--- Comment #18 from pluto at agmk dot net 2007-08-05 08:02 ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> Subject: Re: gcc 4.2.0 compiled vanilla kernel
> 2.4.34.5 crashes when VIA C3 optimized -march=c3
>
> According to pluto at agmk dot net:
> > > but who's bug is it?
> >
> > it's a kernel bug e
$ cat ffs.c
int idx( unsigned mask )
{
return __builtin_ffs( mask ) - 1;
}
gcc-4.3.0-20070712:
idx:bsfl%edi, %eax
movl$-1, %edx
cmove %edx, %eax
ret
gcc-4.2.2-20070802 produces worse code:
idx:bsfl%edi, %edi
movl$-1, %eax
--- Comment #7 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-05 10:18
---
Subject: Bug 32979
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Sun Aug 5 10:18:38 2007
New Revision: 127224
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=127224
Log:
PR fortran/32979
* intrinsic.h (gfc_che
--- Comment #8 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-05 10:36
---
Fixed.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSI
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-05 10:39
---
The more I think about it, the surer I am that this isn't going to work.
Discussing it on IRC, nobody had ideas to circumvent the problem. Closing as
INVALID.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-05 12:02
---
Patch submitted for review:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-08/msg00269.html
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from cato at df dot lth dot se 2007-08-05 13:12 ---
Subject: Re: Incorrect rounding generated for NINT
On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> Well, we'll see if I broke any non-C99 target :)
Yes, you did. :)
NetBSD does not have lroundl (and
--- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-05 13:42
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> It requires
> creating a call to a va_arg function in the front-end, which I would need to
> research because I've never done that.
Well, it took more time than I thought, but I did my
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
uname -a:
Linux ubuntu 2.6.20-16-generic #2 SMP Thu Jun 7 19:00:28 UTC 2007 x86_64
GNU/Linux
gcc -v:
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,objc,obj-c++,treelang --prefix=/usr
--enable-shared --with-system-zlib --libexecdir=/usr/lib
--without
--- Comment #1 from vgeddes at gnome dot org 2007-08-05 13:56 ---
Created an attachment (id=14025)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14025&action=view)
IObject.mi
Preprocessed file for IObject.m
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32995
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-05 14:06
---
Created an attachment (id=14026)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14026&action=view)
Patch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31270
--- Comment #19 from w at 1wt dot eu 2007-08-05 15:39 ---
Reproduced with trivial code. The reason is very simple : The asm code is
emitted in the .data section, because due to the -fno-unit-at-a-time argument,
the "interrupts" array is declared first and sets the current section to .dat
--- Comment #20 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-08-05 16:05 ---
Nothing of this is the fault of the compiler anyway.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pcarlini at suse dot de
|dot org |
In file included from
/home/topic/Desktop/gsoc/work/build-gcc/./gcc/include-fixed/features.h:354,
from /usr/include/stdio.h:28,
from ../../../../../gcc/libgcc/../gcc/tsystem.h:90,
from ../../../../../gcc/libgcc/../gcc/libgcc2.c:33:
/usr/include/gnu
--- Comment #1 from robilad at kaffe dot org 2007-08-05 17:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=14027)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14027&action=view)
build log of the bootstrap failure
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32996
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-08-05 18:03 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 29196 ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-08-05 18:03 ---
*** Bug 32996 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
from /home/topic/Desktop/gsoc/work/build-gcc/./gcc/specs
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../../gcc/configure
--prefix=/home/topic/Desktop/gsoc/work/gcc-bin --enable-java-maintainer-mode
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.3.0 20070805 (experimental)
/home/topic/Desktop/gsoc/work/buil
Code like:
struct A {
struct B {};
typedef int B;
};
does not cause an error or even a warning (even if the type A::B is used
later), it seems like the typedef is silently ignored. It used to be detected
by g++-2.95 and g++-3.3 but not since 3.4.
--
Summary: duplicate nested
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-05 19:37 ---
This is not the business of a compiler to detect all and every programming
mismatch. It can detect some but not all. This is one which you need huge
dataflow analysis and whole program to detect this problem.
Thi
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-05 19:38 ---
This is most likely my fault.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-05 19:46 ---
*** Bug 32994 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-05 19:46 ---
Yes because this was fixed for 4.3.0 by PR 32433 (which is explictly asking for
this change :) ).
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 32433 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
W
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-05 19:50 ---
First if gdb is throwing an internal error, then there is a bug in gdb. Now if
you can prove somehow gcc's debug info is broken, then GCC has a bug. But
until we get a testcase, it is hard to say anything really.
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-05 20:57 ---
Reduced testcase:
enum zone_type {
ZONE_DMA,
ZONE_NORMAL,
ZONE_MOVABLE,
MAX_NR_ZONES
};
static unsigned long arch_zone_lowest_possible_pfn[MAX_NR_ZONES];
static unsigned long arch_zone_highest_possible_pfn[MA
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-05 21:00 ---
Patch which I am testing:
Index: tree.c
===
--- tree.c (revision 127225)
+++ tree.c (working copy)
@@ -3077,7 +3077,7 @@ build2_stat (enum tre
./xgcc -B ./ -frecord-gcc-switches -D_GNU_SOURCE -O2 a.c -S
gives me:
.section.GCC.command.line,"MS",@progbits,1
.ascii "-iprefix /usr/src/gcc/obj/gcc/../lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linu"
.ascii "x-gnu/4.3.0/"
.zero 1
.ascii "-isystem ./include"
--- Comment #11 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-05 22:05
---
Index: intrinsics/c99_functions.c
===
--- intrinsics/c99_functions.c (revision 127224)
+++ intrinsics/c99_functions.c (working copy)
@@ -500,8 +50
--- Comment #12 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-05 22:14
---
Subject: Bug 31202
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Sun Aug 5 22:14:34 2007
New Revision: 127227
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=127227
Log:
2007-08-05 Francois-Xavier Coudert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #34 from sandra at codesourcery dot com 2007-08-05 22:39
---
It is possible that this patch on mainline has added at least some of the
missing support for MIPS16.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-08/msg00057.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-05 23:39
---
Subject: Bug 31612
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Sun Aug 5 23:39:05 2007
New Revision: 127228
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=127228
Log:
PR fortran/31612
* invoke.texi: Adjust docu
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-05 23:39
---
Fixed.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSI
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31612
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-06 03:24 ---
Subject: Bug 32988
Author: pinskia
Date: Mon Aug 6 03:24:19 2007
New Revision: 127237
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=127237
Log:
2008-08-05 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR mi
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-06 03:24 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-06 03:47 ---
Testing this patch right now (a fixed up version really, there is a typo, the
last arg0 should be arg1).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32796
For a long time I've filed many test reports and they have a format similar to
this:
=== gcc tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/2804-1.c -O0 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20050316-2.c execution, -O0
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-06 04:26 ---
may_alias-2.c is xfail'ed on the 4.2 branch so you will not see a FAIL on the
branch.
This is invalid, there is no bug here except in you not understanding what is
going on here.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot or
--- Comment #6 from rob1weld at aol dot com 2007-08-06 04:27 ---
Thanks DJ. That only leaves this in gcc-4_3-trunk/libiberty/configure.ac :
(Line 360):
# These are neither executed nor required, but they help keep
# autoheader happy without adding a bunch of text to acconfig.h.
if test
linuxthing$g++ -v
Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/3.4.6/specs
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man
--infodir=/usr/share/info --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix
--disable-checking --with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit
--disable-libunwind-exce
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-06 04:56 ---
If I add a check for errors:
#include
using namespace std;
int main() {
cout
<< "Input in hex two integers x and y." << endl;
int x, y;
if(!cin)
cout << "error" << endl;
cin >> hex >> x >> y;
if(!cin)
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-06 04:59 ---
No this is expected behavior as 0x < 0x7FFF for signed integers so
there is an error that is expected.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Ad
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-06 05:00
---
Fixed so closing.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Sta
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-06 05:07 ---
This is a front-end bug.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from rob1weld at aol dot com 2007-08-06 05:10 ---
Why do the other reports show no "FAIL" lines and no line like "# of unexpected
failures 122" ? Was the "C" compiler _perfect_ yesterday?
You may need to fix this again:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32783#
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-06 05:20 ---
> Why do the other reports show no "FAIL" lines and no line like "# of
> unexpected
> failures 122" ? Was the "C" compiler _perfect_ yesterday?
If there are no failures, it will not have a line about unexpected fai
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-06 05:12 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 4205 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-06 05:12
---
*** Bug 32993 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #17 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-06 05:52
---
Reconfirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|R
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-06 05:58 ---
Yes this does cause some of PR 28690.
Anyways, mine.
A patch for this was posted at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-08/msg6.html
I need to update it for the comments still.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #13 from gianni at mariani dot ws 2007-08-06 06:26 ---
This seems like a serious bug and it has been around for 6 years and there has
been a patch to fix this as noted by Gaby.
Is someone of the opinion that this should not be fixed ?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show
--- Comment #8 from rob1weld at aol dot com 2007-08-06 06:44 ---
GCC 4.2.2 20070804 is able to compile newer kernels as is 4.2.1 20070628. I
guess 4.3 and 4.1 are the only series lacking this ability.
I am not allowed to change the "Summary:" to add "[4.3 Regression]" to the
begining s
54 matches
Mail list logo
