--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-19 05:05 ---
Subject: Bug 44353
Author: pault
Date: Mon Jul 19 05:05:23 2010
New Revision: 162294
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162294
Log:
2010-07-19 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/44353
* mat
o...@lonkero:~/code$ gcc bug.c -Wall
bug.c: In function main:
bug.c:5: error: void value not ignored as it ought to be
bug.c:5: error: void value not ignored as it ought to be
bug.c:5: confused by earlier errors, bailing out
Preprocessed source stored into /tmp/ccoFNCjw.out file, please attach t
--- Comment #7 from dschlic1 at gmail dot com 2010-07-18 23:51 ---
Created an attachment (id=21248)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21248&action=view)
Script file to build arm cross compiler causes segmentation fault
The attached script file causes the compiler to ha
--- Comment #5 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2010-07-18 22:35 ---
Subject: Re: -fwhopr + ipa-sra misoptimize
sqlite
> IPA-SRA => Martin
Well, the trick is that IPA-SRA is run before LTO streaming, so it means that
it should not be affected
by -fwhopr at all (and linking resulting
--- Comment #7 from jason at redhat dot com 2010-07-18 22:33 ---
Subject: Re: [C++0x] std::is_constructible broken
for fundamental types.
On 07/17/2010 03:14 PM, paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com wrote:
> I attached a draft which fixes the original testcase as a SFINAE issue. Seems
--- Comment #30 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-07-18 22:22
---
(In reply to comment #24)
> Created an attachment (id=21243)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21243&action=view) [edit]
> Patch v4
>
> I found another potential bug in the interaction between th
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 22:19
---
Full regression test passed on IBM Power 5. I will submit patch for approval
this evening. Thanks for bug report and testing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44953
--- Comment #4 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 22:13 ---
Adding wrong-code keyword, as shown by the testcase in PR 44916
--
redi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #2 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 22:11 ---
Thanks, James, confirming as a dup
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 39415 ***
--
redi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 22:11 ---
*** Bug 44916 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
redi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #4 from ramiro dot polla at gmail dot com 2010-07-18 22:08
---
That won't work in this case. If I subtract anything from rsp inside the inline
asm, the local variable relative to f will no longer be valid. Notice where gcc
put it:
21: ff 54 24 f8 callq *-0x8
--- Comment #9 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-07-18 21:59 ---
> Created an attachment (id=21245)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21245&action=view) [edit]
> Proposed Patch
>
> Please test the attached patch.
make -k check-gfortran RUNTESTFLAGS="dg.exp=char4
--- Comment #2 from james dot dennett at gmail dot com 2010-07-18 21:39
---
44916 is a duplicate of this bug (and includes a hacky fix, but no automated
regression test).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39415
--- Comment #1 from james dot dennett at gmail dot com 2010-07-18 21:37
---
Thanks to Ian for reporting this for me (my buganizer account wasn't well at
the time).
This appears to duplicate bug 39415.
I have a hacky fix for this, adding a conversion to the correct target type
after th
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 21:22 ---
More like
if (TREE_CODE (*expr) == MEM_REF
&& TREE_OPERAND (*expr, 0) != ADDR_EXPR)
*expr = fold_build2 (MEM_REF, exp_type,
TREE_OPERAND (*expr, 0),
int
--- Comment #29 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2010-07-18
21:15 ---
Subject: Re: [4.6 regression] Revision 162270 failed to bootstrap
> David, this seems to be caused by a different revision. The postreload pass
> we're discussing here makes no changes to RTL on that tes
--- Comment #28 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 21:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=21247)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21247&action=view)
Minimally tested patch for the hppa problem
Seems like we're extending from the wrong mode. Does this fix it?
--- Comment #8 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 21:15 ---
Fixed in trunk and 4.5. Closing.
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 21:13
---
Fixed in trunk and 4.5. Closing.
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 21:12 ---
Fixed in trunk and 4.5. Closing.
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 21:10 ---
Created an attachment (id=21246)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21246&action=view)
prototype
sth like this, with the FIXME resolved (it's not clear which is the reference
we are replacing at eac
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 21:07
---
Created an attachment (id=21245)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21245&action=view)
Proposed Patch
Please test the attached patch. This patch cleans up pointer use and adds a
few snippets I m
--- Comment #27 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 21:00 ---
(In reply to comment #26)
> Subject: Re: [4.6 regression] Revision 162270 failed to bootstrap
>
> Doing a non bootstrap build, I see the following new fail:
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/950605-1.c execution, -O1
--- Comment #6 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-07-18 20:58 ---
Created an attachment (id=21244)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21244&action=view)
fix Linux kernel math emulation FP_FROM_INT macro
The bug is in the Linux kernel math-emu code. The _FP_FROM_INT ma
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 20:57 ---
Martin, can you have a look here? All this build_ref_for_offset should
now be very easy. But we need to have the original access tree that we
replace as well. The built access should simply be
fold_build2 (MEM_R
--- Comment #58 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 20:49
---
Subject: Bug 40011
Author: dfranke
Date: Sun Jul 18 20:49:30 2010
New Revision: 162287
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162287
Log:
gcc/fortran/:
2010-07-18 Daniel Franke
Paul
--- Comment #6 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 20:49 ---
Subject: Bug 30668
Author: dfranke
Date: Sun Jul 18 20:49:30 2010
New Revision: 162287
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162287
Log:
gcc/fortran/:
2010-07-18 Daniel Franke
Paul Th
--- Comment #12 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 20:49
---
Subject: Bug 31346
Author: dfranke
Date: Sun Jul 18 20:49:30 2010
New Revision: 162287
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162287
Log:
gcc/fortran/:
2010-07-18 Daniel Franke
Paul
--- Comment #7 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 20:49 ---
Subject: Bug 34260
Author: dfranke
Date: Sun Jul 18 20:49:30 2010
New Revision: 162287
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162287
Log:
gcc/fortran/:
2010-07-18 Daniel Franke
Paul Th
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 20:46 ---
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@
(note# 0 0 NOTE_INSN_DELETED)
(note# 0 0 [bb 2] NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK)
(note# 0 0 NOTE_INSN_FUNCTION_BEG)
-(insn:TI# 0 0 pr44971.c:22 (set (reg/f:SI 0 ax [orig:58 D. ] [58])
+(insn:TI# 0 0 pr
--- Comment #26 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2010-07-18
20:43 ---
Subject: Re: [4.6 regression] Revision 162270 failed to bootstrap
Doing a non bootstrap build, I see the following new fail:
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/950605-1.c execution, -O1
f:
.PROC
--- Comment #25 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 20:40 ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> And on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11 gcc-4.6 162277 in stage2:
> ../../../gcc/libgcc/../gcc/libgcc2.c:791:1: internal compiler error:
> Segmentatio
> n fault
If the latest patch does not fix this,
--- Comment #24 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 20:39 ---
Created an attachment (id=21243)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21243&action=view)
Patch v4
I found another potential bug in the interaction between the existing code and
the new one. Fixing th
--- Comment #23 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-07-18 20:34
---
(In reply to comment #19)
> Created an attachment (id=21242)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21242&action=view) [edit]
> Another patch
>
> I've managed to reproduce some differences with -g vs.
--- Comment #4 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 20:21 ---
IPA-SRA => Martin
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.6 regression] Revision |[4.6 Regression] Revision
|162270 failed 450.soplex
--- Comment #4 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-07-18 19:59 ---
It's caused by r160051:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-05/msg01110.html
--
mikpe at it dot uu dot se changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #22 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-07-18 19:53 ---
And on armv5tel-linux-gnueabi with gcc-4.6 r162277:
Comparing stages 2 and 3
warning: gcc/cc1-checksum.o differs
Bootstrap comparison failure!
gcc/tree-ssa.o differs
gcc/sel-sched-ir.o differs
make[2]: *** [compare] Err
--- Comment #21 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-07-18 19:03
---
(In reply to comment #19)
> Created an attachment (id=21242)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21242&action=view) [edit]
> Another patch
>
This patch passed the last failure. I will report any r
--- Comment #20 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-07-18 18:52
---
(In reply to comment #19)
> Created an attachment (id=21242)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21242&action=view) [edit]
> Another patch
I am testing it now.
> I've managed to reproduce some dif
--- Comment #1 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-07-18
18:48 ---
Note that this issue only occurs in darwin10 because of the introduction of ...
#if defined(__GNUC__) && (__GNUC__*10+__GNUC_MINOR__ >= 42) &&
!defined(__INTEL_COMPILER) && (TARGET_OS_MAC || TARGET_OS_EMBE
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 18:42 ---
Mine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned
The testcase...
Executing on host: /sw/src/fink.build/gcc45-4.5.1-1000/darwin_objdir/gcc/xgcc
-B/sw/src/fink.build/gcc45-4.5.1-1000/darwin_objdir/gcc/
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc45-4.5.1-1000/gcc-4.5.1/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/framework-1.c
-F. -S -o framework-1.s(timeout = 300)
In file included fr
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 18:39 ---
Confirmed.
We loose the call during expansion.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #19 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 18:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=21242)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21242&action=view)
Another patch
I've managed to reproduce some differences with -g vs. no-debug builds. This
patch fixes them fo
On Linux/ia32, revision 162270:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-07/msg00624.html
caused:
Running 450.soplex test base o3 default
450.soplex: copy 0 non-zero return code (exit code=0, signal=11)
Invalid run; unable to continue.
I used "-m32 -O3 -msse2 -mfpmath=sse -ffast-math -funroll-loo
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44979
On Linux/x86-64, revision 162270:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-07/msg00624.html
caused:
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/nest-stdar-1.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/nest-stdar-1.c execution, -O3 -g
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr44575.c execution, -O1
FAIL:
--- Comment #8 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-07-18
18:05 ---
Fixed at revision 162275.
--
howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-07-18 18:01 ---
It is caused by revision 139286:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2008-08/msg00848.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 17:51 ---
Mine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 17:50 ---
Mine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned
--- Comment #34 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 17:49
---
In particular we are now back to generating the very bogus
ivtmp.10_12 = (long unsigned int) &a[-1];
ivtmp.16_15 = (long unsigned int) &c[-1];
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|steven at gcc dot gnu dot |unassigned at gcc dot gnu
|org
--- Comment #7 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 17:40 ---
Ah, and since both r14 and r15 are initially copies of r12, they point to the
same memory area (modulo auto-increments/decrements). So indeed an alias thing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43494
--- Comment #6 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 17:29 ---
Smaller hand-changed assembly without new bundle (left aborts, right does not):
.global f1# .global f1#
.type f1#, @function .type f1#, @function
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 17:21 ---
It looks like a store is scheduled wrong.
Slightly reduced test case:
-- 8< #define vector
__attribute__((vector_size(16) ))
vector int f1(vector int t, int a)
{
((int*)&t)[
--- Comment #4 from John dot Tytgat at aaug dot net 2010-07-18 17:13
---
Created an attachment (id=21241)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21241&action=view)
Fix ICE in cancel_option() by repreventing a recursive call for Negative marked
option
--
http://gcc.gnu.
--- Comment #3 from John dot Tytgat at aaug dot net 2010-07-18 17:11
---
I'm updating my port for 4.6trunk and this gcc problem is still there. My
suggested patch in comment #1 is still applicable and attached it after having
brought up-to-date for trunk.
ChangeLog:
John Tytgat
*
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 16:16 ---
Subject: Bug 44353
Author: pault
Date: Sun Jul 18 16:15:43 2010
New Revision: 162286
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162286
Log:
2010-07-18 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/44353
* mat
--- Comment #2 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-07-18 16:07 ---
Not ARM-specific. The same failure occurs for i686/powerpc64/sparc64-linux.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44974
--- Comment #18 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-07-18 15:22
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> x86_64 failures are expected due to a backend bug, see the patch I sent today.
>
> HJ, any chance you could run make check on the stage1 compiler on ia64 to find
> a testcase?
>
New fa
--- Comment #17 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 15:20
---
And on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11 gcc-4.6 162277 in stage2:
/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/./gcc/xgcc -B/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/./gcc/
-B/opt/gnu64/gcc/g
cc-4.6.0/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/bin/
-B/opt/gnu64/gcc/gcc-4.6.0/hppa64-hp-hpux11.1
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfi
Consider the following test case:
type :: t1
type(xy),pointer :: c
end type t1
type, extends(t1) :: t2
end type
type, extends(t2) :: t3
end type
end
This is correctly rejected with:
type(xy),pointer :: c
1
Error: The pointer component 'c' of 't1' at (1) is a type t
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 13:31 ---
You need to in the inline asm subtract 128 from rsp, do the call, then add it
back.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #24 from dimhen at gmail dot com 2010-07-18 12:56 ---
is this the same problem? -- 'i*2 < 35' can't overflow
void
foo(char *ptr, unsigned size)
{
unsigned i;
for(i=0; i*2 < size && i*2 < 35; i++ ) {
*ptr++ = 0;
}
}
# gcc -Wunsafe-loop-optimizations -O3
--- Comment #5 from dimhen at gmail dot com 2010-07-18 12:40 ---
'functions as designed'
--
dimhen at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #16 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-07-18 12:31 ---
And on sparc64-linux with gcc-4.6 r162277:
Comparing stages 2 and 3
warning: gcc/cc1-checksum.o differs
Bootstrap comparison failure!
libdecnumber/decimal32.o differs
libdecnumber/decimal64.o differs
libdecnumber/decima
--- Comment #15 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-07-18 11:55 ---
And on powerpc64-linux with gcc-4.6 r162277:
Comparing stages 2 and 3
warning: gcc/cc1-checksum.o differs
Bootstrap comparison failure!
gcc/tree-ssa.o differs
libiberty/regex.o differs
make[2]: *** [compare] Error 1
Co
--- Comment #3 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 11:52 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-07/msg01432.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43797
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-07-18 10:44 ---
Silently fixed since at least revision 161009.
--
dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-07-18 10:22 ---
> Dominique, I think you're compiling the wrong code.
Yes, it was the invalid version in pr44869. With the code in comment #0 I also
get
Error: 'add' at (1) is not a member of the 'test_suite' structure
without ICE
--- Comment #14 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-07-18 09:57 ---
gcc-4.6 r162277 bootstrap failure on i686-linux:
Comparing stages 2 and 3
warning: gcc/cc1-checksum.o differs
Bootstrap comparison failure!
gcc/dwarf2out.o differs
gcc/reg-stack.o differs
gcc/reload.o differs
gcc/recog.
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 09:23 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> At revision 162276, I get
>
> pr44868.f90:245.24:
>
> tst_case => self%list(i)
> 1
> Error: Pointer assignment target is neither TARGET nor POINTER at (1
--- Comment #1 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-07-18 09:09 ---
I see the same with gcc-4.6 -O1 built natively on armv5tel-linux-gnueabi. With
-O0/-O2/-Os or 4.5/4.4 -O1 foo1() calls _Exit() as it should. Thus a
regression.
--
mikpe at it dot uu dot se changed:
What
--- Comment #2 from aj at member dot fsf dot org 2010-07-18 08:24 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Looks like a bug in antlr3.
>
Yes, it seems that something was wrong with my build configuration. Sorry!
--
aj at member dot fsf dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 07:09 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > This fixes it and regtests.
> > + if (array->expr_type != EXPR_VARIABLE && array->expr_type !=
> > EXPR_FUNCTION)
>
> The patch looks OK, but actually I fail
79 matches
Mail list logo
