--- Comment #1 from davh at davh dot dk 2008-01-01 08:33 ---
Even worse is this:
__asm__(
"someasm" :
:
"i" (&&a),
"i" (&&b));
a:
b:
.L2:
.LBB2:
.loc 1 25 0
#APP
/* My asm statements, which includes this instruction: */
jmp .L2
.L3:
This is a
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2008-01-01 09:22 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19969 ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2008-01-01 09:22 ---
*** Bug 34634 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #1 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2008-01-01 10:02 ---
The failure occurs in is_gimple_val() for this variable. The problem is that
DECL_GIMPLE_REG_P for it is false. The vectorizer sets this value to be true
for every variable of the vector type that the vectorizer creates.
With 4.3.0 20071212 on hppa:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/bin/gcc -c -O3 player-camera.i
camera.c: In function 'set_f_packet':
camera.c:535: internal compiler error: tree check: expected polynomial_chrec,
have integer_cst in add_multivariate_self_dist, at tree-data-ref.c:2813
Please
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-01-01 11:22 ---
Created an attachment (id=14853)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14853&action=view)
preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34635
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-01 12:20 ---
> I wonder if the unroller should duplicate this marking
It should be marked as such by the unroller but then again, the unroller should
be using the same decl as before and just a new SSA_NAME.
--
pinskia at gc
With a recent trunk ( 4.3.0 20071231 (experimental) (GCC) ), I tried compiling
the following program:
#include
#include
using namespace std;
int main(void)
{
vector > v(10);
std::sort(v.begin(), v.end());
}
With:
/usr/gccsvn/bin/g++-svn temp.cc -g -W -D_GLIBCXX_PARALLEL -fopenmp
-march
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-01 13:01 ---
Is this related to libstdc++/34095?
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from chris at bubblescope dot net 2008-01-01 13:08 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Is this related to libstdc++/34095?
>
Good question, could be. That code also fails to run for me. Unfortunately I
don't really have any good idea how to go about debugging this, as I know
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-01 13:29 ---
Both testcases fail for me too, with a segfault, on x86_64-linux.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34636
--- Comment #4 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-01 15:13 ---
Apparently it's a duplicate of 34095 only for a sufficiently big outer vector.
When the outer vector is small, 34095 doesn't fail and this one still does,
differently (not in ~vector but in __gnu_parallel::less)
--
pcar
--- Comment #5 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-01 15:30 ---
The issue for short vectors seems rather trivial,
__parallel::lexicographical_compare_switch not careful with empty ranges.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34636
--- Comment #6 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-01 16:43 ---
Subject: Bug 34636
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Jan 1 16:42:34 2008
New Revision: 131245
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131245
Log:
2008-01-01 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libstd
--- Comment #7 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-01 16:46 ---
The issue certainly specific to this PR is fixed, I'm closing it as duplicate
of 34095, just in case there is still something special to it or the testcase
is easier to deal with to the people working on 34095.
*** This bu
--- Comment #5 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-01 16:46 ---
*** Bug 34636 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #15 from rguenther at suse dot de 2008-01-01 16:59 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] Endless loop
while building a 64-bit 2.6.20 kernel
On Tue, 1 Jan 2008, danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> This appears to have been fixed by the following change on the trunk:
>
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-01 17:11 ---
This is a most peculiar bug, which has nothing to do with allocatability or
temporariness. The result variables of the functions 'get_numbr' and
'get_nfirst' are REAL(mp), whereas they are assigned to INTEGER arrays.
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-01 17:23 ---
Ah! I feel a light bulb moment coming on.
The type mismatch necessitates the use of the internal real to integer
conversion function, which in its turn checks the interface with 'get_nfirst'.
Being a formal argument
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-01 17:42 ---
I see different IL for 4.2 compared to 4.3, is the bug present in 4.3? Can you
attach the optimized tree dump?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-01 17:46 ---
You should post this patch to the gcc-patches mailinglist and provide a
ChangeLog
entry for gcc/ChangeLog and preferably a testcase.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34629
--- Comment #6 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-01 18:10 ---
Seems just a trivial thing: a delete[] in place of ::operator delete
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #7 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-01 19:06 ---
Subject: Bug 34095
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Jan 1 19:05:41 2008
New Revision: 131247
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131247
Log:
2008-01-01 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libstd
--- Comment #8 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-01 19:08 ---
Fixed.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--
hjl at lucon dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34612
--- Comment #16 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-01 21:26
---
It does.
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.1/
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-01 21:34 ---
Is there a reason why you set the target milestone?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #13 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-01-01 22:47 ---
The patch in comment #12 works as advertised without regression in 32 and 64
bit modes on ppc/Intel and my favourite platform.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34545
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |danglin at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #7 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-01 23:07 ---
Confirmed by Richard.
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assig
--- Comment #4 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-01 23:09
---
Subject: Bug 26442
Author: reichelt
Date: Tue Jan 1 23:08:05 2008
New Revision: 131249
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131249
Log:
PR libmudflap/26442
* tree-mudflap.c (mx_r
--- Comment #5 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-01 23:10
---
Fixed on mainline (which will become 4.3.0).
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #2 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-02 01:14
---
Confirmed. Reduced testcase (crashes on i686-pc-linux-gnu):
=
void foo(int x[])
{
int i, j;
for (i = 0; i < 2; i++)
for (j = 0; j < 2; j++)
{
x[i] = x[i*j];
35 matches
Mail list logo
