Reported by Charlie Sharpsteen at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2009-07/msg00010.html
The program runs with NAG f95 5.1 and prints twice:
1. 1. 1.
1.
With gfortran:
aaa.f90: In function 'bugtest':
aaa.f90:30:0: int
--- Comment #8 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 07:57
---
> Attaching a fix that works here for Solaris 10 and I think would work for
> other Solaris versions.
Thanks.
> It changes the spec to account for the other options mentioned in comment 3,
> to handle the main i
--- Comment #11 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-07-04 08:39 ---
Fixed.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
Just passing on a request from Donald Knuth,
from http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~knuth/news08.html ,
A Flame About 64-bit Pointers
# It is absolutely idiotic to have 64-bit pointers when I compile a program
# that uses less than 4 gigabytes of RAM. When such pointer values appear
# inside a s
--- Comment #1 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-07-04 10:07 ---
Very naive question: is it not what -m32 should do?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40647
--- Comment #1 from guerby at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 10:12 ---
Subject: Bug 40631
Author: guerby
Date: Sat Jul 4 10:11:57 2009
New Revision: 149224
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149224
Log:
2009-07-04 Laurent GUERBY
PR ada/40631
* tr
--- Comment #2 from laurent at guerby dot net 2009-07-04 10:15 ---
Fixed.
--
laurent at guerby dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #2 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 10:16 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Very naive question: is it not what -m32 should do?
The gcc info page states
`-m32'
`-m64'
Generate code for a 32-bit or 64-bit environment. The 32-bit
environment sets int, lo
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-07-04 10:33
---
Thanks again Jason.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40619
--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 10:50
---
Could you check whether the following patch fixes it?
Index: gcc/ada/init.c
===
--- gcc/ada/init.c (revision 149223)
+++ gcc/ada/init.c (w
--- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 10:52
---
Please reopen with attachment included.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 11:02 ---
Right, a new 32bit ABI would need to be defined with all its problems of
introducing another multilib variant.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 11:03
---
Confirmed as fixed from 4.3.0 on (probably 4.2, but I didn't check). Closing as
the branches earlier than 4.2 are not open any more.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 11:40 ---
Mine. Patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2009-07/msg00016.html
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 11:34 ---
This would be something like Intel's -mcmodel=small, see
http://software.intel.com/sites/products/documentation/hpc/compilerpro/en-us/fortran/win/compiler_f/copts/common_options/option_mcmodel.htm
--
http://gcc
--- Comment #9 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-07-04 11:49 ---
Subject: Re: -std=c99 does not enable c99 mode in Solaris
C library
On Sat, 4 Jul 2009, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> > I wasn't sure exactly how to handle the various -std=gnu* modes, so I left
> > t
1] is reverted.
The compiler is from today's SVN, "xgcc (GCC) 4.5.0 20090704 (experimental)
[trunk revision 149223]".
The effect of this patch can also be seen on [2], see test_fpu chart between
2009-06-05 and 2009-06-06.
[1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-06/msg00492.html
[
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-07-04 11:54 ---
Subject: Re: 32-bit pointers on 64-bit operating systems
The natural analogy would be with MIPS n32 (an ILP32 ABI for 64-bit MIPS
hardware), which also indicates the directory names (/lib32) to use.
There would c
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 12:05 ---
Can you check numbers with vectorization disabled? I see the regression as
well on a AMD Fam 10 machine which supposedly has unaligned moves as fast
as aligned moves (if the data turns out to be aligned). Which mea
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 12:22 ---
I have just posted a fix on the list, so I might as well take the bug.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 12:28 ---
Subject: Bug 40593
Author: janus
Date: Sat Jul 4 12:28:43 2009
New Revision: 149227
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149227
Log:
2009-07-04 Janus Weil
PR fortran/40593
* inte
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 12:33 ---
One loop is
139 0.0046 : DO l = 1 , K
622 0.0208 : IF ( B(l,j)/=ZERO ) THEN
: temp = Alpha*B(l,j)
21380 0.7146 : DO i =
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 12:36 ---
Tuned for Core2 I get for the innermost loop
.L19:
leal(%eax,%ebx), %edx
movsd (%eax,%ecx), %xmm1
movsd (%edx), %xmm7
movhpd 8(%eax,%ecx), %xmm1
movhpd 8(%edx), %xmm
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 12:38 ---
The same program with procedure pointer components instead of type-bound
procedures gives a different ICE:
module bugTestMod
implicit none
type:: boundTest
procedure(returnMat), pointer, nopass:: test
end ty
--- Comment #63 from simon dot sasburg at gmail dot com 2009-07-04 12:41
---
GCC still generates a segfaulting executable when used with the testcase in the
report, most likely because my assembler doesn't support the 3-argument .comm
directive.
When using the '-mpe-aligned-commons' i
--- Comment #4 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-07-04 12:43 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Can you check numbers with vectorization disabled? I see the regression as
> well on a AMD Fam 10 machine which supposedly has unaligned moves as fast
> as aligned moves (if the data turns out t
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 12:45 ---
The problem is:
gcc_assert (expr2->value.function.isym
|| (!comp && gfc_return_by_reference (expr2->value.function.esym)
which assumes that "esym" is set. However, looking at resolve.c's
resolve_compc
--- Comment #64 from dave dot korn dot cygwin at gmail dot com 2009-07-04
12:47 ---
(In reply to comment #63)
> GCC still generates a segfaulting executable when used with the testcase in
> the
> report, most likely because my assembler doesn't support the 3-argument .comm
> directive.
--- Comment #4 from aaz at althenia dot net 2009-07-04 12:54 ---
It works. Thanks!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40619
--- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 13:01 ---
Fixed with r149227. Closing.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #65 from simon dot sasburg at gmail dot com 2009-07-04 13:17
---
Indeed, i should have expected this, and after rereading the comments here you
even mentioned this problem already. Sorry for the noise.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37216
--- Comment #1 from simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 13:21
---
Patch submitted here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-07/msg00213.html
--
simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #66 from dave dot korn dot cygwin at gmail dot com 2009-07-04
13:21 ---
(In reply to comment #65)
> Indeed, i should have expected this, and after rereading the comments here you
> even mentioned this problem already. Sorry for the noise.
>
That's OK. GCC attempts to dete
The compiler allows violations of access control in classes. This is a major
issue.
The following code should not compile, but it compiles:
// The code is a modified version of the code of TC++PL3, page 852, Appendix C.
class Outer
{
typedef int T;
int i;
public:
class
--- Comment #3 from dentongosnell at yahoo dot com 2009-07-04 13:32 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
>
> > One other thing, there is a flag "-mno-faster-structs" which this page
> > suggests would prevent this sort of ldd/std use
> > (http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/SPARC-Options.html).
--- Comment #5 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-07-04 13:40 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> and in regressed case:
... in NON-regressed case. The regressed code is the first dump.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40648
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 13:50 ---
No, we have -mcmodel as well, but that only specifies the maximum size of the
data and code segments and does not change the size of pointers (-mcmodel=small
is the default btw).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 13:52
---
> If "-mno-faster-structs" is the default, then surely it shouldn't be
> generating ldd/std in this case (and assuming the 8-byte alignment for
> "union myblock").
No, -mno-faster-structs doesn't modify the ABI.
--- Comment #6 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-07-04 14:02 ---
I have seen this problem also. From a crude profiling, it seems that the slow
routines are dgemm as pointed in comment #2 and gauss. This is a regression
with respect to 4.4.0 and it has started between June 5 and 6.
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 14:11 ---
The same ICE as in comment #2 already appears using ordinary procedure
pointers:
module bugTestMod
implicit none
contains
function returnMat( a, b ) result( mat )
integer:: a, b
double precision, dimension
--- Comment #8 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-07-04 14:20 ---
I have posted at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-07/msg00317.html
the test results for revision 149193. There are new failures for which I'll
open PRs ASAP (if nobody is quicker).
Before closing this PR a
--- Comment #10 from heydowns at borg dot com 2009-07-04 15:03 ---
"sol2-6.h doesn't exist anymore in GCC 4.4 and later. Since the patch won't be
applied to GCC 4.3.x, it must be adjusted. Why was values-xpg4 only added to
sol2-6.h and not to sol2.h?"
As far as I could tell from the d
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 15:21
---
*** Bug 40649 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 2009-07-04 15:21 ---
Looks like TC++PL3 is not correct according to the standard here see PR 359 and
the C++ defect report 45.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 359 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-07-04
15:46 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] Ada build fails
> Could you check whether the following patch fixes it?
It fixes the build error.
Thanks,
Dave
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40608
--- Comment #13 from dave dot korn dot cygwin at gmail dot com 2009-07-04
15:48 ---
This should all be resolved by the fixes applied in the past few days to
binutils CVS HEAD.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40455
--- Comment #5 from dave dot korn dot cygwin at gmail dot com 2009-07-04
15:56 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > Might be safer to rename to GNAT_FOPEN or something like that? FOPEN is
> > likely
> > to be taken on more than one platform.
>
> Which line are y
The full 20090702 gcc 4.5 snapshot runs into a problem early in stage 2 on OS
X. The last few lines of the console output are:
checking if the linker (/usr/libexec/gcc/i686-apple-darwin9/4.0.1/ld) is GNU
ld... no
checking for /usr/libexec/gcc/i686-apple-darwin9/4.0.1/ld option to reload
object fi
--- Comment #2 from debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org 2009-07-04
16:01 ---
I see this with a biarch compiler defaulting to powerpc-linux-gnu as well, rev
149224
Matthias
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Debian 20090704-1'
--with-bugurl=file://
trunk revision 149224
Target: arm-linux-gnueabi
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Ubuntu
20090704-0ubuntu1' --with-bugurl=file:///usr/share/doc/gcc-snapshot/README.Bugs
--enable-languages=c,c++,java,fortran,objc,obj-c++
--prefix=/usr/lib/gcc-snapshot --enable-share
--- Comment #8 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 16:10 ---
Subject: Bug 40640
Author: hjl
Date: Sat Jul 4 16:10:28 2009
New Revision: 149231
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149231
Log:
2009-07-04 H.J. Lu
Backport from mainline:
2009-0
--- Comment #7 from dave dot korn dot cygwin at gmail dot com 2009-07-04
16:15 ---
You might like to test this again. It was very likely fixed by the these
patches
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&revision=146425
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&revision=146515
I couldn't repro
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 16:46
---
> As far as I could tell from the documentation available to me, values-xpg4
> didn't exist until Solaris 2.6. Based on the file names I was thinking
> sol2-6.h was for 2.6 and above, where sol2.h had to work fo
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 17:19 ---
Subject: Bug 40596
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Jul 4 17:19:26 2009
New Revision: 149235
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149235
Log:
PR debug/40596
* dwarf2out.c (based_loc_descr): F
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 17:28
---
Subject: Bug 40608
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Sat Jul 4 17:28:32 2009
New Revision: 149238
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149238
Log:
PR ada/40608
* init.c (APPLE): Include .
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 17:29
---
Fix committed.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Sta
--- Comment #5 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 18:12 ---
Subject: Bug 40619
Author: jason
Date: Sat Jul 4 18:11:59 2009
New Revision: 149240
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149240
Log:
PR c++/40619
* tree.c (cp_tree_equal) [PARM_DECL]
This problem appeared when code was recompiled after upgrading from
gcc/gfortran 4.2.4 to 4.3, and was isolated using gcc 4.4.0 on a GNU/Linux
Fedora 11 system (32bit intel).
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i586-redhat-linux
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/sha
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-04 18:56 ---
I think icc has an option to limit pointer size to 32bit.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 19:00 ---
*** Bug 40647 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 19:00 ---
i guess this is a dup.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 34764 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #16 from dtprice at shaw dot ca 2009-07-04 19:02 ---
I just implemented the patch in my copy of 4.4 and recompiled. Works! Many
thanks to all of you for your prompt attention. Even though I should not be
very surprised, it's really cool that such service is possible in the r
--- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-04 19:03 ---
/Qauto-ilp32 (-auto-ilp32): Specifies that the application cannot exceed
a 32-bit address space, which allows the compiler to use 32-bit pointers
whenever possible.
To use this option, you must also specify /Qipo [v
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 19:18
---
"/Qauto-ilp32 (-auto-ilp32): Specifies that the application cannot exceed
a 32-bit address space, which allows the compiler to use 32-bit pointers
whenever possible."
^^^
so it does in fact not change
--- Comment #17 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 19:47
---
*** Bug 40652 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 19:47
---
see PR40638 which was recently reported and fixed yesterday. There is a patch
in the PR
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 40638 ***
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #14 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 21:29
---
I am on cygwin-1.5. will these fixes get pushed to setup? or am I stuck? or is
there a work around?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40455
--- Comment #2 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 22:05 ---
Breakpoint 6, assemble_external (decl=0x7ae86f80)
at ../../gcc/gcc/varasm.c:2304
2304 gcc_assert (asm_out_file);
(gdb) p debug_tree (decl)
>
SI
size
unit size
align 32 symt
--- Comment #1 from ian at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 22:53 ---
Subject: Bug 40636
Author: ian
Date: Sat Jul 4 22:52:57 2009
New Revision: 149243
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149243
Log:
PR target/40636
* config/i386/msformat-c.c (mingw_for
--- Comment #2 from ian at airs dot com 2009-07-04 22:58 ---
Thanks for the bug report. Fixed.
--
ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNC
--- Comment #15 from dave dot korn dot cygwin at gmail dot com 2009-07-04
23:27 ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> I am on cygwin-1.5. will these fixes get pushed to setup? or am I stuck? or
> is
> there a work around?
Hi Jerry,
I can't answer that question. There is a new binutils
--- Comment #16 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-04 23:52
---
I was resisting the change to 1.7 because the website states "Beta".
I will go ahead and do so now. :)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40455
--- Comment #17 from dave dot korn dot cygwin at gmail dot com 2009-07-04
23:55 ---
It is beta, yeah. But it's a damn good beta :) Can't promise you won't
stumble across a new bug or two, but it's reliable enough for fairly heavy-duty
everyday usage.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
--- Comment #6 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-05 01:01 ---
Fixed for 4.4.1.
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #32 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-05 02:12
---
I am getting close now. I have a patch that actually passes the CP2K test case
and regression testing. It turns out that the parse_format_list function is
called recursively so one must be careful about relayin
--- Comment #27 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2009-07-05 06:48 ---
(In reply to comment #23)
> because there are two reductions in that loop which I think the vectorizer
> cannot handle:
Actually, the vectorizer can vectorize two reductions. I think, the problem is
in cond_expr in red
76 matches
Mail list logo
