing else.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 18:15 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> > I am not sure if gfortran diagnostics are different,
>
> I think gfortran handles the warnings quite different, not that I know much
> about the details of the C frontend.
>
Ah, OK. Then
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 18:08 ---
> I am not sure if gfortran diagnostics are different,
I think gfortran handles the warnings quite different, not that I know much
about the details of the C frontend.
> but... are you sure that particular warning i
--- Comment #6 from ian at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 18:01 ---
Subject: Bug 31034
Author: ian
Date: Mon Mar 5 18:01:00 2007
New Revision: 122562
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122562
Log:
PR tree-optimization/31034
* tree-vrp.c (extract_rang
--- Comment #3 from satyaakam at yahoo dot co dot in 2007-03-05 17:58
---
error we get is as follows
case16.cpp: In function 'int main()':
case16.cpp:5: error: in argument to unary !
$/grid/common/pkgs/gcc/v4.1.1/bin/g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-redhat-linux
Configured w
--- Comment #2 from tbm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 17:51 ---
*** Bug 31048 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31049
--- Comment #1 from tbm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 17:51 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 31049 ***
--
tbm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #2 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-03-05 17:48 ---
This works just fine here. Can you please show the exact error message you get
and the output of g++ -v
20816:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~/tmp/src] cat t.c
#include
int main() {
char **const p = (char **)std::malloc(sizeo
--- Comment #1 from satyaakam at yahoo dot co dot in 2007-03-05 17:17
---
Created an attachment (id=13147)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13147&action=view)
case17
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31049
Hi,
We have problems using gcc 4.1.1. we are trying to compile a code in file
case17.cpp (see attached in testcase area). The problem is that compiler
forgets to call malloc and forgets to check the return value and it also
forgets to initialize pointer called color. That is we do not see the fo
Hi,
We have problems using gcc 4.1.1. we are trying to compile a code in file
case17.cpp (see attached in testcase area). The problem is that compiler
forgets to call malloc and forgets to check the return value (see case17.s) and
it also forgets to initialize pointer called color. That is we do
--- Comment #1 from satyaakam at yahoo dot co dot in 2007-03-05 17:11
---
Created an attachment (id=13146)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13146&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31047
We've uncovered a GCC 4.1.1 template bug when we compile using GCC4.1.1,This
simple testcase shows the issue.
#include
template< typename T > void foo( T var) { std::cout << "T" << std::endl; }
template < typename T> void doit( T var ) { foo(var); }
void foo(const int& var) { std::cout << "INT
Before bootstrapping on 3/3/07, the i386-pf-sse-1.c test passed for me. Now, I
get the following:
PASS: gcc.misc-tests/i386-pf-sse-1.c -march=i686 -mtune=pentium3 (test for
excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.misc-tests/i386-pf-sse-1.c -march=i686 -mtune=pentium3
scan-assembler prefetchnta
FAIL: gcc.mis
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 17:07 ---
Depends on (and is partly fixed by) PR30965.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 17:05 ---
I am not sure if gfortran diagnostics are different, but... are you sure that
particular warning is a pedantic warning and not simply an unconditional
warning? AFAIK, pedantic-errors will turn only pedantic warnings int
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 17:03 ---
Subject: Bug 14052
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Mar 5 17:03:14 2007
New Revision: 122559
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122559
Log:
2007-03-05 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 17:03 ---
It was fixed by the fix for PR15911.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from satyaakam at yahoo dot co dot in 2007-03-05 16:58
---
Created an attachment (id=13145)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13145&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31045
Hi ,
The following simple testcase does not compile using GCC4.1.1
#include
int main() {
char **const p = (char **)std::malloc(sizeof*p);
return !p;
}
--
Summary: gcc4.1. has problems with pointers
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.1
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 16:56 ---
This is fixed now on the mainline. Supposedly by
Author: dnovillo
Date: Fri Mar 2 19:20:14 2007
New Revision: 122484
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122484
Log:
* tree-ssa-structali
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 16:55 ---
Subject: Bug 23777
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Mar 5 16:55:23 2007
New Revision: 122558
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122558
Log:
2007-03-05 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
The following sample fails to compile:
template
class Container
{
static const _Type Value = _Val;
};
template
class Test
{
static const uint Value = 2;
static const Container<_Type, Value> m_Test;
};
template
const Container<_Type, Test<_Type>::Value> Test<_Type>::m_Test;
Th
--- Comment #41 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-03-05 16:38 ---
(In reply to comment #40)
> Subject: Re: Discarded Linkonce sections in .rodata
>
> On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, hjl at lucon dot org wrote:
>
> > Can I reproduce it on Linux?
>
> Using gcc 4.1.1 with binutils-070227 I can also re
--- Comment #11 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-03-05 16:30 ---
Subject: Bug number PR19637
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg00295.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
--- Comment #40 from michael dot klein at fazi dot de 2007-03-05 16:20
---
Subject: Re: Discarded Linkonce sections in .rodata
On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, hjl at lucon dot org wrote:
> Can I reproduce it on Linux?
Using gcc 4.1.1 with binutils-070227 I can also reproduce it on Linux,
binuti
--- Comment #39 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-03-05 15:25 ---
(In reply to comment #38)
> (In reply to comment #37)
> >
> > Can I reproduce it on Linux?
> >
>
> May be comment #21 help you?
>
That is an old compiler bug which has been fixed since then.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bu
--- Comment #38 from hidden_peak at mail dot ru 2007-03-05 14:53 ---
(In reply to comment #37)
>
> Can I reproduce it on Linux?
>
May be comment #21 help you?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16625
$ cat pi.cpp
#include
extern double const pi = M_PI;
extern double foo() { return pi; }
.section.rodata.cst8,"aM",@progbits,8
.align 8
.LC0: .long 1413754136
.long 1074340347
.globl pi
.section.rodata
.align 8
pi: .long 14137
--- Comment #37 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-03-05 14:19 ---
(In reply to comment #36)
> Subject: Re: Discarded Linkonce sections in .rodata
>
> >> One possible workaround is to reorder the objects during link, so that
> >> those
> >> with .gnu.linkonce.r.* come first.
> >>
> >> If
--- Comment #6 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-03-05 14:13 ---
Fixed for 4.2.0.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 14:12 ---
Subject: Bug 31031
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Mar 5 14:12:29 2007
New Revision: 122549
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122549
Log:
2007-03-05 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libstd
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 14:10 ---
... to mark as fixed in 3.4.0.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 14:10 ---
Reopen ...
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOL
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 13:46 ---
Two times invalid gimple:
:;
stmp_var_.41_63 = (int) j_34 + 1;
stmp_var_.42_64 = stmp_var_.41_63 + 1;
stmp_var_.43_65 = stmp_var_.42_64 + 1;
vect_cst_.44_66 = {(int) j_34, stmp_var_.41_63, stmp_var_.42_64,
--- Comment #2 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 13:41 ---
Working on a fix.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|un
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 13:27 ---
Your code is invalid. Valid is
class X;
template
int X::* const * f1 () { return static_cast(0); }
int X::* const * f2 () { return f1(); }
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Remo
--- Comment #14 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 13:16
---
And the 4.2 branch.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to
--- Comment #13 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 13:15
---
Subject: Bug 30364
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Mar 5 13:15:25 2007
New Revision: 122548
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122548
Log:
2007-03-05 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #11 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 13:14 ---
Thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29441
--- Comment #3 from tbm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 13:11 ---
confirmed with GCC 4.3.0 20070303. 4.2.0 works.
--
tbm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-03-05 13:09 ---
Reduced testcase:
typedef int int32_t;
struct UNewTrie
{
int32_t index[(0x11 >> 1)];
};
typedef struct UNewTrie UNewTrie;
utrie_open_3_4 ()
{
UNewTrie *trie;
int32_t i, j;
{
i = 0;
do
{
--- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 12:59 ---
Fixed in 4.2 (and 4.3). I don't think it is worth to porting to 4.1.
-> close bug.
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 12:58 ---
Subject: Bug 30968
Author: burnus
Date: Mon Mar 5 12:58:14 2007
New Revision: 122547
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122547
Log:
2007-03-05 Tobias Burnus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fort
Dear all,
I would like to post a bug report for the GNU C/C++ compiler 3.3-e500.
We use the compiler to generate code for a PowerPC processor.
Used invokation line for the GNU C++ compiler:
ccppc -c -x c++ -ansi -Wall -Werror -mcpu=8540 -fverbose-asm -mbig
-fmerge-templates -mmultiple -mn
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 12:22 ---
Note that in addition to unrolling the outermost loop you can experiment with
adjusting the --param max-completely-peeled-insns param. Also I wonder if
DO lxb=0,0
is really common (if so, the frontend might want
--- Comment #3 from rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz
2007-03-05 11:49 ---
Subject: Re: unroll/peel loops not aggressive enough
> We don't unroll non-innermost loops at the moment. I don't know if sccp can
> be taught to handle this case (and if it's worth it).
It
--- Comment #2 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2007-03-05 11:47 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> We don't unroll non-innermost loops at the moment. I don't know if sccp can
> be taught to handle this case (and if it's worth it).
such small loops are quite typical for some quantum chemist
--- Comment #1 from pluto at agmk dot net 2007-03-05 11:11 ---
3.4.6 generates a nice code:
_Z7convertj:
movl%edi, -4(%rsp)
movss -4(%rsp), %xmm0
ret
_Z4loadPv:
movzwl (%rdi), %eax
ret
--
pluto at agmk dot net changed:
What
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 10:57 ---
Subject: Bug 26420
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Mar 5 10:57:09 2007
New Revision: 122544
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122544
Log:
2007-03-05 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Dor
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 10:57 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #1 from dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2007-03-05 10:50 ---
Created an attachment (id=13144)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13144&action=view)
C source code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31041
I just tried to compile a Suse Linux package
with the GNU C++ compiler version 4.3 snapshot 20070302.
The compiler said
utrie.c: In function 'utrie_open_3_4':
utrie.c:51: error: invalid operand to binary operator
(int) j_93;
utrie.c:51: error: incorrect sharing of tree nodes
vect_cst_.1224_132
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21463
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 10:18 ---
We don't unroll non-innermost loops at the moment. I don't know if sccp can
be taught to handle this case (and if it's worth it).
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #19 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-03-05 10:13 ---
> I will try to get back to this bug this week. I was fighting some
> other fights last week, i apologize.
Danny, any update on this?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29922
--- Comment #15 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2007-03-05 09:30 ---
I tried the reduced testcase on powerpc with -ftree-loop-linear and both -O2
and -O3 on 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3, and it works fine.
Ira
--
irar at il dot ibm dot com changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #10 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 09:29 ---
(In reply to comment #9) Tobias Schlüter wrote:
> Fixed on all release branches.
This sounds as if should have been marked as FIXED.
Did so. Please reopen if it should not have been closed.
--
burnus at gcc dot
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bonzini at gnu dot org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #5 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2007-03-05 09:17 ---
On 4.3, it is still there at -O1
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
