--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19
02:40 ---
/* Something went wrong - thumb_compute_save_reg_mask()
should have arranged for a suitable register to be pushed. */
gcc_unreachable ();
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23473
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19
02:53 ---
Seems like it was caused by:
PR target/23355
* arm.c (thumb_compute_save_reg_mask): Use similar logic to
arm_compure_save_reg0_reg12_mask to determine when the PIC register
m
--- Additional Comments From kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19 03:11
---
In fact, reverting Richard Earnshaw's patch
2005-08-15 Richard Earnshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR target/23355
* arm.c (thumb_compute_save_reg_mask): Use similar logic to
arm_compure_sa
--- Additional Comments From amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2005-08-19
03:21 ---
Confirmed
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |amodra at bigpond dot net
|dot org |dot au
Status|NEW
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
Version|4.0.1 |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21506
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19
04:07 ---
Does this work now?
I thought I saw that it does.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21506
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19
04:09 ---
Yes it does, this is a dup of bug 21984.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21984 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19
04:09 ---
*** Bug 21506 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23458
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19
04:21 ---
Reducing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23435
--- Additional Comments From phython at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19
04:41 ---
ia64-linux as well. These tests seem to have been failing for a while on mmix.
See pr19747.
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19
05:11 ---
Confirmed, reduced testcase:
struct statfs {
int f_bsize;
};
struct super_block {
unsigned long s_blocksize;
};
struct nfs_fsinfo {
unsigned long long bsize;
};
int statfs (struct nfs_fsinfo *);
int nf
--
What|Removed |Added
GCC target triplet|m68k-* |m68k-rtems
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19421
--
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22049
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19
05:41 ---
Fixed on the mainline, will apply to the 4.0 branch later today (after class
around 12pm EDT).
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19
05:41 ---
Subject: Bug 20624
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-19 05:41:14
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog gimple-low.c
gcc/t
Testcase:
int f(int t)
{
int i;
if(t)
for(i = 0 ;i<10;i++)
;
else
return 2;
return 1;
}
in the tree dump:
:
if (t_3 != 0) goto ; else goto ;
Invalid sum of incoming frequencies 1100, should be 1
# i_6 = PHI <0(0)>;
:;
i_8 = i_6 + 1;
Invalid sum of incomi
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19
06:01 ---
I should note I found this while looking into PR 23358.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23475
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19
06:01 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
--- Additional Comments From snambi at gmail dot com 2005-08-19 06:17
---
some more analysis of the problem.
looks like this bug has been introduced in gcj 4.0.1
it works correctly in gcj 3.3.3 and javac 1.4.2, ie it gives an error while
compiling. please look below, to see the messages
Testcase:
int h(int);
static inline int f(int t, const int i)
{
_Bool a = i < t;
if (a)
return h(t);
return 9;
}
int g(int t)
{
return f(t, 0x7FFF);
}
Compile with -O2 -fno-tree-copy-prop, and you will get an ICE:
t.c: In function g:
t.c:12: internal compiler error: in remove_r
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19
06:19 ---
Honza and Diego, this is the VRP bug which Honza was talking about which he
found working on his
SSA based inliner.
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19
06:24 ---
Ignore the comment about fold, copy prop is doing its job.
Also here is a testcase which can be repduced with a simple -O2 so this is
definitely a regression now
and not just a latent bug waiting to be ex
101 - 126 of 126 matches
Mail list logo
