--- Comment #6 from debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org 2007-09-25
07:15 ---
comparing 4.2 20070902 with 4.2 20070925 + plus the proposed patch, I see two
regressions:
FAIL: g++.dg/ext/vla4.C (test for errors, line 10)
FAIL: g++.dg/other/unused1.C scan-assembler
(string|ascii?)z
-25
> 07:15 ---
> comparing 4.2 20070902 with 4.2 20070925 + plus the proposed patch, I see two
> regressions:
>
> FAIL: g++.dg/ext/vla4.C (test for errors, line 10)
> FAIL: g++.dg/other/unused1.C scan-assembler
> (string|ascii?)z?\\t"class2("|\\\\000
--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 09:32 ---
Subject: Bug 22244
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 25 09:32:44 2007
New Revision: 128747
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128747
Log:
PR fortran/22244
* Make-lang.in (fortran/trans-ty
--- Comment #9 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 09:35 ---
Subject: Bug 32678
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 25 09:35:35 2007
New Revision: 128748
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128748
Log:
PR libgfortran/32678
* io/transfer.c (formatted_t
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 09:52 ---
Subject: Bug 33289
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 25 09:52:15 2007
New Revision: 128754
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128754
Log:
PR c++/33289
* decl.c (builtin_function_1): Set D
--- Comment #25 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 10:26 ---
Subject: Bug 27954
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 25 10:26:01 2007
New Revision: 128758
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128758
Log:
2006-10-27 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortr
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 10:27 ---
Subject: Bug 33423
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 25 10:27:28 2007
New Revision: 128759
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128759
Log:
PR middle-end/33423
* builtins.c (expand_builtin
Revision 128761 fails to compile the test case from bug 32776:
$ gcc/xgcc -Bgcc/ -g -O2 -mcpu=m32cm /n/12/rask/dtoa-m32c.c -S -o /dev/null
/n/12/rask/src/all/newlib/libc/stdlib/dtoa.c: In function '_dtoa_r':
/n/12/rask/src/all/newlib/libc/stdlib/dtoa.c:862: internal compiler error: RTL
check: expec
--- Comment #8 from rask at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 12:05 ---
It works for me too at revision 128761.
--
rask at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
On x86_64, the following function (extracted from gmp, the asms are from
its longlong.h)
void
mul_basecase (unsigned long * wp, unsigned long * up, long un,
unsigned long * vp, long vn)
{
long j;
unsigned long prod_low, prod_high;
unsigned long cy_dig;
unsigned long v_limb;
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 12:32 ---
1) umul_ppmm(high_prod, low_prod, multipler, multiplicand) multiplies two
UWtype integers MULTIPLER and MULTIPLICAND, and generates a two UWtype
word product in HIGH_PROD and LOW_PROD.
#define umul_ppmm(w1,
--- Comment #2 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2007-09-25 12:33 ---
Does it fix the bug to remove the pass?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33552
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 12:37 ---
Yes, disabling rest_of_match_asm_constraints fixes the problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33552
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 12:40 ---
Correct asm is then for example
#APP
# 16 "t.c" 1
mulq %rcx
# 0 "" 2
# 18 "t.c" 1
addq %r9,%rax
adcq $0,%rdx
# 0 "" 2
#NO_APP
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33552
--- Comment #10 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 13:08 ---
This still fails in 64-bit mode bootstrap.
--
dje at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org 2007-09-25
13:36 ---
> > Currently checking 20070925 without the proposed patch.
>
> They also happened w/o the patch for me.
same here, Matthias
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33381
--- Comment #5 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-09-25 13:58 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> #define add_ss(sh, sl, ah, al, bh, bl) \
> __asm__ ("addq %5,%q1\n\tadcq %3,%q0" \
>: "=r" (sh), "=&r" (sl)
--- Comment #27 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 13:58
---
tree-dse also miscompiles perls pp_pack.c.
It removes the store to symptr->patend here:
# MPT.498_212 = VDEF
symptr_19(D)->patend = D.14885_146;
lenptr.50_147 = (char *) patptr_128;
# MPT.498_213 = VDEF
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 13:59 ---
Perl itself passes with -fno-tree-dse (see PR33389), I didn't check
400.perlbench.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch 2007-09-25
14:22 ---
Subject: Re: wrong code for multiple output asm,
wrong df?
ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #5 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-09-25 13:58 ---
> (In reply to comment #1)
>
>> #
--- Comment #10 from pluto at agmk dot net 2007-09-25 14:24 ---
Manuel, ping, do you working on it?
i've posted preprocessed 32-bit testaces for you over month ago ;)
btw. PR32368 exposes this bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32395
--- Comment #7 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-09-25 14:29 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> I think that both version ought to work.
There is a comment in the '%' documentation:
GCC can only handle one commutative pair in an asm; if you use
more, the compiler may fail. Not
--- Comment #8 from paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch 2007-09-25
14:40 ---
Subject: Re: wrong code for multiple output asm,
wrong df?
> There is a comment in the '%' documentation:
>
> GCC can only handle one commutative pair in an asm; if you use
> more, the compil
--- Comment #28 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 14:48
---
I'll take it for now.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ass
--- Comment #4 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-09-25 14:54 ---
When fixing this bug we also want to make sure we do not reject this valid
variant:
template struct A
{
struct S { int X; };
static S a;
};
template typename A::S A::a = { X : 1 };
void foo()
{
A<0>::a;
}
--
pc
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
This error happens in this case:
template class SizeFor_{ public: enum {Size = 2}; };
template
class Test {
public:
template
void test_array(T_ tag, V_ (&arr)[SizeFor_::Size])
{
}
};
(Full test case in the end of the message)
It happens when declaring a
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
--- Comment #1 from e dot tadeu at gmail dot com 2007-09-25 15:04 ---
Created an attachment (id=14251)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14251&action=view)
Test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33553
--- Comment #6 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 15:05 ---
Subject: Bug 32295
Author: jsm28
Date: Tue Sep 25 15:04:58 2007
New Revision: 128765
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128765
Log:
PR c/32295
* c-typeck.c (default_conversion): Cal
8 Roger Sayle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* tree-ssa-propagate.c (set_rhs): Verify tcc_comparison the same way
as tcc_binary.
* tree-ssa-ccp.c (fold_stmt_r) : Use set_rhs to modify
the condition after calling fold_binary.
* gcc.c-torture/compile/20070925-1.c: Ne
--- Comment #2 from e dot tadeu at gmail dot com 2007-09-25 15:23 ---
s/template method that is inside a template method/template method that is
inside a template CLASS
(In reply to comment #0)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33553
--- Comment #12 from cboos at neuf dot fr 2007-09-25 15:25 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> So are the files reported as missing really missing...?
>
I had the same issue on HP-UX and I can confirm this was an issue with tar and
long file names.
On Linux:
# tar --version
tar (GNU
--- Comment #9 from eddy at opera dot com 2007-09-25 15:54 ---
Subject: Re: __attribute__((deprecated)) broken with inline, ignored with pure
virtual, misreported after definition
> Virtual problem fixed for 4.3.0.
Yay !
Thank you :-)
Eddy.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 17:15 ---
Use of % in asm should be discougaged.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33552
--- Comment #6 from kai-gcc-bugs at khms dot westfalen dot de 2007-09-25
17:36 ---
I don't know about Wolfgang.
As for me:
1. This is rather confusing.
2. I was writing a perl script to correlate source with tm.texi documentation.
I certainly couldn't think of an algorithm that would
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-09-25 17:39 ---
Note: given the C99 extensions, this is actually reject-valid: for instance
Comeau in relaxed mode accepts it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32385
Hi,
the attached program crashes at runtime when compiled *without* optimization:
% gfc -g gfcbug72.f90 -fbounds-check -fbacktrace -O0 && ./a.out
before construct_temp, size (temp) = 2
Program received signal 11 (SIGSEGV): Segmentation fault.
Backtrace for this error:
+ /lib/libc.s
--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gmx dot de 2007-09-25 17:41 ---
Created an attachment (id=14252)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14252&action=view)
Demo code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33554
--- Comment #7 from bangerth at math dot tamu dot edu 2007-09-25 17:44
---
Subject: Re: bogus escape
> I don't know about Wolfgang.
I was just confused, not realizing that we weren't in regular C code. Andrew's
(as usual) brief comment didn't help the situation. So simply ignore my
--- Comment #10 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-09-25 17:53 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Right, but then it is gmp (the subject of this PR) who's right and gcc
> who's wrong. You said the other way round. :-)
;)
My conclusion is based on the generated code, where gmp's version
3.0 20070925 (experimental) (GCC)
> /usr/local/gcc43/bin/gcc -Os -fno-pic -S sbb.c -fomit-frame-pointer
.text
.globl _cmpb_sbb
_cmpb_sbb:
subl$12, %esp
movl16(%esp), %eax
movl20(%esp), %ecx
xorl%edx, %edx
cmpl24(%esp), %ecx
--- Comment #4 from simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 18:34
---
Subject: Bug 33207
Author: simartin
Date: Tue Sep 25 18:34:05 2007
New Revision: 128769
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128769
Log:
gcc/cp/
2007-09-25 Simon Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #2 from kai-gcc-bugs at khms dot westfalen dot de 2007-09-25
18:38 ---
Learned some more. (For reference, this is all from Fr 17 Aug 21:29:16 UTC 2007
(revision 127595).)
In the docs, but not anywhere in the source:
TARGET_ALIGN_ANON_BITFIELDS
TARGET_NARROW_VOLATILE_BITFIEL
--- Comment #5 from simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 18:41
---
Fixed on the mainline.
--
simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-09-25 18:48 ---
The fact that "%0" version produces correct code is simply due to strtoul in
match_asm_constraints_1, where "%0" is not recognized as a valid string for
conversion and further processing of input constraint is stopped.
--- Comment #12 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-09-25 18:57 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> marking %0 early-clobbered fixes the problem.
Please look at comment #7.
Confirmed as a 4.3 regression, something is wrong in match_asm_constraints_1.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 19:16 ---
Work around: Change the intent to INOUT in:
subroutine construct_temp (temp)
type (t_temp), intent(out) :: temp (:)
or - which is effectively the same - remove the default initializer:
type t_datum
char
--- Comment #13 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-09-25 19:29 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> > marking %0 early-clobbered fixes the problem.
> Please look at comment #7.
I think I need some sleep. I was thinking of comment #11.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3355
--- Comment #3 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-09-25 20:08 ---
On Darwin8 I get:
[karma] f90/bug% gfc -O0 -fbounds-check -fbacktrace -g pr33554.f90
[karma] f90/bug% a.out
before construct_temp, size (temp) = 2
Enter construct_temp, size (temp) = 2
Leave
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
following code invokes ICE.
svn revision 128768
class Ifoo
{
public:
virtual ~Ifoo(){}
};
class foo:public Ifoo
{
foo(){};
// ~foo();
};
foo::~foo()
{
delete this;
}
1. if you uncomment ~foo in class definition, ICE go away.
2. if you comment functiono body of foo::~foo, it invokes error.
error:
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 23:18 ---
Confirmed, but not just a 4.3 regression.
4.0.2 showed:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ~/x86-linux-4.0.2/bin/gcc t.cc
t.cc:11: error: definition of implicitly-declared 'virtual foo::~foo()'
t.cc:14: confused by earlier errors,
--- Comment #2 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-09-25 23:26 ---
The fix seems simple...
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassi
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Summary|Bogus "array bound is not an|[4.2/4.
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 23:32 ---
Confirmed, reduced testcase:
template struct SizeFor_ { static const int Size = 2; };
template
struct Test {
template
void test_array(int (&arr)[SizeFor_::Size]);
};
Test p2;
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #9 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-09-25 23:54 ---
*** Bug 33556 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-09-25 23:54 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 30303 ***
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from dj at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-26 00:03 ---
Subject: Bug 33551
Author: dj
Date: Wed Sep 26 00:03:07 2007
New Revision: 128773
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128773
Log:
PR target/33551
* config/m32c/m32c.c (m32c_immd_dbl_mov): Use INTVAL in
--- Comment #14 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-26 00:22 ---
Working on a patch.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo
/home/test/gcc-4.2-build/./prev-gcc/xgcc -B/home/test/gcc-4.2-build/./prev-gcc/
-B/opt/gcc-4.2.2/x86_64-asianux-linux/bin/ -g -O2 -DIN_GCC -W -Wall
-Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -pedantic
-Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros -Wno-overlength-strings
-Wold-style-definiti
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pcarlini at suse dot de
|dot org |
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-26 02:39 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 32831 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-26 02:39 ---
*** Bug 33557 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32831
7.1.1/8 says that 'mutable' can't be applied to reference members:
The mutable specifier can be applied only to names of
class data members (_class.mem_) and cannot be applied to names
declared const or static, and cannot be applied to reference members.
Yet gcc accepts this code:
-
GCC manual documents Wstack-protector option but not
fstack-protector/fno-stack-protector.
As documenting the Wstack-protector option alludes to the existence of the
fstack-protector/fno-stack-protector options, it would be nice if these were
included.
--
Summary: GCC manual document
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gmx dot de 2007-09-26 05:19 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
This appears to be a regression, as the following version does not crash:
GNU Fortran (GCC) 4.3.0 20070416 (experimental)
while it occurs with
GNU Fortran (GCC) 4.3.0 20070907 (experimental) [trunk r
65 matches
Mail list logo
