--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 07:38 ---
foo1 (__result, n)
{
bar1 ((int4 *) n, foo1);
goto __return_foo1;
__return_foo1:;
looks strange. Shouldn't this be:
bar1 ((int4 *) n, __result)
In addition, the warning
g.f90:8: warning: Function does not
--- Comment #2 from siarhei dot siamashka at gmail dot com 2007-04-25
07:28 ---
This may be related to #31386
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31693
--- Comment #1 from siarhei dot siamashka at gmail dot com 2007-04-25
07:26 ---
Created an attachment (id=13436)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13436&action=view)
testcase for this bug
Testcase attached
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31693
In the attached testcase, gcc assigns the same register to several inline asm
named operands resulting in incorrect code generated. Seems like names of
operands do matter ('c' and 'count' are assigned the same register but renaming
'c' operand to 'xxc' for example makes this bug disappear).
--
--- Comment #2 from aesok at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 07:18 ---
Subject: Bug 18989
Author: aesok
Date: Wed Apr 25 07:18:33 2007
New Revision: 124141
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124141
Log:
PR target/18989
* config/avr/avr.h (ASM_OUTPUT_AL
--- Comment #5 from mtrudel at gmx dot ch 2007-04-25 07:17 ---
You write "it needs a host version of gcj",
your host is "i686-pc-linux-gnu" and
configure looks for "i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcj"?
Seems correct to me? What gcj should be searched for? The only problem I'm
currently aware of is t
--- Comment #2 from ian at airs dot com 2007-04-25 06:49 ---
Adding SH maintainer to CC.
--
ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #1 from ian at airs dot com 2007-04-25 06:48 ---
Adding SH maintainer to CC. Lowering priority for non-primary target.
--
ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #18 from ian at airs dot com 2007-04-25 06:45 ---
Lowering priority of suspended PR.
--
ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 06:44
---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 06:43 ---
Subject: Bug 30222
Author: pinskia
Date: Wed Apr 25 06:43:32 2007
New Revision: 124140
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124140
Log:
2007-04-24 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ro
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 06:32 ---
I made a note of it when Roger submitted the patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg00704.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30222
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 06:30 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Andrew, can you identify whatever portion of this patch has not yet been
> applied to 4.2?
This portion which was part of my original submitial (though Roger found it
when he was fixing a
--- Comment #14 from ian at airs dot com 2007-04-25 06:26 ---
-frename-registers should be rewritten to use the new DF framework when
dataflow branch is merged.
Lowering priority to P3. This is not high priority.
--
ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed
The following code causes segfault on execution.
(This code works with PGI, Intel, and Hitachi Fortrans)
module one
contains
function foo1(n)
integer :: n
integer :: foo1(n)
call bar1(n, foo1)
return
end function
subroutine bar1(n,
--- Comment #25 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 03:14
---
(In reply to comment #23)
> This is a regression. Danny?
>
It actually should get assigned anything as a points-to set, so the "bad"
constraints are correct.
We should also always get correct aliasing even if e
--- Comment #5 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 02:34 ---
Fixed.
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #4 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 02:24 ---
Subject: Bug 31084
Author: danglin
Date: Wed Apr 25 02:24:47 2007
New Revision: 124138
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124138
Log:
PR libgcj/31084
* java/lang/natVMProcess.cc:
--- Comment #5 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2007-04-25 02:18 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> This is a very misleading diagnostic, but not a wrong-code as far as I can
> see.
Indeed, I was mislead by the diagnostic in reducing the wrong-code issue to the
above testcase. So that leave
--- Comment #5 from mkgnu at mkgnu dot net 2007-04-25 02:12 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I've tried a couple of different ways to use branch predictions for
> partitioning, but it never leads to meaningful results. Either everything is
> hot or everything is cold. I don't know what e
--- Comment #39 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2007-04-25
02:06 ---
Mike,
Why don't you close this report as RESOLVED and create another one just for
the non-working --with-system-libunwind issue as a P4. That might help prevent
folks from constantly reopening this PR
--- Comment #38 from mrs at apple dot com 2007-04-25 01:56 ---
I think a non-working --with-system-libunwind corner case on darwin is a P4 at
best?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26792
--- Comment #37 from mrs at apple dot com 2007-04-25 01:42 ---
libgcc_s.10.5.dylib now includes __Unwind_GetIPInfo on mainline and in 4.2...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26792
--- Comment #11 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 01:29 ---
*** Bug 31182 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 01:29 ---
This is fixed by the follow-on patch in PR 28709, see:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28709#c5
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 28709 ***
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 01:27 ---
> However it also leaves a t.h.gch file, which seems a bit weird.
That in itself is a bug and maybe the real bug here :)
as if you do:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ~/x86-local-fsf/bin/gcc t.h
t.h: In function 'f':
t.h:2: err
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 01:24 ---
This is somewhat odd, and probably not the only such oddity you can find.
But I think it is somewhat dangerous to change the default behavior.
I think it has been this way for a long time, and we can't know what
chang
--- Comment #2 from davek at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 01:23 ---
It determines the calling convention used, and is therefore surely the
territory of the system headers/libs. Do take a look at the upstream source:
http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/newlib/libc/include/_an
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 01:22 ---
I agree that the "swedish" (never heard it called that before) format
is superior. But what is the use case for having this available
as a preprocessor macro?
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 01:20 ---
Hmm. "gcc t.h" fails and prints an error:
opsy. gcc t.h
t.h: In function f:
t.h:2: error: expected declaration or statement at end of input
However it also leaves a t.h.gch file, which seems a bit weird.
Anyway
--- Comment #36 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2007-04-25
01:19 ---
(In reply to comment #31)
> When configuring with --with-system-libunwind, GCC should not include
> unwind-compat.o (or any unwind code) in the build of libgcc_s. Then the
> configure check will work corr
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 01:16
---
This is most likely related to PR 30567.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #4 from ddaney at avtrex dot com 2007-04-25 01:16 ---
Subject: Re: Cross build fails because native gcj needed
to build ecjx
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 01:12
> ---
> Is this still a problem?
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 01:12 ---
Is this still a problem?
I thought it was ironed out a while ago.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30591
--- Comment #9 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 01:11 ---
The test also fails on powerpc-linux, so it's not specific to i686-linux. The
results seem to be inconsistent, so I'm doing more testing to determine whether
the failure is intermittent.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bug
--- Comment #35 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2007-04-25
01:04 ---
(In reply to comment #33)
> Geoff, do you intend to backport these Darwin patches to 4.2.0?
>
Mark,
Are you under the impression that the libstdc++-v3 and libjava patches were
only applied to trunk?
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-25
00:59 ---
Subject: Re: config-int.h:327:1: error: "INT8_MIN" redefined
> This patch looks ok -- a bit messy, but not overly so for configury code ;).
> Let me know if it works for you, I will push it upstream.
It w
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 00:53 ---
In general I think if there is a variant in the libgcj fdlibm, then
we want to use it.
What is __cdecl for?
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 00:51 ---
This patch is ok. Please check it in. thanks.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 00:50 ---
This patch looks ok -- a bit messy, but not overly so for configury code ;).
Let me know if it works for you, I will push it upstream.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 00:47 ---
I agree this is a buglet in libjava/classpath/include/Makefile.am
One workaround: don't configure with --enable-regen-headers.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #34 from geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 00:14 ---
I don't know what patches you're referring to, so no.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26792
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31638
General
--- Comment #8 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-04-24 23:39 ---
Problem solved in 4_2-branch too via fixing C++/30500. Nothing will be done in
older branches.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.3.0 |4.2.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30500
--- Comment #6 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 23:37 ---
Subject: Bug 30500
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Apr 24 23:36:53 2007
New Revision: 124130
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124130
Log:
2007-04-24 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR c++/30
--- Comment #8 from ian at airs dot com 2007-04-24 23:28 ---
Fixed on mainline and 4.2 branch.
--
ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #7 from ian at airs dot com 2007-04-24 23:27 ---
Fixed on mainline and 4.2 branch.
--
ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #7 from ian at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 23:26 ---
Subject: Bug 31605
Author: ian
Date: Tue Apr 24 23:26:25 2007
New Revision: 124129
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124129
Log:
./ChangeLog:
PR tree-optimization/31605
* tree-vrp.c
--- Comment #6 from ian at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 23:24 ---
Subject: Bug 31605
Author: ian
Date: Tue Apr 24 23:24:01 2007
New Revision: 124128
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124128
Log:
./:
PR tree-optimization/31605
* tree-vrp.c (set_valu
--- Comment #6 from ian at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 22:54 ---
Subject: Bug 31602
Author: ian
Date: Tue Apr 24 22:54:22 2007
New Revision: 124127
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124127
Log:
PR tree-optimization/31602
* tree-ssa-loop-ch.c (copy
--- Comment #33 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 22:51
---
Geoff, do you intend to backport these Darwin patches to 4.2.0?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26792
--- Comment #8 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 22:46
---
Ulrich, in response to your question in Comment #6, yes, this bug appears in
4.1 and 4.2, not just in 4.3. So, if you think it's safe to backport the
reload patch, it would be nice to have the fix there as well.
--- Comment #18 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 22:44
---
(In reply to comment #17)
> Zdenek, do you think this is appropriate for a backport to 4.2.0?
Well right now it causes a regression so I don't think it is appropriate until
that regression is fixed :). See PR 31676
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 22:43
---
Andrew, can you identify whatever portion of this patch has not yet been
applied to 4.2?
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #17 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 22:42
---
Zdenek, do you think this is appropriate for a backport to 4.2.0?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31360
--- Comment #14 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 22:38
---
Fixed on mainline.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 22:37
---
Subject: Bug 31587
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Tue Apr 24 22:37:37 2007
New Revision: 124126
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124126
Log:
PR fortran/31587
* lib/gcc-dg.exp (sca
The following example takes the "wrong_branch" when compiled with
gcc -O3 -fno-inline
gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.1.2
Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
= example =
#include
static int get_kind(int v) {
volatile int k = v;
return k;
}
static int some_call(void
--- Comment #5 from simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 21:52
---
Subject: Bug 25923
Author: simartin
Date: Tue Apr 24 21:52:16 2007
New Revision: 124121
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124121
Log:
2007-04-24 Simon Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
Testcase, compile with -g:
const __uint128_t fives = (((__uint128_t)(0xULL))
<<64)|((__uint128_t)(0xULL));
The ICE on the mainline:
t.c:0: internal compiler error: in add_const_value_attribute, at
dwarf2out.c:10005
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed
--- Comment #5 from ian at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 21:44 ---
Subject: Bug 31602
Author: ian
Date: Tue Apr 24 21:44:45 2007
New Revision: 124120
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124120
Log:
./:
PR tree-optimization/31602
* tree-ssa-loop-ch.c (
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31605
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30567
Sorry to bother you, but I am too stupid to understand how to use bugzilla.
So I send this bug report via the way of last resort.
The following does not link.
module bla
logical, save :: blub= .true.
logical :: pa
equivalence (blub, pa)
end module
program po
use bla, only : pa
--- Comment #4 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 21:06 ---
There is a questionable practice with the original code: It uses
pab without a check whether it is present.
The compiler tries to guard against this, partially by generating
(from the *.original dump):
if (pab !
--- Comment #1 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 20:31 ---
Patch posted here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-04/msg01609.html
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 20:27 ---
*** Bug 31689 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 20:27 ---
This is a stupid idea, it is better to use __builtin_expect and
-freorder-blocks-and-partition which means this is a dup of bug 26493.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26493 ***
--
pinskia at gcc
Support defining attributes at a scope level.
I'd like to request implementing the feature of defining attributes at a scope
level. For example, allow a syntax such as the following, possibly as a GNU
extension:
if (something)
__attribute__ ((section("bar"))) {
/* body of if-statement */
}
.
--- Comment #16 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 20:05
---
*** Bug 31688 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 20:05 ---
This is really the oldest uninitialized variable warning bug out there. PR
5035.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 5035 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 19:58 ---
> > This example is not valid. As NAG f95 claims:
> it is not supposed to be a runable example
Well, for hunting miscompilation bugs, a runable example helps.
I think there are at leastfour problems:
a) The program
[Based on PR 31683]
Compiling the following program with "gfortran -O -Wall" gives the bogus
warning:
foo2.f90:4: warning: 'offset.7' may be used uninitialized in this function
foo2.f90:4: warning: 'stride.6' may be used uninitialized in this function
foo2.f90:4: warning: 'pab.0' may be used unini
while the gcc executables reliably find their associated files / libraries /
paths
even if the executable is invoked through symlinks, this is not true for the
gnat executables.
For example, if gcc is installed with --prefix=/usr/local/gcc1
and then symlinks are made such as
cd /usr/local/bin ; ln
--- Comment #2 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2007-04-24 19:07 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> This example is not valid. As NAG f95 claims:
it is not supposed to be a runable example, of course. Just remove the
'PRIVATE' from the module definition.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 18:46 ---
This example is not valid. As NAG f95 claims:
Error: foo.f90, line 45: ALLOCATABLE array NCOSET used but never ALLOCATEd
(gfortran actually misses such an error/warning.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.c
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
See failing test, analysis, suggested patch here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-04/msg01595.html
--
Summary: wrong codegen from reload
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
// { dg-do compile }
// { dg-options "-O2" }
template struct F
{
~F () {}
F (T x) {}
};
template F foo (const F &x)
{
return x;
}
static F z = 6;
struct G
{
G () {}
F &operator () (F x) { return z; }
};
int
main ()
{
G g;
F j (0);
F f = g (j);
F h = foo (f);
}
ICEs on both
I get the following ICE with current gcc 4.3. This goes back until at
least 4.3 20070303. 4.1 works. I cannot test 4.2.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/bin/gcc -c -O2 mpfr-mul.c
mpfr-mul.c: In function 'mpfr_mul':
mpfr-mul.c:19: error: unrecognizable insn:
(insn:TI 69 102 68 3 (para
--- Comment #29 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-04-24 15:59 ---
> It is hanging on undefined, I think there is a difference here, a big
> difference.
What is the difference for you?
Just as a side note, that's not me who classed the PR as invalid and so far I
did not see a clas
--- Comment #28 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 15:46
---
> Bugzilla has plenty of entries "ICE on invalid", I am just asking that
> "hanging
> on invalid" is not brushed aside just because it does happen on a platform
> some
> people don't like.
It is hanging on unde
--- Comment #95 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2007-04-24 15:42 ---
added PR 31683 with a reduced testcase
--
jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk changed:
What|Removed |Added
Bu
The following generates bogus warnings and is likely miscompiled:
MODULE test
IMPLICIT NONE
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=KIND(0.0D0)
INTEGER, ALLOCATABLE, DIMENSION(:) :: ncoset
PRIVATE
PUBLIC :: overlap
CONTAINS
SUBROUTINE overlap(la_max_set,la_min_set,&
lb_max_set
--- Comment #94 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2007-04-24 15:27 ---
In fact, gfortran gives a hint here. The file that gets miscompiled produces
the following warnings:
cp2k/obj/Linux-x86-64-gfortran/sdbg> gfortran -c -O2 -g -Wall -Wextra
ai_overlap_new.f90
ai_overlap_new.f90: In funct
There are many libgomp failures in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2007-04/msg01222.html
=== libgomp tests ===
Running target unix/-m32
=== libgomp Summary for unix/-m32 ===
# of expected passes1566
Running target unix
FAIL: libgomp.fortran/v
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 15:17 ---
I can reproduce this on i?86 with 32bit HWI (even with optimization if you
trick around CCP):
int one(void) { return 1; }
int printf (const char *, ...);
int main()
{
long long qhat = one();
long long res =
--- Comment #93 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2007-04-24 15:11 ---
(In reply to comment #91)
I checked that the miscompilation at '-O2' also happens for the sources in the
initial comment, so it is definitely a gfortran regression. Furthermore, by
recompiling ai_overlap_new.F and qs_c
There are many failures in libmudflap in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2007-04/msg01222.html
=== libmudflap tests ===
Running target unix/-m32
FAIL: libmudflap.c++/pass41-frag.cxx execution test
FAIL: libmudflap.c++/pass41-frag.cxx (-static) execution test
FAIL: libmudflap.c++/p
--- Comment #92 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2007-04-24 14:31 ---
(In reply to comment #91)
> /QS/regtest-gpw-1/NO2_lsd.inp.out
> I'll see if I can reduce the number of optimization options.
the above testcase also fails at a plain '-O2' so I suspect it won't happen
only on opteron.
--- Comment #3 from vlasenko at bifit dot com dot ua 2007-04-24 14:21
---
The bug also reproduces with GCC 4.1.2 compiled under FreeBSD:
gcc -save-temps -v test.c -o test
Using built-in specs.
Target: i386-unknown-freebsd6.0
Configured with: ../gcc-4.1.2/configure --enable-languages=c
--- Comment #91 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2007-04-24 13:37 ---
current (i.e. this morning) mainline seems to miscompile CP2K (tested current
CVS of CP2K). The code compiled with '-O3 -ftree-vectorize -ffast-math
-march=native' on an opteron segfaults on several regtests. The same c
--- Comment #7 from krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 13:23 ---
Ulrich approved the patch for 4.1/4.2/4.3.
--
krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #6 from krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 13:21 ---
Subject: Bug 31641
Author: krebbel
Date: Tue Apr 24 13:21:22 2007
New Revision: 124101
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124101
Log:
2007-04-24 Andreas Krebbel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
--- Comment #2 from vlasenko at bifit dot com dot ua 2007-04-24 13:16
---
Yes, it compiles with warning... so what? The bug is not in the warning. If you
insert #include in the top of source the bug reproduces and the
problem will not leave.
ÎÊ, if you want to play in bureaucracy, than
--- Comment #5 from krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 13:15 ---
Subject: Bug 31641
Author: krebbel
Date: Tue Apr 24 13:15:11 2007
New Revision: 124100
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124100
Log:
2007-04-24 Andreas Krebbel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
--- Comment #4 from krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 13:08 ---
Subject: Bug 31641
Author: krebbel
Date: Tue Apr 24 13:08:05 2007
New Revision: 124099
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124099
Log:
2007-04-24 Andreas Krebbel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
--- Comment #27 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-04-24 13:03 ---
> Please define "fixed".
For me "fixed"=="no hanging" period.
> You run an invalid program,
Yes, I know, repeating that won't help!
> all you need is change your expectations what will happen.
Bugzilla has plen
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
