The following (generated) code fails an assertion that checks that values
passed to a function are
received correctly. This fails for one value:
./gcc-4.1.1-ppc-cpp
gcc-4.1.1-ppc.c:140: failed assertion `yv7.mv7 == dp7.mv7'
Abort trap
The particular value is an unsigned bitfield as part of a
--- Additional Comments From lindig at cs dot uni-sb dot de 2005-08-11
08:10 ---
Created an attachment (id=9468)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9468&action=view)
Test case to reproduce the bug.
This is the same code that I included in the bug description.
--
htt
--- Additional Comments From irar at il dot ibm dot com 2005-08-11 08:14
---
Created an attachment (id=9469)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9469&action=view)
Patch
Yes, you are right, I should check the type of the data-ref (array type in the
first case). And instea
--- Additional Comments From lindig at cs dot uni-sb dot de 2005-08-11
08:15 ---
The bitfield mv7 is actually signed, not unsigned:
struct et7
{
struct dt7 { float iv7; unsigned short int jv7; } kv7;
float lv7[0];
signed mv7:9;
short int nv7;
double ov7;
float pv
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
08:30 ---
Now that you describe what is going wrong, I remember having this problem
earlier.
And even a fix. Ugh. Sorry for bothering you.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23297
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
08:32 ---
Created an attachment (id=9470)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9470&action=view)
patch fixing the problem
This is the patch which fixes the problem. Whether this situation can happen
w
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
08:59 ---
Subject: Bug 23289
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-11 08:59:22
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/i386: i
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
09:03 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
Bug 23153 depends on bug 23289, which changed state.
Bug 23289 Summary: [4.1 Regression] tail call optimization not performed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23289
What|Old Value |New Value
--- Additional Comments From jkj at sco dot com 2005-08-11 09:18 ---
On UnixWare I have a very similar failure. It seems to be -fPIC that's wreaking
the havoc. I have an almost identical test case, and it aborts with:
terminate called after throwing an instance of 'int'
terminate called r
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
09:24 ---
Subject: Bug 23219
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-11 09:23:57
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog name-lookup.c
gcc/
--- Additional Comments From nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
09:29 ---
Fixed mainline and 4.0
2005-08-11 Nathan Sidwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR c++/23219
* name-lookup.c (pushtag): Process the template type before
altering the identifier lookup fields.
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
09:31 ---
Subject: Bug 23219
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-11 09:31:22
Modified files:
gcc/cp : Change
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
10:30 ---
I cannot confirm your observations, instead, with -O2 timings are about the
same for 4.0.2 (20050728) and 4.1.0 (20050803), while with -O3 the 4.0.2
compiler seems to be about 2x faster even if the tree opti
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
10:44 ---
We inline all and get
void bar() ()
{
char & D.1777;
struct B * D.1776;
char & D.1773;
union C D.1772;
:
D.1772.p = &a;
D.1776_5 = D.1772.q;
D.1777_6 = &D.1776_5->d;
D.1773_7 = D.1777_6;
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
10:53 ---
With the patch we make
_Z3barv:
.LFB6:
pushl %ebp
.LCFI0:
movl%esp, %ebp
.LCFI1:
movb$0, a+1
popl%ebp
ret
out of it btw, which looks ok.
--
http://
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
11:01 ---
Couldn't DOM do this at jump threading time? I.e.
if (D.1286_3 > D.1287_5) goto ; else goto ;
:;
if (D.1286_3 == D.1287_5) goto ; else goto ;
during trying of threading through the jump at L1 merge th
--- Additional Comments From rmathew at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
11:38 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
>
>
> I cannot debug it further as I debugging with an optimized compiled.
cd $GCC_SRC_DIR/gcc/java
touch class.c parse.y
cd $GCC_BLD_DIR
make BOOT_CFLAGS='-g3 -O0' bubble
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
11:49 ---
Subject: Bug 23230
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-11 11:49:27
Modified files:
gcc/java : ChangeLog java-gimplify.c parse.y
L
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
12:01 ---
This is reg stack going funny so this is a target issue.
--
What|Removed |Added
Com
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |rtl-optimization
Keywords||wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
12:22 ---
Confirmed, This looks like an aliasing issue on the rtl level as -O2
-fno-strict-aliasing works.
This also worked on the 4.0 branch.
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
12:24 ---
Oh, and this is related to how we inline and then also inline the values of the
static const variables (with
-ftree-store-ccp).
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
12:34 ---
CSE1 is where the differenet is between -O2 and -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23324
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
12:47 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 20971 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
12:47 ---
*** Bug 23323 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
12:55 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] ICE in
first_vi_for_offset, at tree-ssa-structalias.c:2858
On Thu, 2005-08-11 at 10:44 +, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
13:04 ---
Subject: Bug 23230
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-11 13:03:51
Modified files:
gcc/java : Change
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
13:07 ---
4.1.0, 4.0.2 and 3.4.5 work with all -O0 -O1 -O2 -O3.
gcc (GCC) 3.3.3 (SuSE Linux) and gcc 3.3.6 abort with -O1.
I guess this is RESOLVED FIXED as far as gcc bugzilla is concerned?
--
What|
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
13:26 ---
Fixed in 4.0.2.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOL
--
Bug 18131 depends on bug 23230, which changed state.
Bug 23230 Summary: Wrong "this" used when call made to superclass which is also
superclass of enclosing class
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23230
What|Old Value |New Value
--
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
13:31 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
Platform : AMD 64bit Opteron.
O/S : Redhat linux Advanced Server 3.0
Kernel Version : 2.4.21-1.1931.2.393.ent
When we try to build gcc 3.4.3, the build fails giving the following error.
/usr/bin/ld: cannot open crti.o: No such file or directory
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make[2]: *** [32
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
13:33 ---
This is not a bug, it is trying to compile the 32bit multilib.
Use either --disable-multilib or install the 32bit libraries.
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
13:39 ---
Ok, patch finally has all latent problems fixed. Maybe we can consider this for
4.2.
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From dir at lanl dot gov 2005-08-11 13:41 ---
In pulling the routines out, I forgot to set n1=1 and zero the others, but it
does not affect the results. The rest of the warning messages indicate that
ftnchek does not know how to correctly handle a program that does
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
13:43 ---
Hmm, -fno-tree-loop-im fixes it for some reason
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23318
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
13:48 ---
Hmm, this worked in 4.0.0.
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|fortran
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
13:50 ---
Subject: Bug 20006
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-11 13:50:13
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog gfortran.h trans-decl.c tra
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
13:52 ---
This bug is fixed: we now have a framework for runtime warnings about standard
conformance, and we use it in this case.
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
13:53 ---
This seems like a bug in GNU make and should reported there instead as it could
cause other issues.
Seems like this should be turned off by default and have a way to turn it on
for these makefiles who
w
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
13:53 ---
Subject: Bug 20006
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-11 13:53:22
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: Change
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at eyesopen dot com
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
Version|4.0.1
--
What|Removed |Added
GCC build triplet|i686-pc-linux-gnu |
GCC host triplet|i686-pc-linux-gnu |
GCC target triplet|i686-pc-linux-gnu |
http://gc
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
14:15 ---
Is this fixed? profiledbootstrap works for me.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22471
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
14:16 ---
A real good question is why does debug mode need link once at all?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22205
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
14:18 ---
As I mentioned this effects more than AIX, though AIX's limits are lower than
most other OS's
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22143
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
14:20 ---
Subject: Bug 23250
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-11 14:20:25
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/arm : a
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
14:33 ---
Subject: Bug 23250
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-11 14:33:19
Modified files:
gcc: Change
--- Additional Comments From rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
14:35 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From roger at eyesopen dot com 2005-08-11 14:56
---
I'll take a look, but on first inspection this looks more like a register
allocation issue than a reg-stack problem. In the first (4.0) case, the
accumulator "result" is assigned a hard register in the loop, whi
The following testcase reduced from Kopete is miscompiled at -O2
struct Bar { bool is() const; int status() const; };
void foobar(void);
void foobar2(void);
void Foo(const Bar& x, const Bar& y)
{
const bool wasOffline = !x.is();
const bool isOffline = !y.is();
if (wasOffline || y.status()
--
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.0.2
Known to work||4.1.0
Target Milestone|--- |4.
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
15:29 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-08-11 15:43 ---
Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] Merge two "if"s if
one subsumes the other.
On Thu, 2005-08-11 at 11:01 +, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
15:51 ---
Oh, this is truely fixed for 4.1 and not a latent bug there.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23326
--- Additional Comments From trt at acm dot org 2005-08-11 15:52 ---
I think http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21643 is closely related.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15353
--- Additional Comments From rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
15:55 ---
The problem seems to be related to the fact that in this configuration the
compiler has decided that bar2 can tailcall foo2. In order to do this it then
has to swap x & y in place (well, with one temporary
GCC 4.0.0 and later optimize out struct assignments inappropriately when the
struct is used as an input to an asm(). For example, in:
struct {int a,b} args;
a
--
Summary: Improper removal of struct field assignments by
optimizer
Product: gcc
GCC 4.0.0 and later optimize out struct assignments inappropriately when the
struct is used as an input to an asm(). For example, in:
int foo(int a, int b) {
struct {int a,b} args;
args.a = a; args.b = b;
asm("..." : "" : "S" (&args));
}
the args.a and args.b assignments are optimize
--- Additional Comments From gcczilla at achurch dot org 2005-08-11 16:00
---
Sorry, accidentally submitted while typing--refiled as bug 23328.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From gcczilla at achurch dot org 2005-08-11 16:01
---
Created an attachment (id=9473)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9473&action=view)
Sample source file demonstrating bug
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23328
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
16:03 ---
Created an attachment (id=9474)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9474&action=view)
Patch which fixes but needs testing
This patch fixes the problem by continuing if we don't have a SSA_NA
--- Additional Comments From matz at suse dot de 2005-08-11 16:13 ---
I don't think this is actually fixed in reload1.c. Perhaps it is hidden
by other changes, so that the particular miscompilation doesn't happen
anymore, but even HEAD reload1.c contains the questionable double countin
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
16:48 ---
The code is invalid as you don't say you going to access memory.
either mark the asm as clobbers memory (which is not fully true) or use the
following replacement asm
(which works):
asm("mov 0(%%esi),%
--
Bug 22368 depends on bug 23315, which changed state.
Bug 23315 Summary: java produces mismatch types in MODIFY_EXPR, down cast
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23315
What|Old Value |New Value
---
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
16:50 ---
This was fixed by:
2005-08-10 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* java-gimplify.c (java_gimplify_modify_expr): Fix any pointer
type mismatches to make legal GIMPLE.
--
What
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
16:50 ---
Fixed by:
2005-08-10 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* java-gimplify.c (java_gimplify_modify_expr): Fix any pointer
type mismatches to make legal GIMPLE.
--
What|Removed
--
Bug 22368 depends on bug 23314, which changed state.
Bug 23314 Summary: java produces mismatch types in MODIFY_EXPR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23314
What|Old Value |New Value
--
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
16:56 ---
Subject: Bug 5
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-11 16:56:33
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/alpha:
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11 16:59
---
Clarification to comment #18; the newly-enabled-for-all-targets try-catch-8.m
(PR 23306) fails (so there was *one* failure in the objc testsuite at the time
the above commit was made).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/b
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11 16:59
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-08-11
17:05 ---
Bernd, do you believe this is taken care of by the reload branch?
--
What|Removed |Added
The hack in may_propagate_copy:
/* FIXME. GIMPLE is allowing pointer assignments and comparisons of
pointers that have different alias sets. This means that these
pointers will have different memory tags associated to them.
If we allow copy propagation in these cases, statements
--
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO||23329
nThis||
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
17:06 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Note I think I already fixed the DOM problem in PR 22335.
And now the java front-end bug has been fixed, maybe I should go ahead and test
a patch to remove
the hack from may_pro
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn|22368 |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23329
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||22368
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23329
FIXME from passes.c:
/* FIXME: SRA may generate arbitrary gimple code, exposing new
aliased and call-clobbered variables. As mentioned below,
pass_may_alias should be a TODO item. */
/* FIXME: May alias should a TODO but for 4.0.0,
we add may_alias right after fold builtins
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at developer dot classpath dot org
2005-08-11 17:11 ---
Subject: Bug 23238
CVSROOT:/cvsroot/classpath
Module name:classpath
Branch:
Changes by: Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/08/11 16:40:53
Modified files:
.
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
17:12 ---
Subject: Bug 23312
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-11 17:12:31
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog gimplify.c
Log message:
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-08-11
17:13 ---
I don't think the hack should be removed until a verifier is committed,
otherwise we could still get wrong code for other yet-to-be-fixed cases.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23329
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11 17:16
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
/* We can get here for out-of-range string constant accesses,
such as "_"[3]. Bail out of the entire substitution search
and arrange for the entire statement to be replaced by a
call to __builtin_trap. In all likelihood this will all be
constant-folded away, bu
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
17:20 ---
I think the FIXME in tree-ssa-operands.c is the issue here:
/* FIXME - if we have better information from the static vars
analysis, we need to make the cache call site specific. This way
we can
static void
tree_gen_const_delta_profiler (histogram_value value ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
unsigned tag ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
unsigned base ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
{
/* FIXME implement this. */
#ifdef ENABLE_CHECKING
internal_error ("unimplemented
testcase:
class a
{
virtual void f() = 0L;
};
See FIXME in parse.c:
/* FIXME: Unfortunately, this will accept `0L' and `0x00' as well.
We need to get information from the lexer about how the number
was spelled in order to fix this problem. */
return integer_zero_node;
--
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-08-11 17:29 ---
Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] Merge two "if"s if
one subsumes the other.
On Thu, 2005-08-11 at 15:52 +, trt at acm dot org wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From trt at acm dot org 2005-08-11 15:52 ---
--- Additional Comments From janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11 17:29
---
Mainline GCC built last night successfully compiles and runs the SPEC CPU2000
tests that failed earlier. If anyone cares I can find out which patch fixed
it, otherwise we can just close this as magically fixe
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
17:31 ---
This was most likely fixed by the following patches:
2005-07-28 Jan Hubicka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Makefile.in (rtl-profile.o): Kill all traces of it.
2005-08-03 Jan Hubicka <[EMAIL P
coverage.c: /* FIXME: use build_constructor directly. */
coverage.c: /* FIXME: use build_constructor directly. */
coverage.c: /* FIXME: use build_constructor directly. */
coverage.c: /* FIXME: use build_constructor directly. */
coverage.c: /* FIXME: use build_constructor directly. */
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen
dot de 2005-08-11 17:43 ---
I'll do that. Though
+ /* If we don't have , then we cannot
+optimize this case. */
+ if ((cond_code == NE_EXPR || cond_code == EQ_EXPR)
+
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2005-08-11
17:45 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] Wrong code from forwprop
On Aug 11, 2005, at 1:43 PM, rguenth at tat dot physik dot
uni-tuebingen dot de wrote:
> because else we might get f.i. LE_EXPR passing through?
The .t82.uncprop dump looks like this:
:;
D.15800_45 = *params_11;
__nptr_47 = D.15800_45;
D.15802_50 = __strtol_internal (__nptr_47, 0B, 10, 0);
mult_55 = mult_1 * D.15802_50;
goto ();
:;
D.15800_29 = *params_11;
__nptr_31 = D.15800_29;
D.15807_34 = __strtol_internal (__nptr_31,
--- Additional Comments From dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu
2005-08-11 17:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=9475)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9475&action=view)
Preprocessed code that shows the problem
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
17:56 ---
TER should have done that ...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23335
--- Additional Comments From belyshev at depni dot sinp dot msu dot ru
2005-08-11 18:05 ---
// self-contained C++ testcase, compile with -O2
extern "C" void abort (void);
int j;
void foo (bool x, bool y)
{
if (!x)
j = 0;
if (!x == y)
j = 1;
}
int main (void)
{
foo (1, 1
1 - 100 of 171 matches
Mail list logo
