--- Comment #12 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-09-02 06:05 ---
Created an attachment (id=21652)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21652&action=view)
preprocessed source, fails with valgrind on linux
A non-sse4 sse2 capable host (core2 class) is needed to trigger va
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2010-09-02 05:55 ---
Subject: Re: r163660 ICEs gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/sprintf-chk.c
compilation, -Os at -m32
On Sep 1, 2010, at 10:47 PM, "ubizjak at gmail dot com"
wrote:
>
>
> --- Comment #10 from ubizjak at gmail dot com
On Sep 1, 2010, at 10:47 PM, "ubizjak at gmail dot com" > wrote:
--- Comment #10 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-09-02 05:47
---
(In reply to comment #8)
Since this doesn't backtrace in gdb, I recompiled dwarf2out.c with
the patch...
You should use bigger hammer.
Try va
--- Comment #10 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-09-02 05:47 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Since this doesn't backtrace in gdb, I recompiled dwarf2out.c with the
> patch...
You should use bigger hammer.
Try valgrind using following procedure:
a) Create a preprocessed source
"~
--- Comment #9 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-02
05:10 ---
Note that in current gcc trunk (r163747) with...
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-08/msg01916.html
and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21650
the frequency of the test case ICEing th
--- Comment #8 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-02 05:05 ---
Subject: Bug 45476
Author: uros
Date: Thu Sep 2 05:05:01 2010
New Revision: 163756
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=163756
Log:
PR target/45476
* config/i386/freebsd.h (LIBGCC2_HA
--- Comment #8 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-02
05:05 ---
At r163660, the reduced test case (of just the test3 subroutine of
sprint-chk.c) triggers the compiler ICE at high frequency on
x86-apple-darwin10...
/Users/howarth/darwin_objdir/gcc/xgcc -B/Users/howarth/
--- Comment #7 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-02
04:59 ---
Created an attachment (id=21651)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21651&action=view)
preprocessed source of reduced failing test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4
--- Comment #1 from tadhunt at gmail dot com 2010-09-02 03:42 ---
Same behavior on 4.4.3 & 4.4.1 (same host, target & build)
Forgot to mention:
gcc version 4.4.3 (Ubuntu 4.4.3-4ubuntu5)
gcc version 4.4.1 (Ubuntu 4.4.1-4ubuntu9)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4549
When the first use of an uninitialized variable is inside a loop, no warning is
generated when -Wuninitialized is turned on.
int
main(void)
{
int len, i;
for(i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
printf("%d\n", len);// no warning!
len = 10;
}
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-02 01:19
---
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=posix+thread+cancel+C%2B%2B+exceptions
the third link is an interesting news group entry.
http://udrepper.livejournal.com/21541.html
etc.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=
--- Comment #7 from mikedalpee at enginsol dot com 2010-09-02 01:16 ---
Ah, ok, that makes good sense. Thanks for the clarification.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45481
--- Comment #9 from mikedalpee at enginsol dot com 2010-09-02 01:13 ---
That fix didn't change the behaviour one bit for me - was there more to it than
just moving the two lines from where they were to the exception handler? Also,
as I am new to this venue, could you please tell me wher
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-02 00:44 ---
Doing:
catch (int i)
{
Guard g(ioSync);
cout << "Caught " << i << endl << flush;
sched_yield();
pthread_testcancel();
}
Fixes
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-02 00:30 ---
Related to PR 21385.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45492
With trunk G++:
$ ~/gcc/bin/g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 4.6.0 20100901 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
$ cat fdc.cc
--- Comment #6 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-02 00:24 ---
This is standard-conformant behavior.
15.3/15: "The currently handled exception is rethrown if control reaches the
end of a handler of the function-try-block of a constructor or destructor."
The rationale for this is
--- Comment #17 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-09-02 00:13
---
No.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44963
--- Comment #16 from fang at csl dot cornell dot edu 2010-09-02 00:08
---
(In reply to comment #15)
> From now on I will not apply *any* patch not fixing extremely serious
> regressions to the 4.4.x branch.
Is 'rejects-valid' serious enough?
(This compiles with earlier versions.)
-
--- Comment #15 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-09-01 23:59
---
>From now on I will not apply *any* patch not fixing extremely serious
regressions to the 4.4.x branch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44963
--- Comment #14 from fang at csl dot cornell dot edu 2010-09-01 23:52
---
I also ran into this problem with std::back_insert_iterator of vector on
gcc-4.4.4's libstdc++ (in C++0x mode).
Any chance of a 4.4.5 backport, or is the 4.5.x target final?
--
fang at csl dot cornell dot ed
--- Comment #6 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01
23:21 ---
I should also note that sometimes the test in comment 5 does produce identical
code between two instances of executing the compile command whereas other times
I get a crash...
/Users/howarth/darwin_objdir/
--- Comment #5 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01
23:17 ---
The code generate IS random. I repeatedly execute...
/Users/howarth/darwin_objdir/gcc/xgcc -B/Users/howarth/darwin_objdir/gcc/
/Users/howarth/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/sprintf-chk.c
--- Comment #4 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01
23:11 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
>
> I think I can prove that my patch doesn't affect code generation, except
> possibly on the SPARC, so I'm a little skeptical about your diagnosis. Are
> you
> sure it's not r1
Executing on host: /test/gnu/gcc/objdir/gcc/xgcc -B/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/gcc/
-
O0 -O2 -Wuninitialized -c -o pr45085.o
/test/gnu/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-
torture/compile/pr45085.c(timeout = 300)
/test/gnu/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr45085.c: In function
'fn
9':
/test/g
--- Comment #12 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-09-01 23:00
---
Done.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Statu
--- Comment #11 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 22:58 ---
Subject: Bug 45488
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Sep 1 22:58:15 2010
New Revision: 163747
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=163747
Log:
2010-09-01 Christopher Yeleighton
Paolo Carlini
--- Comment #10 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 22:58 ---
Subject: Bug 45488
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Sep 1 22:58:05 2010
New Revision: 163746
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=163746
Log:
2010-09-01 Christopher Yeleighton
Paolo Carlini
--- Comment #9 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-09-01 22:49
---
We are already well beyond the size of change which is not fixing any real bug
and applied without a Copyright Assignment on file. If you are interested in
enhancing the library, please file one and then start
--- Comment #8 from giecrilj at stegny dot 2a dot pl 2010-09-01 22:42
---
(In reply to comment #5)
> We are not adding testcases here, because a forward iterator must be default
> constructible.
On the other hand, unless we are talking concepts and forcing, the standard
library is not
--- Comment #7 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-09-01 22:42
---
Doesn't always work with proxy iterators.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45488
--- Comment #6 from giecrilj at stegny dot 2a dot pl 2010-09-01 22:39
---
BTW, why is this implementation so repetitive?
What would be wrong with saying
lower_bound (a_, b_, c_) := lower_bound (a, b, c, less ())?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45488
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-09-01 22:37
---
We are not adding testcases here, because a forward iterator must be default
constructible.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45488
--- Comment #4 from giecrilj at stegny dot 2a dot pl 2010-09-01 22:34
---
== Test case ==
#include
#include
namespace BUG45488 {
class my_iter:
public std:: iterator
{ private: typedef my_iter ref;
private: pointer m_ptr;
public: typedef std:: less compare;
publi
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2010-09-01
22:11 ---
Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] FAIL:
tr1/5_numerical_facilities/special_functions/01_assoc_laguerre/check
_nan.cc
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010, jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
>
> --- Co
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-09-01 22:09
---
Ok, I'll do it, for equal_range too, and __half can also be moved inside the
loop.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 21:37 ---
Not to mention it is accepted with -std=c++0x as local types in C++0x can be
now template arguments.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45490
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 21:36 ---
On the trunk we get:
t.cc: In function âvoid foo()â:
t.cc:9:39: error: no matching function for call to âdistance(foo()::my_iter,
foo()::my_iter)â
/home/apinski/local-gcc/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.6
#include
void foo (void)
{
class my_iter:
public std:: iterator
{ public: operator int * (void) const { return NULL; }};
std:: distance (my_iter (), my_iter ()); }
Compiling this code, you get:
error: no matching function for call to ‘distance(foo()::my_iter,
foo()::my_iter)’
This mes
--- Comment #40 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01
21:28 ---
(In reply to comment #39)
> Created an attachment (id=21650)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21650&action=view) [edit]
> Another patch
>
> Darwin needs 128bit stack alignment for -pg.
--- Comment #7 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 21:25 ---
Close as fixed (on the 4.6 trunk).
Thanks for the patch, Janus!
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 21:19 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Note: The following simple patch does *not* work but gives an ICE:
> test.f90:9:0: internal compiler error: in gfc_get_symbol_decl, at
> fortran/trans-decl.c:1055
It seems to work if one ad
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 21:05 ---
See thread at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2010-09/msg00044.html (+
previous/later emails) for the discussion.
Note: The following simple patch does *not* work but gives an ICE:
test.f90:9:0: internal compiler error
The following program fails because the function result in "f" is never
initialized. It should be default initialized, which works using other
compilers.
type A
integer, pointer:: p => null ()
integer:: i=3
end type A
type(A):: x
x=f()
if (associated(x%p) .or. x%i /= 3) call abor
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 20:57
---
> Original patch submitted with
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-08/msg00440.html.
I think I can prove that my patch doesn't affect code generation, except
possibly on the SPARC, so I'm a little skeptical
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-09-01 20:53
---
Granted, __middle is not used after the loop, thus moving the declaration
inside the loop seems a tad cleaner. But then we should do the change
consistently for both lower_bound overloads and for upper_bound. P
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 20:51 ---
Subject: Bug 44541
Author: janus
Date: Wed Sep 1 20:50:46 2010
New Revision: 163744
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=163744
Log:
2010-09-01 Janus Weil
PR fortran/44541
* clas
--- Comment #3 from fierevere at ya dot ru 2010-09-01 20:47 ---
In file included from
../../../../gcc-4.5.2pre-20100901-rev163742/libstdc++-v3/src/pool_allocator.cc:31:0:
/var/tmp/gccbuild/i586-sylvia-linux/libstdc++-v3/include/ext/pool_allocator.h:
In constructor '__gn
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-09-01 20:44
---
I do not understand: according to Table 74 *any* forward iterator is default
constructible, and C++0x isn't changing that, is even more explicit. Thus, I
don't see which problem you are trying to solve.
--
First of all, I understand that this is a requirement imposed by the Standard.
However, the requirement, in general, is valid only for iterators that do not
refer to any container. This is not the case with iterators useful in
algorithms; the default value of such an iterator has no meaning.
More
--- Comment #39 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-01 20:03
---
Created an attachment (id=21650)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21650&action=view)
Another patch
Darwin needs 128bit stack alignment for -pg.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
When compiling a program such as:
template
void foo(T, typename T::type c) {c.y();}
struct x {typedef int type;};
void f() {foo(x(), 3);}
GCC 4.5.0 (correctly) produces the error message:
foo.cpp: In function void foo(T, typename T::type) [with T = x, typename
T::type = int]:
foo.cpp:4:21:
--- Comment #38 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-01 19:49
---
Created an attachment (id=21649)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21649&action=view)
A patrch
Darwin needs 128bit stack boundary for all function calls. This
patch should fix nest.c.
--
ht
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 19:46 ---
Subject: Bug 45458
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Sep 1 19:46:21 2010
New Revision: 163743
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=163743
Log:
PR middle-end/45458
* bb-reorder.c (add_labels_an
--- Comment #3 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 19:29 ---
The handling of target options (the patch for bug 45475) is another
host-dependency in the bytecode stream.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #2 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01
19:26 ---
I am finding in current gcc trunk that these tests randomly pass and fail if
you repeat them enough times. This correlates with Richard Henderson
observation that the failures at r163660 looks like random m
I'm not sure whether to call this a new bug or not, because the error is very
similar to the existing bug 42159. However, the system I am on does not crash
for the code listed in that bug report. Also, the comments for that bug seem
to be indicating that the bug is specific to Snow Leopard, while
--- Comment #12 from yotambarnoy at gmail dot com 2010-09-01 18:35 ---
Right. Unfortunately
> typedef my_unaligned_aliasing_uint32 uint32
> __attribute__((aligned(1),may_alias));
>
> inline __attribute__((__always_inline__)) uint32 READ_UINT32(const void *ptr)
> {
> return *(const my
--- Comment #13 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 18:32 ---
Yeah, if the bug is still present on the trunk, it definitely should be fixed
on the trunk first, and whether it is actually backportable or not is to be
decided afterwards. We just happen to have a reproducer only f
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 18:25
---
(In reply to comment #10)
> typedef my_unaligned_aliasing_uint32 uint32
> __attribute__((aligned(1),may_alias));
>
> inline __attribute__((__always_inline__)) uint32 READ_UINT32(const void *ptr)
> {
> return *(c
--- Comment #7 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 18:06 ---
Subject: Bug 45476
Author: uros
Date: Wed Sep 1 18:06:02 2010
New Revision: 163741
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=163741
Log:
PR target/45476
* config/i386/cygming.h (LIBGCC2_HA
--- Comment #12 from vmakarov at redhat dot com 2010-09-01 18:06 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> (insn 1407 1405 1406 78
> /mnt/b1/src/linux/set64/arch/x86/include/asm/cmpxchg_32.h:72 (set (reg:SI 2
> cx)
> (mem/c:SI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 6 bp)
> (const_int -28 [0x
--- Comment #37 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01
18:01 ---
The nest.c failure doesn't occur with r163659 and gcc-pr45234-2.patch. So
PR36502v4.patch solves PR36502 but introduces a single regression in the gcc
testsuite.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bu
--- Comment #36 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01
17:45 ---
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/sprintf-chk.c compilation, -Os (internal
compiler error)
UNRESOLVED: gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/sprintf-chk.c execution, -Os
FAIL: gcc.dg/stack-usage-1.c scan-f
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 17:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=21648)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21648&action=view)
gcc46-pr45458.patch
Untested fix.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45458
--- Comment #4 from ak at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 17:04 ---
Subject: Bug 45475
Author: ak
Date: Wed Sep 1 17:03:56 2010
New Revision: 163740
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=163740
Log:
2010-09-01 Andi Kleen
PR lto/45475
* lto-streamer-i
--- Comment #2 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 16:58 ---
Fix applied at revision 163738.
--
ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-09-01 17:05 ---
Patch fixing it went in
--
andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #21 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 16:38 ---
*** Bug 45485 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 16:38 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 43706 ***
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-01 16:37 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > (In reply to comment #2)
> > > gcc-4.5 is still hardmasked downstream in Gentoo, then, I am unsure about
> > > installing it :-/, are you sure this bug could be
--
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
On a system with more than 8 cores the following program causes an interprocess
deadlock if started twice. This Problem has been observed on following systems:
2 IntelCPUs with 4 Cores per CPU; 2 IntelCPUs with 6 Cores per CPU; 1 IntelCPUs
with 6 Cores per CPU and Hyperthreading on (results in 12 v
--- Comment #1 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01
16:21 ---
Original patch submitted with
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-08/msg00440.html.
Test cases added with http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-08/msg00503.html.
--
howarth at nitro dot med dot uc d
w test
cases...
FAIL: gcc.dg/stack-usage-1.c scan-file foo\\t(256|264)\\tstatic
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/stack-usage-realign.c scan-file
main\\t48\\tdynamic,bounded
at -m32 as well. The sprintf error appears as...
/fink.build/gcc46-4.6.0-1000/gcc-4.6-20100901/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/built
--- Comment #4 from pacho at condmat1 dot ciencias dot uniovi dot es
2010-09-01 16:06 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > gcc-4.5 is still hardmasked downstream in Gentoo, then, I am unsure about
> > installing it :-/, are you sure this bug could be solved in 4.5
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-01 15:56 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> gcc-4.5 is still hardmasked downstream in Gentoo, then, I am unsure about
> installing it :-/, are you sure this bug could be solved in 4.5* ?
>
1. -march=native is changed in gcc 4.5.
2.
--- Comment #2 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2010-09-01 15:56 ---
Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] New LTO failures
> Confirmed. Obviously Honzas.
I had no commits in the specified range ;)
It seems that Andi's patch just disable whopr...
Honza
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug
--- Comment #2 from pacho at condmat1 dot ciencias dot uniovi dot es
2010-09-01 15:51 ---
gcc-4.5 is still hardmasked downstream in Gentoo, then, I am unsure about
installing it :-/, are you sure this bug could be solved in 4.5* ?
--
pacho at condmat1 dot ciencias dot uniovi dot es
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-01 15:40 ---
Please try gcc 4.5.2 and report what it does.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #35 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01
15:37 ---
(In reply to comment #34)
> Please do a proper regression test and report REAL regressions.
>
First we need to do a regression hunt in gcc trunk for the new
stack test case failures. It is impossible to
--- Comment #34 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-01 15:31
---
(In reply to comment #33)
> Created an attachment (id=21647)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21647&action=view) [edit]
> Don't redefine STACK_BOUNDARY and replace STACK_BOUNDARY with 128.
>
Pl
--- Comment #33 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01
15:30 ---
Created an attachment (id=21647)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21647&action=view)
Don't redefine STACK_BOUNDARY and replace STACK_BOUNDARY with 128.
--
howarth at nitro dot med do
--- Comment #11 from Lulin dot Song at gmail dot com 2010-09-01 15:29
---
(In reply to comment #10)
> (In reply to comment #9)
> > when the return value is character string, is it more intuitive to be
> >
> > requestdouble ( real(kind=8) & rlat, real(kind=8) &
> > rlng,character(kind=
--- Comment #32 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01
15:18 ---
(In reply to comment #31)
> I compared revision 163733 against revision 163733 + gcc-pr45234-2.patch
> with a cross compiler to x86_64-apple-darwin10.4.0. I saw no
> differences in .su files for gcc.dg/s
I checked what options are being chosen on one of my laptops following the
following instructions:
http://en.chys.info/2010/04/what-exactly-marchnative-means/
But, when reviewing used options I got:
$ ps af | grep cc1
18118 pts/1S+ 0:00 \_ grep --colour=auto cc1
18116 pts/0S+ 0:
--- Comment #1 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 14:54 ---
With r163667 and fixes for PR45444 applied I don't see issues with a v7-a
bootstrap. Can we see if a later version works for you ?
Ramana
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #31 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-01 14:51
---
(In reply to comment #30)
> With only gcc-pr45234-2.patch at r163712 , I am seeing the following
> regressions...
>
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/sprintf-chk.c compilation, -Os
> (internal
> compiler e
--- Comment #31 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2010-09-01 14:42 ---
Subject: Re: m32 lto produces non-relocatable subtraction
expression errors
> Original -m32 lto testsuite failures due to "non-relocatable subtraction
> expression" errors were made latent by the commit...
Hmm, th
> Original -m32 lto testsuite failures due to "non-relocatable subtraction
> expression" errors were made latent by the commit...
Hmm, this does not make much sense. What changed?
Honza
--- Comment #30 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01
14:38 ---
Original -m32 lto testsuite failures due to "non-relocatable subtraction
expression" errors were made latent by the commit...
Author: ak
Date: Tue Aug 31 16:58:46 2010
New Revision: 163680
URL: http://gc
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 14:36 ---
Using 4.6.0 20100901 (experimental) [trunk revision 163720], I still see:
gfortran -g alloc_comp_scalar_1.f90 && valgrind ./a.out
==14804== Invalid read of size 8
==14804==at 0x400B82
--- Comment #10 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 14:32 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> when the return value is character string, is it more intuitive to be
>
> requestdouble ( real(kind=8) & rlat, real(kind=8) &
> rlng,character(kind=1)[1:16] & __result, integer(kind=4) ._
--- Comment #1 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 14:26 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> Invalid read of size 1
I don't see this at r163721 (probably has been fixed by r159445).
Closing.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #9 from Lulin dot Song at gmail dot com 2010-09-01 14:22
---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > Main program is written in C. (see the following)
>
> I strongly suggest using the C Binding facility of Fortran 2003 instead of
> relying on the internals o
--- Comment #7 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-09-01 13:53
---
Likewise about ICC.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45479
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-09-01 13:49
---
For the record, building with ICC gives the same behavior of GCC. Let's ask
Jason' opinion about this.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it 2010-09-01 13:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=21646)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21646&action=view)
stage 2 libiberty/config.h
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45482
--- Comment #4 from sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it 2010-09-01 13:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=21645)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21645&action=view)
stage 2 libiberty/config.log
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45482
--- Comment #3 from sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it 2010-09-01 13:44 ---
Created an attachment (id=21644)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21644&action=view)
stage 1 libiberty/config.h
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45482
1 - 100 of 165 matches
Mail list logo
