--- Comment #7 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 07:19 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Does -fno-tree-sink fix the issue? If so this is duplicate of bug 39604.
>
Comment #1 indicates that -fno-tree-sink fixes the issue.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 39604
--- Comment #20 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 07:19 ---
*** Bug 41354 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Compile the attached source code with options -march=armv5te -mthumb -Os, I got
push{r4, lr}
ldr r4, [r0, #8]
ldr r3, [r0, #4]
b .L2
.L7:
ldr r2, [r3, #8]
ldr r1, [r2]
ldr r2, [r3]
add r2, r1, r2
--- Comment #1 from carrot at google dot com 2009-09-18 07:57 ---
Created an attachment (id=18602)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18602&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41396
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 07:57 ---
yes, currently at -Os basic block reordering is disabled :).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41396
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 08:37 ---
You are getting assembler errors because it doesn't understand CFI directives.
You can use -fno-dwarf2-cfi-asm to work around the issue or update the
binutils package to something more recent.
--
http://gcc.gnu.
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 08:42 ---
Confirmed. (another --combine one, usually very low priority for me when such
things "regress"). But I'm sure I caused it, so ... mine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 08:44 ---
So, confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|U
--- Comment #14 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 08:52
---
The situation of a variable-size return value is not handled. The only
gimple I could envision is a GIMPLE_CALL with the W_S_E on the lhs. Ugh.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21374
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41328
--- Comment #32 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 08:58
---
Honza, this is yours.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ass
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40535
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40968
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Priority|P3 |P
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3 |P2
http:
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41085
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41087
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3 |P4
http:
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41090
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41182
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 09:06 ---
If possible please update the performance numbers with recent trunk.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #18 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 09:06
---
Fixed or what?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41245
--- Comment #13 from t7 at gmail dot com 2009-09-18 09:11 ---
Hmm I haven't noticed this bug has been fixed a week ago, since [Revision
151627], it was still reproducible at [Revision 151584] which was just a day
before.
Thanks!!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41
--- Comment #31 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 09:12
---
P1 to attract darwin maintainers. We'll downgrade this if not fixed before
a release candidate (and honestly we then should drop *-darwin from the list
of primary targets).
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org ch
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41288
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 09:16 ---
Honza, this is yours.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assig
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 09:18 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41311
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41328
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|other |debug
Keywords||build
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41343
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid, ice-on-
|
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |target
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gc
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41371
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41377
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 09:26 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
At revision 151832 I get
/home/eric/build/gcc/native/./prev-gcc/xgcc
-B/home/eric/build/gcc/native/./prev-gcc/
-B/home/eric/install/gcc/x86_64-suse-linux/bin/
-B/home/eric/install/gcc/x86_64-suse-linux/bin/
-B/home/eric/install/gcc/x86_64-suse-linux/lib/ -isystem
/home/eric/install/gcc/x86_64-suse
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Priority|P3 |P2
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41394
--- Comment #27 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 09:45
---
Today we regressed with the introduction of IPA-SRA at -O2 and -O3:
ipa SRA : 387.53 (78%) usr 0.08 ( 5%) sys 387.79 (77%) wall
2939 kB ( 1%) ggc
my bet is at the alias-oracle walking (walk_ali
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 09:55
---
Likewise on i586.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
GCC build t
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 10:03 ---
See the dwarf2out.c part of
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-09/msg01017.html
which fixes this.
If approved separately, I could commit just that part.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 10:06
---
> See the dwarf2out.c part of
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-09/msg01017.html
> which fixes this.
Strange, the same builds (with RTL checking) passed yesterday.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_
--
jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jh at suse dot cz
|dot org |
32101
# of unexpected failures169
# of expected failures 21
# of unresolved testcases 82
# of unsupported tests 52
/home/jweil/gcc45/build/gcc/testsuite/gfortran/../../gfortran version 4.5.0
20090918 (experimental) [trunk revision 151837] (GCC
--- Comment #8 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-09-18 11:14 ---
The binary search identified revision 145494, the alias-improvements merge, as
the point where this test case stopped breaking.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41354
/* gcc-4.4-20090724 */
$ gcc ide-lib.i -mregparm=3 -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -g2 -m32 -O2
/tmp/cc3MH58W.s: Assembler messages:
/tmp/cc3MH58W.s:1986: Error:
can't resolve '.LFE1408' {*UND* section} - '.Ltext0' {.text section}
--
Summary: can't resolve .LFE1408 {*UND* section}
--- Comment #1 from pluto at agmk dot net 2009-09-18 11:29 ---
Created an attachment (id=18603)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18603&action=view)
testcase.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41398
--- Comment #6 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-09-18 11:53 ---
Looks like you swapped the two ChangeLog entries, committing the testsuite
entry to gcc/cp/ChangeLog and the cp entry to gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog/.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39365
--- Comment #2 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 12:04
---
This looks like the same issue we had on the trunk a while ago: PR 40126.
Honza, could you please have a look?
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #19 from developer at sandoe-acoustics dot co dot uk
2009-09-18 12:56 ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> Fixed or what?
Yes at 151650 (for example) on i686-apple-darwin9 (current trunk, 151837,
appears to have a different problem).
Also OK on powerpc-apple-darwin8 (configured
--- Comment #4 from developer at sandoe-acoustics dot co dot uk 2009-09-18
12:58 ---
FIXED as of 151837.
--
developer at sandoe-acoustics dot co dot uk changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #20 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-09-18
13:15 ---
Have you opened a new PR for this new failure on i686-apple-darwin9 with
current gcc trunk? How exactly is the bootstrap failing in that case?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41245
--- Comment #5 from joerg dot richter at pdv-fs dot de 2009-09-18 13:47
---
I found Doug Gregors workaround for this pair problem:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2008-10/msg00080.html
I wonder why it was reverted 9 days later? I couldn't find any discussion on
gcc-patches nor libstdc
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-09-18 13:49 ---
This is caused by revision 151696:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-09/msg00443.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-18 14:10
---
(In reply to comment #5)
> I wonder why it was reverted 9 days later? I couldn't find any discussion on
> gcc-patches nor libstdc++. Perhaps I have missed something.
You did, it caused libstdc++/37919, as yo
--- Comment #3 from pluto at agmk dot net 2009-09-18 13:14 ---
update:
the latest gcc-4.4-20090918 seems to work but i don't see
any fixes on the 4.4 branch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/dwarf2out.c?view=log
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.c
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir/./prev-gcc/xgcc
-B/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir/./prev-gcc
/ -B/home/dave/opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.5.0/armv5tejl-unknown-linux-gnueabi/bin/
-B/hom
e/dave/opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.5.0/armv5tejl-unknown-linux-gnueabi/bin/
-B/home/dave/opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.5.0/armv5tejl-unknown-linux-gnueabi/lib/
--- Comment #4 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 14:34 ---
Subject: Bug 41009
Author: danglin
Date: Fri Sep 18 14:34:31 2009
New Revision: 151846
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151846
Log:
PR middle-end/41009
Backport from mainline
--- Comment #11 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 14:34
---
Subject: Bug 37850
Author: danglin
Date: Fri Sep 18 14:34:31 2009
New Revision: 151846
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151846
Log:
PR middle-end/41009
Backport from mainline
--- Comment #5 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 14:37 ---
Fixed.
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #4 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 14:42 ---
I can reproduce the problem. --enable-checking=assert is the key configure
option.
Thus, this bug is mine.
--
jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 15:10 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> --enable-checking=assert is the key configure option.
Are you sure about that? For me, configuring with --enable-checking=no still
yields loads of regressions in the Fortran testsuite. Other
--- Comment #6 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 15:13 ---
Subject: Bug 38288
Author: uros
Date: Fri Sep 18 15:12:48 2009
New Revision: 151854
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151854
Log:
PR target/38288
From David Binderman :
* gc
--- Comment #13 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 15:17 ---
Subject: Bug 41288
Author: uros
Date: Fri Sep 18 15:16:44 2009
New Revision: 151855
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151855
Log:
PR testsuite/41288
* gcc.target/x86_64/abi/asm-sup
--- Comment #6 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2009-09-18 15:18 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> If possible please update the performance numbers with recent trunk.
much faster now at -O1 ;-)
fortran -fgraphite -c -O1 -ffast-math -funroll-loops -ftree-vectorize
-march=native -ftime-repo
--- Comment #7 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-09-18 15:20 ---
Fixed.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
The unwind table does not get populated on Win64 because a long is 32 bits and
an address is 64 bits. The following patch fixes this problem.
<<
2009-09-18 Pascal Obry
* unwind-dw2-fde.c (classify_object_over_fdes):
Properly cast the 1L constant. This is needed on
--- Comment #6 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-09-18 15:29 ---
This revision also fails to bootstrap on alphaev68-unknown-linux-gnu (revision
151799 is OK). stage2 compiler segfaults trying to build libgcc:
configure:3232: /home/uros/gcc-build/./gcc/xgcc -B/home/uros/gcc-build/./gcc/
--- Comment #1 from p dot obry at wanadoo dot fr 2009-09-18 15:30 ---
Created an attachment (id=18604)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18604&action=view)
patch as attachment.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41400
--- Comment #7 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-09-18 15:31 ---
On alpha, bootstrap also fails with --enable-checking=assert.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41395
--- Comment #2 from p dot obry at wanadoo dot fr 2009-09-18 15:33 ---
This patch also apply to GCC 4.4 and GCC 4.5.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41400
--- Comment #8 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 15:34 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > --enable-checking=assert is the key configure option.
>
> Are you sure about that? For me, configuring with --enable-checking=no still
> yields loads of regres
--- Comment #3 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-09-18 15:35 ---
Please post patches to gcc-patches mailing list. Bugzilla is not the right
place to post and discuss patches intended to be committed to SVN.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41400
--- Comment #26 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-09-18 15:45 ---
Sigh... I hoped that blaming target-independent parts of the compiler will
somehow bring this bug above the radar (aka P3) for 4.5.0 release ;)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41089
--- Comment #28 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 15:52
---
(In reply to comment #27)
> Today we regressed with the introduction of IPA-SRA at -O2 and -O3:
>
The problem is that I call compute_inline_parameters() whenever I
change a single call site, even when the caller
--- Comment #9 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-09-18 16:35 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> On alpha, bootstrap also fails with --enable-checking=assert.
It also fails with --enable-checking=none.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41395
After the merge from trunk into the Graphite branch:
svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/graph...@151820
the bootstrap failed:
http://groups.google.com/group/gcc-graphite-test/browse_thread/thread/515ac3ca06085582
http://groups.google.com/group/gcc-graphite-test/browse_thread/thread/738b8f8bde0a1b90
--- Comment #32 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-09-18
16:57 ---
This issue could be a linkage issue as described here...
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2009-September/025894.html
and it may be that the linkage for 10.6 needs to be adjusted
in config/darwi
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-09-18 16:58 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> update:
>
> the latest gcc-4.4-20090918 seems to work but i don't see
> any fixes on the 4.4 branch:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/dwarf2o
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 17:04 ---
Subject: Bug 41049
Author: janis
Date: Fri Sep 18 17:03:55 2009
New Revision: 151857
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151857
Log:
PR c/41049
* real.c decimal_from_integer, decimal
--- Comment #14 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 17:12 ---
Subject: Bug 41288
Author: uros
Date: Fri Sep 18 17:11:57 2009
New Revision: 151858
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151858
Log:
PR testsuite/41288
* gcc.target/x86_64/abi/asm-sup
--- Comment #15 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 17:12 ---
Subject: Bug 41288
Author: uros
Date: Fri Sep 18 17:12:41 2009
New Revision: 151859
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151859
Log:
PR testsuite/41288
* gcc.target/x86_64/abi/asm-sup
--- Comment #16 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-09-18 17:14 ---
Fixed everywhere.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #1 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 17:19 ---
Reverting the patch from Honza at -r151806:151807 fixes the futures.cc ICE:
2009-09-17 Jan Hubicka
* dwarf2out.c: Include tree-pass.h and gimple.h.
(loc_list_plus_const): New function.
(loc_des
--- Comment #33 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-09-18
18:02 ---
The comments in...
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2009-September/025898.html
also are useful in understanding the dimensions of the problem with darwin
>=10.6.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugz
--- Comment #8 from geir at cray dot com 2009-09-18 18:41 ---
Here is how other compilers process this code:
PGI:
$ pgf90 -mp test.f90
$ ./a.out
Warning: omp_set_num_threads (4) greater than available cpus (2)
tmp, fsize3.141592653589793-7
s =0.000
--- Comment #10 from developer at sandoe-acoustics dot co dot uk
2009-09-18 19:08 ---
on i686-apple-darwin9 bootstrap fails with a variety of different errors
depending on what --enable-checking=xx is set.
For
=yes if fails with a lot of dsymutil crashes.
=runtime it fails per the
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 19:20
---
Here is a new test case, closely related, reported on fortran list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2009-09/msg00126.html
The read of the last line in a file without the end-of-line marker should be
treated as see
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.4.2 |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41328
--- Comment #34 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-09-18
19:24 ---
If I understand those messages from llvm-dev properly, on Snow Leopard symbols
from libgcc_s are ignored and the unwinder is gotten from libSystem now. So
doesn't this mean we are just seeing the incompati
--- Comment #1 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 21:00 ---
I see this has -g and this sounds like PR41343 where cc1 is killed because the
compiler runs out of VM . Could you try the same file without -g or without
var-tracking ?
Thanks,
Ramana
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bu
--- Comment #11 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 21:30 ---
Mine - I'm testing a backport.
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-09-18
21:51 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] Internal error compiling fortran/intrinsic.c
> I see this has -g and this sounds like PR41343 where cc1 is killed because the
> compiler runs out of VM . Could you try the sam
--- Comment #35 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-09-18
22:45 ---
We have two messages on llvm-dev which discuss the exact cause of the breakage
on darwin10 and possible fixes...
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2009-September/025908.html
http://lists.cs.uiuc.
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 23:17 ---
Subject: Bug 41397
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Sep 18 23:17:25 2009
New Revision: 151872
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151872
Log:
PR bootstrap/41397
* dwarf2out.c (mem_loc_descrip
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 23:26 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 23:46 ---
This should be a middle end bug rather than a target bug. TER needs to
maintain state regarding the negate_expr (which is in a previous basic block
but only has a single use) and then we could query the def during ex
--- Comment #36 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-09-19
02:18 ---
I can also confirm that adding -Wl,-no_compact_unwind to the linkage eliminates
the error when the g++.dg/torture/stackalign/eh-vararg-2.C test cases is
executed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b
The current config.guess in gcc trunk and gcc 4.4 branch erroneously reports
the architecture on darwin10 when running on EMT64 capable hardware. This is
due to the use of 'uname -p' to detect the architecture. The config.guess
upstream has been patched to take the same approach as SunOS5 of detect
1 - 100 of 109 matches
Mail list logo
