--- Comment #7 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 09:02 ---
Subject: Bug 40532
Author: uros
Date: Fri Jun 26 09:02:04 2009
New Revision: 148967
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148967
Log:
PR testsuite/40532
* gcc.dg/builtins-65.c: Require
At revision 148962 bootstrap fails on powerpc-apple-darwin9 with:
...
./gcc/config/rs6000/darwin-tramp.asm
/opt/gcc/darwin_buildw/./gcc/xgcc -B/opt/gcc/darwin_buildw/./gcc/
-B/opt/gcc/gcc4.5w/powerpc-apple-darwin9/bin/
-B/opt/gcc/gcc4.5w/powerpc-apple-darwin9/lib/ -isystem
/opt/gcc/gcc4.5w/powerpc
--- Comment #8 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-06-26 09:04 ---
Fixed.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
ht
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |tree-optimization
Target Milestone|--- |4.5
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40557
--- Comment #1 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 12:18 ---
Another test case for this can be found in PR40541:
program test
procedure(real), pointer :: p
p => f() ! << Invalid f() returns a LOGICAL(1) function, but p is a REAL one
contains
function f()
pointer :: f
--- Comment #3 from prafullat at kpitcummins dot com 2009-06-26 13:12
---
There is no change to this patch for gcc-4.5-20090402.
Do we I still need to repost it?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38091
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 13:51 ---
patches need to be sent to gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org together with a ChangeLog
entry that follows existing practice and a note on how the patch was tested.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38091
--- Comment #2 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 13:53 ---
This is some sort of cgraph consistency check. Honza added it and he also said
he will look into this :-)
--
jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #5 from prafullat at kpitcummins dot com 2009-06-26 13:54
---
Ok, I will do that asap.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38091
--- Comment #5 from d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com 2009-06-26
14:57 ---
Perhaps there are two bugs, not one, as my more elaborate testcases show.
Though they are seemingly equivalent, one triggers the bug, while another
don't.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=
--- Comment #1 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 14:59 ---
OK, I have finally managed to reproduce this and the patch does indeed result
into a segfault. I will keep looking into this, even though probably won't be
able to do much until Monday.
--
jamborm at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #2 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 15:08 ---
The miscompiled file seems to be derivative_approximation.o
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40554
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 15:12 ---
I have a patch for the DSE part.
The malloc part shouldn't be too difficult.
The free part is more interesting. Basically the pointer use in free (p)
should mark the malloc necessary but really nothing is there to
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 15:23 ---
Hm, it's not _that_ simple. A fab hack is easier I guess.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19831
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 15:39 ---
And we want to optimize
void *malloc(__SIZE_TYPE__);
void free(void*);
void abort(void);
int f(void)
{
char *i = malloc(1);
if (i == (void *)0)
abort ();
*i = 1;
free (i);
}
the same (removing the check
--- Comment #31 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 15:50
---
I am working on some ideas here. We are getting double free or corruption
related to free_format_data. I think it is because we have two pointers to pay
attention to. The one in the hash table and dtp->u.p.fmt
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-26 16:14 ---
For C++:
class Foo
{
private:
virtual void foo1 ()
{
printf ("I am %s\n", __PRETTY_FUNCTION__);
}
public:
virtual void __attribute__ ((ifunc)) foo ()
{
return &Foo::foo1;
}
};
class
Revision 148947:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-06/msg00931.html
caused:
FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 -O2 execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer execution
test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
-funroll-a
When I compile the following code with gcc-4.4.0 with "-O3 -Wall" flags I get
the messages below.
Testcase has 'union' between Z and char types therefore such type conversion
should be allowed by aliasing rules.
--- error message ---
pr.C: In member function Z& X::get():
pr.C:12: warning: derefe
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 16:47 ---
I don't think this is a bogus warning message as you reading a character via Z
which is undefined. (the opposite way is defined though).
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #2 from yuri at rawbw dot com 2009-06-26 17:16 ---
Subject: Re: Erroneous aliasing rules message
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 16:47
> ---
> I don't think this is a bogus warning message as yo
In file included from /usr/include/boost/config.hpp:35,
from /usr/include/boost/variant/detail/config.hpp:16,
from /usr/include/boost/variant/variant.hpp:20,
from /usr/include/boost/variant.hpp:17,
from tmp.cpp:16:
/usr/include/boo
--- Comment #12 from sje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 17:28 ---
Subject: Bug 40338
Author: sje
Date: Fri Jun 26 17:28:40 2009
New Revision: 148978
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148978
Log:
2009-06-26 Steve Ellcey
PR bootstrap/40338
* con
--- Comment #1 from peter_foelsche at agilent dot com 2009-06-26 17:29
---
Created an attachment (id=18074)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18074&action=view)
gpperror.cpp
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40561
--- Comment #13 from sje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 17:31 ---
Subject: Bug 40338
Author: sje
Date: Fri Jun 26 17:30:55 2009
New Revision: 148979
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148979
Log:
2009-06-26 Steve Ellcey
PR bootstrap/40338
* con
--- Comment #2 from peter_foelsche at agilent dot com 2009-06-26 17:36
---
Created an attachment (id=18075)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18075&action=view)
gpperror.cpp
--
peter_foelsche at agilent dot com changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #14 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2009-06-26 17:36 ---
Bug has been resolved, we use -frandom-seed to make most objects identical on
hppa and extended the comparision exclusions to include the two files we
coudln't make identical.
--
sje at cup dot hp dot com changed:
--- Comment #8 from breiten at lexmark dot com 2009-06-26 18:06 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Fails with 4.5.0 20090513.
I noticed that bug 31979 appears to be the same thing - reported against a
slightly newer openssl, 0.9.8e, oscp.c, also a ppc target. Solved by fixing
ill-defined c
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35712
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 18:27 ---
Subject: Bug 39902
Author: janis
Date: Fri Jun 26 18:27:30 2009
New Revision: 148982
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148982
Log:
PR c/39902
* tree.c (real_zerop, real_onep, real_
--- Comment #1 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-06-26 18:35 ---
Subject: Re: New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 148947
failed gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_1.f90
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009, hjl dot tools at gmail dot com wrote:
> Revision 148947:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-06/msg0
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 18:45 ---
A patch has been posted that fixes this problem.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2009-06/msg00269.html
Hopefully, Janus does not mind that I assigned this
bug to him.
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 19:39 ---
Z is not a union type.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-06-26 19:49 ---
I believe this is the same issue as in PR39254.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38886
$ g++ -E typed_factory.hpp
g++: typed_factory.hpp: linker input file unused because linking not done
That any code path when running with -E could cause an error to appear about
*compiling* let alone *linking* doesn't make any sense. As it turns out
renaming typed_factory.hpp to typed_factory.h fi
--- Comment #1 from joseph dot h dot garvin at gmail dot com 2009-06-26
20:01 ---
Actually, make that 4 bugs.
4. The extension shouldn't matter. I said run the preprocessor on it. So run
the preprocessor on it.
G++ is bending over backwards to do the wrong thing :P
--
http://gcc.
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 20:11 ---
Fixed in gcc 4.3.x
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Stat
--- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-26 20:20 ---
Created an attachment (id=18076)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18076&action=view)
Ifunc examples in C and C++
Here are some C/C++ examples with valid and invalid cases.
--
hjl dot tools at
--- Comment #10 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-26 20:39
---
Created an attachment (id=18077)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18077&action=view)
A C++ program with ifunc attribute
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40528
--- Comment #11 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-26 20:41
---
Created an attachment (id=18078)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18078&action=view)
Static Linux/ia32 binary of prog.C
I got
[...@gnu-6 c++]$ ./static
I have SSE4.2
I support 64bit.
I have SS
This program
struct s { const int i; };
int foo () { struct s v; }
is invalid C++:
foo.c: In function int foo():
foo.c:2: error: structure v with uninitialized const members
However, no warning is issued when compiling the program as C using
-Wc++-compat. -Wc++-compat should issue a warnin
This code is valid C++:
#define S(a) #a
const char* s = S(and);
However, the C frontend gives a warning with -Wc++-compat:
foo.c:2:19: warning: identifier "and" is a special operator name in C++
This warning should not be given if the preprocessor token is simply
stringified.
--
S
--
dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |blocker
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40558
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 21:39 ---
I am going to be looking at this over the weekend for Michael.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 21:49 ---
> Hopefully, Janus does not mind that I assigned this
> bug to him.
Not at all ;)
Will commit my patch in a sec ...
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Adde
On Linux/ia32, revision 48982 got
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/O3-vect-pr34223.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1
loops" 1
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/local.c scan-assembler magic[^\\n]*eax
Revision 148981:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-06/msg00966.html
may be the cause.
--
Summary: [4
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 22:11 ---
Subject: Bug 40541
Author: janus
Date: Fri Jun 26 22:11:15 2009
New Revision: 148996
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148996
Log:
2009-06-26 Janus Weil
PR fortran/39997
PR for
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 22:11 ---
Subject: Bug 39997
Author: janus
Date: Fri Jun 26 22:11:15 2009
New Revision: 148996
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148996
Log:
2009-06-26 Janus Weil
PR fortran/39997
PR for
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 22:12 ---
Fixed in r148996. Closing.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 22:17 ---
Fixed in r148996. Closing.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-26 22:23 ---
Confirmed, I saw them as well.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-06-26 22:44 ---
Subject: Re: New: Invalid -Wc++-compat warning about stringized
C++ operator name
A closely related case is:
#define foo not used
There is no important difference in the meaning of this between C and C++
if th
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-27 00:43 ---
It was introduced revision 145565 and 145569.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40274
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-27 00:45 ---
It is caused by revision 145566:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-04/msg00188.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jason at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #12 from ppluzhnikov at google dot com 2009-06-27 00:49 ---
This appears to still be broken in 32-bit mode.
I just built GCC @148996 on x86_64, and compiled the attached test case with
'-m32':
(gdb) start
Breakpoint 1 at 0x80483d9: file gcc-pr40012-test.c, line 24.
main ()
--- Comment #2 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-27 01:06 ---
Hmph. Buggy tests.
--
rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unas
--- Comment #3 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-27 01:13 ---
Subject: Bug 40565
Author: rth
Date: Sat Jun 27 01:13:11 2009
New Revision: 149002
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149002
Log:
PR testsuite/40565
* gcc.dg/vect/vect.exp: Add -fno-i
--- Comment #4 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-27 06:23 ---
Delete all the cpp HAVE_mpc goo.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40302
61 matches
Mail list logo
