--- Comment #4 from rbertran at ac dot upc dot edu 2008-04-04 06:57 ---
I've been testing using the Cell SDK3.0, and I can compile the program. I've
used -O3 and -ftree-vectorize flags. The gcc version provided by the SDK is
4.1.1.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3582
--- Comment #3 from rbertran at ac dot upc dot edu 2008-04-04 06:48 ---
host: x86 linux gnu
build: x86 linux gnu
target : spe
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35822
$ gcc -c -v verify_gimple_failure.adb
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../../SOURCES/gcc/configure --prefix=/opt/gccsnap
--enable-debug --enable-languages=c,ada,c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.4.0 20080403 (experimental) (GCC)
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-c
--- Comment #2 from rbertran at ac dot upc dot edu 2008-04-04 06:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=15422)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15422&action=view)
Temp file generated when -save-temp flag is set
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35822
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-04 06:44 ---
This might be a gc bug with the back-end that shows up with the vectorizer.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from rbertran at ac dot upc dot edu 2008-04-04 06:43 ---
Created an attachment (id=15421)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15421&action=view)
Temp file generated when -save-temp flag is set
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35822
Crosstoolchain for the Cell. I got an internal compiler error (segmentation
fault). I'm usign gcc 4.3.0 .
Command:
/opt/ia32/cell/toolchain/2008-03-28/bin/../bin/spu-gcc-W -Wall -Winline
-Wno-main -I. -I ../../../include -I ../../../include/spu -I ../../include/jpc
-I /scratch/local/rber
--- Comment #1 from rbertran at ac dot upc dot edu 2008-04-04 06:42 ---
Created an attachment (id=15420)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15420&action=view)
Temp file generated when -save-temps flag is set
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35821
Crosstoolchain for the Cell. I got an internal compiler error (segmentation
fault). I'm usign gcc 4.3.0 .
Command:
/opt/ia32/cell/toolchain/2008-03-28/bin/../bin/spu-gcc-W -Wall -Winline
-Wno-main -I. -I ../../../include -I ../../../include/spu -I ../../include/jpc
-I /scratch/local/rber
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35818
--
pogma at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pogma at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from pogma at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-04 05:30 ---
Fixed in r125309
--
pogma at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|una
--- Comment #1 from vmakarov at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-04 02:05
---
Subject: Bug 35817
Author: vmakarov
Date: Fri Apr 4 02:04:25 2008
New Revision: 133888
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133888
Log:
2008-04-03 Vladimir Makarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-04 00:21 ---
Subject: Bug 35713
Author: janis
Date: Fri Apr 4 00:20:48 2008
New Revision: 133887
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133887
Log:
PR target/35713
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 23:50 ---
Subject: Bug 35712
Author: janis
Date: Thu Apr 3 23:49:35 2008
New Revision: 133881
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133881
Log:
2008-04-03 Janis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
gcc/
PR c
--
eric dot weddington at atmel dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last r
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 22:27 ---
Confirm. While I do not get any crash like Dominique, valgrind shows that that
there is a problem:
==20532== Invalid write of size 8
==20532==at 0x463933: resolve_code (resolve.c:5902)
==20532==by 0x4661DB: g
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 22:20 ---
Close then as INVALID. Actual bug report is PR 35820
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #2 from dick dot hendrickson at gmail dot com 2008-04-03 22:12
---
Subject: Re: internal compiler error with forall
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 3:30 PM, dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> --- Comment #1 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-0
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:26 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:25 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:25 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:25 ---
Subject: Bug 35738
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Apr 3 21:24:28 2008
New Revision: 133879
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133879
Log:
PR c/35738
* c-parser.c (c_parser_omp_atomic): Ca
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:23 ---
Subject: Bug 35818
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Apr 3 21:22:41 2008
New Revision: 133878
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133878
Log:
PR middle-end/35818
* omp-low.c (scan_sharing_cla
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:21 ---
Subject: Bug 35786
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Apr 3 21:20:53 2008
New Revision: 133877
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133877
Log:
PR fortran/35786
* openmp.c (resolve_omp_clauses)
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:04 ---
Subject: Bug 35738
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Apr 3 21:03:54 2008
New Revision: 133876
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133876
Log:
PR c/35738
* c-parser.c (c_parser_omp_atomic): Ca
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:03 ---
Subject: Bug 35818
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Apr 3 21:02:44 2008
New Revision: 133875
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133875
Log:
PR middle-end/35818
* omp-low.c (scan_sharing_cla
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:02 ---
Subject: Bug 35786
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Apr 3 21:01:26 2008
New Revision: 133874
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133874
Log:
PR fortran/35786
* openmp.c (resolve_omp_clauses)
--- Comment #2 from oblivian at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-04-03
20:45 ---
Ok so the gcc/g++ i build has optimization on by default. The configuration
scripts don't seem to take this into account and the call to CXX for the atomic
check is optimizing away the check in the output
--- Comment #1 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-04-03 20:30 ---
The code compiles fine on (powerpc|i686)-apple-darwin9. Would it be possible to
check how the executable works?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35820
--- Comment #68 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 19:52
---
I am no longer working on specifically this.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--
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
The following program causes an internal compiler error.
Each of the three subroutines causes an ICE. The ICE moves
around or goes away when I try to simplify the test much
more.
! fails on Windows XP
! gcc version 4.4.0 20080312 (experimental) [trunk revision 133139]
Dick Hendrickson
MOD
--- Comment #1 from dick dot hendrickson at gmail dot com 2008-04-03 18:37
---
Obviously, ignore this one. I must have hit "enter"
by mistake
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35819
--
Summary: internal compiler error with forall
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: di
--- Comment #1 from oblivian at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-04-03
17:34 ---
After looking back at my 4.2.3 build logs. The above is somewhat incorrect.
In 4.2.3, the pass 2 toolchain build of libstdc++ correctly checked the target
g++ rather than the host and reported that it w
--- Comment #21 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 17:04 ---
Dominique, in answer to your question in comment #19, without the patch any
code for powerpc*-linux gets an ICE as reported originally. The very long
compilation times are a concern, but wrong code in four CPU2000 te
extern int a[];
void
foo (void)
{
#pragma omp parallel
#pragma omp master
a[3] = 1;
#pragma omp parallel shared(a)
#pragma omp master
a[3] = 1;
}
ICEs, because is_variable_sized doesn't expect incomplete types.
--
Summary: ICE on incomplete array in shared clause
Produ
--
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
Hi,
I get an ICE when compiling vector-2.c with -fira:
Executing on host: /home/mstein/sim/ira/arm-elf/build/gcc/xgcc
-B/home/mstein/sim/ira/arm-elf/build
/gcc/ -O0 -w -DSTACK_SIZE=16384 -fno-show-column -c-fira -o vector-2.o
/home/mstein/svn/ira/
gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/vector-
--- Comment #12 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-04-03 16:21
---
Fixed.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFI
--- Comment #11 from joel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 16:19 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] Revision 133787 breaks ia64
>
> > I am pretty sure I saw this one targeting sparc-rtems. Building an updated
> > tree now to confirm it is the fix.
> >
> >
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 16:19 ---
Fixed in 4.4:
foo:
.LFB2:
andl$7, %edx
jmp *.L10(,%rdx,8)
...
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
When compiling a combined gcc + g++ + binutils, the configure script for the
libstdc++ library is using the host g++ rather than the last stage g++ for
determining atomic builtin support status.
While I probably need to compile the toolchain with CXXFLAGS=-march=i486, from
what I've read, to enabl
--- Comment #10 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2008-04-03 15:44 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] Revision 133787 breaks ia64
> I am pretty sure I saw this one targeting sparc-rtems. Building an updated
> tree now to confirm it is the fix.
>
> ../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/iostream-i
--- Comment #20 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-04-03 15:22 ---
I have reverted the patch referenced in comment #16 and the 16 tests fail as
with gfortran 4.3.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33642
--- Comment #7 from oblivian at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-04-03
15:07 ---
They re-closed the binutils bug as invalid again and told me to open a new one.
So here's the new one http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6027
We'll see if it gets any more traction.
--
h
n a less than 10% decrease in the executable
size at the expense of more than a factor 3 in the compile time.
Core2Duo 2.16Ghz, i686-apple-darwin9, gcc version 4.4.0 20080403 (experimental)
(GCC)
+ patches (including the patch referenced in comment #16):
--
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
the static 2nd static assertion in x() fails. if the other partial
specialization of template d is used, the code works as expected. As you can
see the only difference between these d's is, that the T parameter is at a
different position which shouldn't make a difference to the outcome of typedef
T
--- Comment #35 from joel dot sherrill at oarcorp dot com 2008-04-03 14:30
---
Subject: Re: Branch to 0x0 from Ada run-time
laurent at guerby dot net wrote:
> --- Comment #34 from laurent at guerby dot net 2008-04-03 03:47 ---
> May be other platform aligned the record 8 byte
--- Comment #9 from joel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 13:44 ---
I am pretty sure I saw this one targeting sparc-rtems. Building an updated
tree now to confirm it is the fix.
../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/iostream-inst.cc: In member function 'void
std::basic_iostream >::_ZThn8_
code:
#include
#include
namespace __cxxabi {
extern "C" char* __cxa_demangle(const char* mangled_name, char* buf,
size_t* n, int*status);
}
template
struct p {};
int main()
{
int r;
assert(__cxxabi::__cxa_demangle(typeid(p<>).name(),0,0,&r));
}
--
Summary: deman
code,
template struct i { typedef i t; };
template struct n;
template struct n > : i { };
template struct n > : i { };
typedef i<1, char> t;
typedef n::t x;
leads to "internal compiler error: tree check: expected tree_vec, have
type_pack_expansion in tsubst_copy_and_build, at cp/pt.c
--- Comment #8 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 12:50 ---
Subject: Bug 35795
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Apr 3 12:49:27 2008
New Revision: 133868
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133868
Log:
2008-04-03 Jan Hubicka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR tree-optimiz
The code generated for "switch (n & 7)" which has all possible cases (0-7)
includes a redundant range check.
To illustrate, this source code:
void foo(unsigned int *d, const unsigned int *s, unsigned int n)
{
switch (n & 7) {
case 7:
d[7] = s[7];
break;
case 6:
--- Comment #11 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 11:28 ---
Actually, to clarify #c10, attributes on parameter packs just make things
harder on the compiler side, but even in C++98 the same issue is present:
#define vector __attribute__((__vector_size__ (16)))
template void
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 10:23 ---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-04/msg00177.html
for details.
I guess before moving further along with this, attributes for parameter packs
should be decided upon. Do we want to allow them at all? What ac
--- Comment #24 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 10:02
---
"It looks ugly as hell, but i have no problem with it because i'm not
sure you can do better without completely replacing the algorithm :)"
as it seems only wine is affected (and there is the -fno-tree-fre -fno-t
--- Comment #23 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 09:53
---
*** Bug 35811 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 09:53 ---
I suppose this is exactly PR35204.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 35204 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 09:52 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35811
On the attached testcase (from wine) at -O -m32 or higher GCC ICEs, because
very deep recursion in tree-ssa-sccvn.c's DFS:
...
#49137 0x0078fe7c in DFS (name=0x2aaab0a8dde0) at
../../gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.c:1898
#49138 0x0078fe7c in DFS (name=0x2f5d7840) at
../../gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 09:04 ---
One thing to add: Seemingly gfortran supports reallocation for allocatable
components (by itself a F2003 feature) using the constructor (see example), but
not without constructor.
Additionally, while a simple example
--- Comment #2 from singler at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 09:00 ---
Same thing for me.
--
singler at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assigned
The following is invalid Fortran 95 but valid Fortran 2003 as the variable is
reallocated:
integer, allocatable :: a(:)
allocate(a(1))
print *, size(a)
a = [1,2,3] ! Implicit reallocation.
! Wrong: a(:) = [1,2,3] ! Out of bounds 1 vs. 3
print *, size(a)
end
The Intel compiler already supports th
--- Comment #18 from loki at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 08:24 ---
*** Bug 35785 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
loki at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from loki at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 08:24 ---
The patch from http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-03/msg00824.html should
fix this kind of problem.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 33642 ***
--
loki at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 07:52 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 07:51 ---
Subject: Bug 35741
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Apr 3 07:51:01 2008
New Revision: 133864
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133864
Log:
PR c++/35741
* semantics.c (finish_offsetof): Und
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 07:44 ---
Subject: Bug 35741
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Apr 3 07:43:46 2008
New Revision: 133863
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=133863
Log:
PR c++/35741
* semantics.c (finish_offsetof): Und
72 matches
Mail list logo
