--- Comment #4 from mckelvey at maskull dot com 2009-06-23 03:04 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> That was also my understanding. The funny thing is that apparently the builds
> fails exactly on the macro and also that the configure tests apparently do not
> select the generic locale model
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-23 00:16
---
Subject: Bug 40508
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Jun 23 00:16:24 2009
New Revision: 148823
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148823
Log:
2009-06-22 Jerry DeLisle
PR libfortran/40508
--- Comment #36 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-23 00:12 ---
(In reply to comment #35)
>
> so, what are these? Once we removed the uninitialized use (CCP) we cannot
> recover the information.
We usually do not remove the uninitialized use but assume a value for the
variable a
--- Comment #5 from david dot kirkby at onetel dot net 2009-06-23 00:04
---
Thinking about this more, why should it matter if the type being printed is of
a smaller size than the print statement. This clearly works ok,
drkir...@kestrel:[~] $ cat test2.c
#include
int main() {
printf (
--- Comment #4 from david dot kirkby at onetel dot net 2009-06-22 23:56
---
i take you point, but I'm still puzzled why the two print statements should be
different.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40524
--- Comment #3 from david dot kirkby at onetel dot net 2009-06-22 23:52
---
Created an attachment (id=18052)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18052&action=view)
config.log from a 16-core Sun T5240
This is config.log from the Sun T5240, which was configured to use the
--- Comment #2 from david dot kirkby at onetel dot net 2009-06-22 23:42
---
Created an attachment (id=18051)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18051&action=view)
config.log from the Sun Blade 2000
This is the config.log that was generated on the Sun Blade 2000. gcc 4
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 23:42 ---
Note:
t.c: In function 'main':
t.c:9: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 2
has type 'int'
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40524
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major |normal
Component|c |target
GCC b
One of the MPFR developers sent me this test program, which I've called test.c
You would expect both print statements to be the same, as exactly the same
things are being compared, but in fact the output is different with gcc-4.4.0
on Solaris to that with other versions of gcc.
drkir...@kestrel
--
rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #1 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 23:25 ---
What happens with a more recent version of the toolchain ? 4.2.x is now
obsolete.
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35296
--- Comment #2 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 23:24 ---
Qualcomm does someting like this, see:
http://www.capsl.udel.edu/conferences/open64/2009/Papers/101-codeSizeOpen64_Qualcomm.pdf
http://www.capsl.udel.edu/conferences/open64/2009/Slides/001-101-codeSizeOpen64Conf_QCO
--- Comment #1 from doko at ubuntu dot com 2009-06-22 23:24 ---
Created an attachment (id=18050)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18050&action=view)
preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40523
--- Comment #3 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 23:22 ---
Digging old bugs can be fun...
Andrew, do you think this is perhaps fixed by Jakub's x86 mem* work?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12966
[ forwarded from https://launchpad.net/+bugs/347864 ]
seen on the 4.3 branch, fixed in 4.4 and trunk.
When building for the Thumb-2 instruction set, GCC appears to generate Thumb2
loads and stores with invalid address offsets and base register writeback. The
Thumb-2 instruction set does not suppo
--- Comment #8 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 22:57 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Compiling with gcc 4.4.1 with options "-Os -mtune=cortex-a8" I get this:
Try with -mcpu=cortex-a8 . -mtune=cortex-a8 doesn't choose the cpu for that ,
insn selection for the arm port happe
--- Comment #12 from doko at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 22:25 ---
Subject: Bug 28050
Author: doko
Date: Mon Jun 22 22:25:38 2009
New Revision: 148820
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148820
Log:
gcc/
2009-06-22 Steven Bosscher
Matthias Klose
--- Comment #6 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 22:23 ---
Vlad, what can we do with IRA to make it choose a better regclass here? Maybe
do something similar to what MIPS does, changing IRA_COVER_CLASSES for i386
depending on target options?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzil
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 22:21 ---
This patch gives the correct error messages for comment #1, while avoiding the
testsuite failure of iso_c_binding_rename_1.f03:
Index: gcc/fortran/interface.c
=
--- Comment #11 from doko at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 22:21 ---
Subject: Bug 28050
Author: doko
Date: Mon Jun 22 22:21:17 2009
New Revision: 148819
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148819
Log:
gcc/
2009-06-22 Steven Bosscher
Matthias Klose
--- Comment #1 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 22:18 ---
Uros, this bug is from the pre-IRA times. Could you check if you still see
this problem, please?
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #12 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 22:17 ---
Three and a half year of nothing. Dead horse.
=> Closing. If something shows up, open a new bug report please.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 21:56 ---
The missing checks are due to the following code in interface.c
(compare_parameter):
if (formal->ts.type == BT_DERIVED
&& formal->ts.derived && formal->ts.derived->ts.is_iso_c
&& actual->ts.type == BT_DE
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 21:28 ---
Subject: Bug 37254
Author: janus
Date: Mon Jun 22 21:28:34 2009
New Revision: 148817
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148817
Log:
2009-06-22 Janus Weil
PR fortran/37254
* gf
--- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 21:08 ---
r148816 fixes comment #1 and #3.
The errors in comment #4 are justified, since subroutines and functions are
mixed.
So I think this can be closed if there are no further problems.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 21:02 ---
Subject: Bug 39850
Author: janus
Date: Mon Jun 22 21:02:19 2009
New Revision: 148816
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148816
Log:
2009-06-22 Janus Weil
PR fortran/37254
PR fo
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 21:02 ---
Subject: Bug 37254
Author: janus
Date: Mon Jun 22 21:02:19 2009
New Revision: 148816
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148816
Log:
2009-06-22 Janus Weil
PR fortran/37254
PR for
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-06-22 20:48
---
Ok, we are very far from having the parallel mode facilities correctly
uglified, but we could as well use __CHAR_BIT__...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34106
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 20:31 ---
FIXED on the trunk (4.5) with the patch of PR 40472 comment 19.
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #8 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2009-06-22 20:30
---
the revised patch tests ok, no helgrind errors from
std::string s;
s.erase();
s.erase(s.begin(), s.end());
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40518
--- Comment #2 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2009-06-22 20:25
---
Created an attachment (id=18049)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18049&action=view)
use BITS_PER_UNIT instead of hardcoded 8
additional patch to use BITS_PER_UNIT for lcas_t_bits
--
http:
--- Comment #16 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 20:24 ---
Subject: Bug 40472
Author: burnus
Date: Mon Jun 22 20:24:18 2009
New Revision: 148814
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148814
Log:
2009-06-22 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/40472
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 20:15 ---
Thomas, I think your patch does not help.
(In reply to comment #2)
> This patchlet avoids the ICE:
>gfc_array_size (source, &size);
> - if (mpz_get_si (size)*ncopies > gfc_option.flag_max_array_constructor)
> +
--- Comment #15 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 20:02 ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> Too quick. That should be: mpz_init_set_si or mpz_init_set_ui; the _init_ was
> missing.
>
Dang it! OK that's right. Can you commit that correction - I cannot do so
until Thursday.
Ch
--- Comment #14 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-06-22 19:50 ---
The patch in comments #12 and #13 fixes the problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40472
--- Comment #3 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-06-22 19:49 ---
I have tested the patch in comments pr40472#12 and pr40472#13 and it fixes the
failures in comment #0 and the failure reported in pr40472#9.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40520
--- Comment #2 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 19:28 ---
Confirmed.
Backtrace:
0 0xb7e574ab in __gmpz_get_si () from /usr/local/lib/libgmp.so.3
#1 0x08132738 in gfc_simplify_spread (source=0x8c370b8, dim_expr=0x8c37128,
ncopies_expr=0x8c37198) at ../../../gcc/trunk
--- Comment #9 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 18:57 ---
Right, now I can reproduce the problem and it indeed is introduced by the new
SRA commit. None of the fixes I have done so far deals with this one either. I
am investigating this further (but don't hold your breath,
--- Comment #7 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 18:25 ---
see the uxtbs instead of the ands, that is...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40487
--- Comment #6 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 18:25 ---
I get the same code with 4.5-today as the code of comment #5. I configured for
--target=arm-eabi. Should I configure differently to see the shifts instead of
ands?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
Between 20090612 (rev 148427) and 20090622 (rev 148784), stage2 dwarf2out.c
failed to compile:
In file included from /vol/gcc/src/gcc-dist/gcc/flags.h:27:0,
from /vol/gcc/src/gcc-dist/gcc/dwarf2out.c:65:
/vol/gcc/src/gcc-dist/gcc/real.h:83:13: error: size of array
5
eor r3, r3, r3, asl #1
and r0, r3, #255
bx lr
.size foo, .-foo
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 4.4.1 20090622 (prerelease) [gcc-4_4-branch
revision 148809]"
which isn't a whole lot better, is it...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40487
--- Comment #7 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-06-22 17:56
---
Jon, that is ;)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40518
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-06-22 17:56
---
Created an attachment (id=18048)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18048&action=view)
Updated
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40518
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-06-22 17:55
---
Jo, I think we need an additional hunk, to deal with s.erase(s.begin(),
s.end()). I'm attaching an updated draft...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40518
--- Comment #9 from christian dot joensson at gmail dot com 2009-06-22
17:37 ---
The PR was reported using a local build of binutils' daily snapshot of
20090609, and all comments from me was using that version of binutils.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40455
--- Comment #2 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 17:25 ---
Here's what the reghunt revealed:
* As of rev 148410, mainline ICEs building the 64-bit unwind-dw2-fde.o:
/vol/gcc/src/gcc-reghunt/libgcc/../gcc/unwind-dw2-fde.c:154:1: internal
compiler error: in dwarf2out_begin_epilog
--- Comment #8 from christian dot joensson at gmail dot com 2009-06-22
17:22 ---
Might be related to http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2009-06/msg00370.html ...
If I strip the here attached a.exe, I get a file that indeed runs...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40455
--- Comment #4 from krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 17:20 ---
Created an attachment (id=18047)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18047&action=view)
Initial Patch - not bootstrapped yet
I currently don't understand why this didn't occur earlier. Did become the
--- Comment #4 from rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 17:00
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Is this related to bug 39715?
>
Maybe.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40487
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfir
--- Comment #11 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 16:41 ---
IIUC comment #8, this bug depends on bug 29336.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 16:36 ---
Is this related to bug 39715?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40487
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 16:32 ---
Did that patch go in already?
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 16:29 ---
How is this different from bug 39837?
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 16:25 ---
Since this is inherently a heuristics issue, and the IRA heuristics result in
overall better code size according to Vlad, I would like to propose we close
this PR as WONTFIX. Would anyone object to that?
--
http:
--- Comment #6 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 16:21 ---
Is there anything in the tool chain that handles this right now (linker maybe)?
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #10 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 16:14 ---
Note that we usually add the name of the committer to the ChangeLog too, like
so:
2009-06-22 Steven Bosscher <...>
Matthias Klose <...>
etc.
But thanks for handling the patch. Fixed on trunk.
--
--- Comment #1 from drow at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 15:45 ---
Subject: Re: New: add a debug_privnames section
On Thu, Apr 09, 2009 at 11:58:59PM -, tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> In response to a request like "break function", gdb will currently
> search all objfile
--- Comment #4 from doko at ubuntu dot com 2009-06-22 15:35 ---
fixed in rev 148806.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40286
--- Comment #2 from drow at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 15:22 ---
I've confirmed that older GCC emits both .debug_frame and .eh_frame.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40521
--- Comment #1 from drow at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 15:20 ---
CC'ing some people who know about CFI for opinions on the best resolution. Do
we need a new gas option and/or CFI directive for this?
--
drow at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #9 from doko at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 15:18 ---
Subject: Bug 28050
Author: doko
Date: Mon Jun 22 15:18:38 2009
New Revision: 148804
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148804
Log:
gcc/
2009-06-22 Steven Bosscher
PR objc/28050
*
Put this in main.c and build it with a 4.4-branch compiler using recent
binutils:
int main ()
{
return 0;
}
Versions:
GNU assembler (GNU Binutils) 2.19.51.20090611
i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc (GCC) 4.4.1 20090611 (prerelease)
% i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -c main.c; objdump --wide -h main.o | grep ALLOC
--- Comment #1 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-06-22 14:55 ---
see pr40472.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40520
--- Comment #4 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2009-06-22 14:49
---
bug 14410 and also bug 5583 :)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14990
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-06-22 14:43
---
Indeed, is correct per the current C++ standard at least. I also remember to
have certainly closed similar issues in the past, but I'm too lazy to find one
to mark as duplicate ;)
--
paolo dot carlini at or
On Linux/ia32, revision 148775:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-06/msg00758.html
caused:
FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_simplify_1.f90 -O (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_simplify_1.f90 -O (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/intrinsic_spread_1.f90 -O0 (internal compiler
--- Comment #2 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2009-06-22 14:38
---
See http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#103
"For associative containers where the value type is the same as the key type,
both iterator and const_iterator are constant iterators. It is u
--- Comment #13 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 14:32 ---
> + else
> +mpz_set_si (size, 1);
Too quick. That should be: mpz_init_set_si or mpz_init_set_ui; the _init_ was
missing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40472
--- Comment #12 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 14:21 ---
Patch
Index: simplify.c
===
--- simplify.c (revision 148777)
+++ simplify.c (working copy)
@@ -5117,7 +5117,14 @@ gfc_simplify_spread (gfc_expr *sour
--- Comment #9 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-06-22 14:17 ---
The patch in comment #8 fixes the ICEs reported in comment #7 and #8.
> Yeah, the same happens for the examples in PR37254.
I also so it, but I preferred to report against this pr.
Thanks for the quick patch.
--
--- Comment #1 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 14:08 ---
The problem persists as of 20090622 (rev 148784). Starting a reghunt now.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40431
--- Comment #6 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 13:55 ---
Subject: Bug 40492
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Jun 22 13:55:41 2009
New Revision: 148797
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148797
Log:
2009-06-22 H.J. Lu
Backport from mainline:
2009-0
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-22 13:37 ---
Fixed.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #1 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 13:36 ---
Subject: Bug 40481
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Jun 22 13:36:37 2009
New Revision: 148795
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148795
Log:
2009-06-22 H.J. Lu
PR testsuite/40481
* gcc.dg/pl
--- Comment #5 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 13:05 ---
hence fixed.
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITI
--- Comment #11 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-06-22 12:56 ---
See also http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-06/msg01767.html for a lot
of related failures.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40472
--- Comment #4 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 12:43 ---
Subject: Bug 40463
Author: ramana
Date: Mon Jun 22 12:43:23 2009
New Revision: 148791
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148791
Log:
Fix target/40463
2009-06-22 Ramana Radhakrishnan
PR
--- Comment #6 from rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 12:37
---
Support for single-instruction return insns has been around a lot longer than
rtl-based epilogues, so there's no need to convert the thumb target to RTL
epilogues as a pre-requisite for fixing this. Someone simply
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-06-22 12:01
---
Great. In the meanwhile I did run the testsuite and everything is fine. Let's
wait a bit more, in case something trickier is noticed, and close the issue.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=405
--- Comment #3 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2009-06-22 11:58
---
That looks good. I didn't run the v3 testsuite, but it fixes the helgrind
errors in the test cases
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40518
> cat bug.i
void f(int i, int j, int k) {
if (i == 0) k = 0;
if (j == 0) __builtin_unreachable();
if (k == 0) __builtin_unreachable();
}
> gcc -O2 -ftracer bug.i
bug.i: In function f:
bug.i:5:1: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Using SVN revision 148787.
--
--- Comment #7 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 11:55 ---
Jerry's patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2009-06/msg00233.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40508
--- Comment #10 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 11:51 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> At revision 148777 (but not at r148732) [...] Segmentation fault
Does not segfault here, but I get with valgrind:
==23187== Use of uninitialised value of size 8
==23187==at 0x52A29C8:
--- Comment #3 from doko at ubuntu dot com 2009-06-22 11:20 ---
updated patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-06/msg01724.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40286
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-06-22 11:06
---
Created an attachment (id=18046)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18046&action=view)
Draft
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40518
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-06-22 11:05
---
Jon, thanks for clearly pointing out that warning: indeed, at that time I
noticed that in some cases we could overwrite the same values. Anyway, the very
simple attached draft seems then the way to go. Can you
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |paolo dot carlini at oracle
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 10:56 ---
Mine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned
--- Comment #5 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 10:54 ---
Subject: Bug 40492
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Jun 22 10:54:16 2009
New Revision: 148787
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148787
Log:
2009-06-22 Martin Jambor
PR tree-optimization/404
--- Comment #8 from MR dot Swami dot Reddy at nsc dot com 2009-06-22 10:47
---
Subject: Re: --verbose-asm option not list all
enbaled command line option flags
Thanks for the reply.
OK I will request the maintainer to do the same.
Thanks
Swami
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
--- Comment #7 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 10:30 ---
I'm not allowed to authorize or approve the change. You'd be better off
requesting for a review and someone to commit this for you on gcc-patches @
rather than in comments in bugzilla.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzi
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 10:28 ---
We don't have something better to print here - apart from which
likely would be even less useful.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40517
from http://etbe.coker.com.au/2009/06/22/valgrindhelgrind-and-stl-string
simplified test case:
#include
#include
void *do_work(void *)
{
std::string s;
s.erase();
return 0;
}
int main()
{
pthread_t tid[2];
pthread_create(&tid[0], NULL, do_work, NULL);
pthread_create(&
--- Comment #6 from MR dot Swami dot Reddy at nsc dot com 2009-06-22 10:26
---
Could you please review the patch and apply the same to gcc trunk?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40424
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40242
--- Comment #8 from d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com 2009-06-22
10:05 ---
This is probably the same bug: binutils 2.19.51.20090616 (build, host:
i686-pc-linux-gnu, target: i686-pc-mingw32), compiled with GCC 4.5.0 20090618.
GAS aborts when tries to assemble this instruction:
i
1 - 100 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
