--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-10-23 07:37 ---
Reduced test case:
module abstract_gradient
implicit none
public :: vector_class
public :: inner_product_class
public :: gradient_class
private
type, abstract :: vector_class
end type vector_class
t
--- Comment #3 from enrio at online dot no 2009-10-23 07:41 ---
Created an attachment (id=18877)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18877&action=view)
Code that warns, 50 lines, no #include. #ifdef for variations w/o warning
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.c
--- Comment #5 from estrizhov at topcon dot com 2009-10-23 07:51 ---
I've rechecked it with lto merged with rev. 152279 and there is no effect any
more.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40818
GCC 4.5.0 20091022, compiled with GCC 4.3.3:
../gcc-4.5/configure --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-bootstrap
make CFLAGS=-O0
g++ -fcompare-debug -O2 rtl.ii
g++: rtl.ii: -fcompare-debug failure (length)
See bug 41340, attachment 18567.
--
Summary: G++ fails to compile a testcase
--- Comment #9 from carrot at google dot com 2009-10-23 09:15 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> This is fixed on trunk by revision 149082:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-06/msg01067.html
>
The patch 149082 contains two parts: 1. fixed a wrong optimization in
tree-ssa-sink.c, it a
--- Comment #13 from d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com 2009-10-23
09:15 ---
The original testcase still fails with -fcompare-debug with GCC 4.5.0 20091022.
This bug is now tracked here: bug 41806.
The second bug is indeed fixed.
--
d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com change
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 09:34 ---
Subject: Bug 41778
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Oct 23 09:34:46 2009
New Revision: 153491
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153491
Log:
2009-10-23 Richard Guenther
PR tree-optimization/
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 09:35 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #27 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 09:45
---
Appearantly I was misguided in comment #24 and likely was thinking about
the 4.4 dynamic stack re-alignment code which (guessing again) is probably
only in effect for AVX.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b
--- Comment #18 from singler at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 10:00
---
(In reply to comment #17)
> Is something known about the actual size of a, b, and c?
They can be as large as the input size.
> Also, I don't know which is the required precision for the result: must be
> exact
--- Comment #19 from singler at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 10:01
---
Created an attachment (id=18878)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18878&action=view)
Patch avoid large intermediates to avoid overflow, for trunk.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cg
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 10:04 ---
It is RTL expansion that drops the calls to func_2 () from main.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from enrio at online dot no 2009-10-23 10:06 ---
In my example code there is a pointer to a struct that has an array as the
first member. I appears that the compiler treats the pointer as a pointer to
this first member, and flags a loop that writes outside the first member
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 10:17 ---
I have a patch.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|
--- Comment #5 from enrico dot scholz at informatik dot tu-chemnitz dot de
2009-10-23 10:19 ---
similar issue seen with gcc 4.4.2 (this time in glibc; can not check gcc/libobj
because glibc is required by gcc):
(insn 202 200 195 12 fxprintf.c:48 (set (reg/f:SI 13 sp)
(reg/f:SI
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 10:20 ---
Non-LTO testcase:
void __attribute__((noinline))
foo (void)
{
while (1)
;
}
int main()
{
foo ();
return 0;
}
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41805
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #6 from enrico dot scholz at informatik dot tu-chemnitz dot de
2009-10-23 10:33 ---
message on file from comment #2 is now
$ ./cross/iwmmxt/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc -O2 -march=iwmmxt -mcpu=iwmmxt
-mtune=iwmmxt /tmp/foo.i
(insn 83 81 72 2
/srv/oe/projects/kk/ipan7/tmp/wor
--- Comment #2 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 10:58 ---
I am not sure the example is invalid.
The Dummy()(Gen()) call expression obviously selects the operator "template
typename F::template Sig<>::ResultType operator()(F const& f)
const" in Dummy.
I believe the critical
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 11:01 ---
Subject: Bug 41758
Author: janus
Date: Fri Oct 23 11:01:38 2009
New Revision: 153494
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153494
Log:
2009-10-23 Janus Weil
PR fortran/41758
* matc
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 11:05 ---
Fixed with r153494. Closing.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 11:10 ---
Backtrace:
Breakpoint 1, fold_convert_loc (loc=0, type=0x7fd3e16529a0, arg=0x7fd3e1659000)
at /home/jweil/gcc45/trunk/gcc/fold-const.c:2789
2789 gcc_unreachable ();
(gdb) bt
#0 fold_convert_loc (loc=0, type=
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 11:27 ---
Further reduced test case:
module abstract_gradient
implicit none
private
type, public, abstract :: gradient_class
contains
procedure, nopass :: inner_product
end type
contains
function inner_pro
--- Comment #3 from tsandnes at atmel dot com 2009-10-23 11:41 ---
I tried gcc 4.3.2 from the WinAVR distribution and also avr-gcc 4.4.1.
The short story is: There is call frame information there, but not enough.
Specifically, the Call Frame instructions to reconstruct the pc to unwind
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 12:01 ---
Subject: Bug 41805
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Oct 23 12:01:21 2009
New Revision: 153495
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153495
Log:
2009-10-23 Richard Guenther
PR middle-end/41805
--- Comment #6 from grobian at gentoo dot org 2009-10-23 12:12 ---
this sounds like bug #30726
for what it's worth, my updated patches for gcc-4.4 can be found here:
http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/alt/browser/trunk/prefix-overlay/sys-devel/gcc/files/4.4.0/gcc-4.4.1-solaris-x86_64.patch?
--- Comment #2 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 12:18 ---
Subject: Bug 41673
Author: jsm28
Date: Fri Oct 23 12:18:42 2009
New Revision: 153496
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153496
Log:
PR c/41673
* alias.c (get_alias_set): Call langho
--- Comment #3 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 12:23 ---
Fixed for 4.5.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIG
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 12:26 ---
This patch fixes it:
Index: gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c
===
--- gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c(Revision 153493)
+++ gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c(Arbeitskopie)
Reported on clf
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/650b2eeeb8d76213#
w.f90:53.20:
data(dft_water_nuc(i), i=1,n_nuc) /
&
1
Error: non-constant array in DATA statement (1)
These seems to be variable - I can confirm it but others say that th
--- Comment #1 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-10-23 12:46 ---
The code in comment #0 gives errors with gfortran 4.4.1 and 4.5.0 (recent
patched trunk), compiles with 4.3.4, and gives an ICE with 4.2.4. Also compiles
with ifort and gives an ICE with g95.
--
http://gcc.gnu.or
--- Comment #13 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-10-23 12:49 ---
Created an attachment (id=18879)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18879&action=view)
backport of r141742 to gcc-4.3.4 that I'm testing
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37954
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 13:06 ---
Mine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 13:14 ---
I believe this is because in slaveapp.min.cpp the gimplifier drops the
conversion
in
< = (struct cNetworkType *) cHead::find
(&networks, s)>>;
as useless (it's a conversion to an incomplete type).
cNetworkType
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 13:16 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
x.h
---
class cObject {
public:
cObject *firstchildp;
};
class cHead : public cObject {
public:
cObject *find(const char *objname) const;
};
chead.min.cpp:
--
#include "x.h"
cObject *cHead::find(const char *objname) const
{
return firstchildp;
}
class cNetworkType : public
--- Comment #7 from enrico dot scholz at informatik dot tu-chemnitz dot de
2009-10-23 13:39 ---
When I read the RTL dumps correctly, gcc tries to assign SP to wCGR0.
This can be done by the
tmrc sp, wCGR0
assembly instruction which will be issued by alternative 6 in
--- iwmmxt.
--- Comment #8 from enrico dot scholz at informatik dot tu-chemnitz dot de
2009-10-23 14:31 ---
adding 'k' to the 'r' constraints seems to fix the ICE (although I did not
tested correctness of the generated code).
What is the reason that 'sp' resp. 'r13' is not catched by the 'r' & 'l'
--- Comment #7 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-10-23 15:01 ---
It seems that the patch in comment #2 has been silently applied (I have been
unable to find when) and that the test in comment #0 no longer gives an ICE for
gfortran 4.3.4, 4.4.1, and trunk.
Apparently the failure of
--- Comment #9 from enrico dot scholz at informatik dot tu-chemnitz dot de
2009-10-23 15:13 ---
Core problem seemss to be that 4.4 differs between CORE_REGS and GENERAL_REGS
(CORE_REGS without r13/sp) and the "r", "l" + "h" constraints in the .md rules
apply to GENERAL_REGS only. This
--- Comment #20 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-10-23 16:00
---
Excellent. Let's wait a bit for feedback from people experiencing this issue
and then commit the patch, first mainline and then probably 4_4-branch too.
Make sure to also regression test the fix on a "normal"
A field in a packed struct will often not have the normal alignment for its
type. So taking the address of such a field may yield a misaligned pointer,
but gcc does not warn about that. This is similar to casting a pointer from a
less aligned type to a more aligned type, which does give a warning
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 16:10 ---
Subject: Bug 41800
Author: janus
Date: Fri Oct 23 16:10:08 2009
New Revision: 153504
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153504
Log:
2009-10-23 Janus Weil
PR fortran/41800
* tran
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 16:13 ---
Fixed with r153504. Thanks for the report.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
I'm using a gcc-3.4.3 (csl-sol210-3_4-20050802) to build another instance of
gcc-4.4.2. Build fails with the following error message:
Making all in include
gmake[4]: Entering directory
`/home/gprog/build/i386-pc-solaris2.11/libstdc++-v3/include'
mkdir -p ./i386-pc-solaris2.11/bits/stdc++.h.gch
/ho
--- Comment #1 from YLitvinenko at astana dot oilfield dot slb dot com
2009-10-23 17:03 ---
Created an attachment (id=18880)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18880&action=view)
At line 466: error: '__mutex' was not declared
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug
--- Comment #10 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 17:17 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Now here we may need:
>
> if (p == NULL)
> {
> skip_list ();
> continue;
> }
skip_list() is unnecessary here as we have parsed everything alre
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 17:33 ---
Created an attachment (id=18881)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18881&action=view)
gcc44-pr41762.patch
Patch I'm going to bootstrap/regtest.
As ix86 backend doesn't know what kind of VALUE preser
--- Comment #2 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 17:37 ---
Subject: Bug 31342
Author: jsm28
Date: Fri Oct 23 17:37:13 2009
New Revision: 153506
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153506
Log:
* g++.dg/abi/rtti3.C, g++.dg/abi/thunk4.C: Skip for *-*-m
--- Comment #3 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 17:38 ---
Fixed for 4.5.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #1 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 17:59 ---
Created an attachment (id=18882)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18882&action=view)
Patch for enable for mingw32 targets -fset-stack-executable
Changelog
* config/i386/mingw32.h (CHECK_EXECUTE_ST
The kernel that is miscompiled is in shape20h.f and it looks like this:
do i=1,3
do j=1,3
xs(i,j)=0.d0
do k=1,20
xs(i,j)=xs(i,j)+xl(i,k)*shp(j,k)
enddo
enddo
enddo
There is an interchange of the j and k loops that is applied to
--
spop at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last recon
Posted a patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-10/msg01469.html
--
Dodji Seketeli
Red Hat
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-10-23 18:14
---
Let's CC Rainer. IMHO something is broken in gthr-solaris.h, I see:
#ifdef __cplusplus
#define UNUSED(x)
#else
#define UNUSED(x) x __attribute__((unused))
#endif
...
static inline int
__gthread_mutex_destroy
--- Comment #1 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 18:16 ---
The bug disappears with disabling the loop interchange, but the code
generated by CLooG still looks strange:
for (scat_1=0;scat_1<=2;scat_1++) {
S3(scat_1) ;
for (scat_3=0;scat_3<=1;scat_3++) {
S4(scat_1,scat_3
Indeed. I am testing the patch below.
diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
index 5eb389f..7c01ee2 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
@@ -104,6 +104,7 @@ static void store_parm_decls (tree);
static void initialize_local_var (tree, tree);
static void expand_static_init (tree, tre
--- Comment #8 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 18:19 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] Can't declare an extern "C"
friend of a builtin function
Indeed. I am testing the patch below.
diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
index 5eb389f..7c01ee2 100644
--- a/gcc
--
dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 18:35 ---
Created an attachment (id=18883)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18883&action=view)
patch
I propose the attached patch. It's an extended version of Paul's patch from
comment #5, plus Mikael's comm
--- Comment #7 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2009-10-23 18:52 ---
I haven't had a chance to test it on PA yet but it fixes the problem on
Itanium.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41700
--- Comment #9 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 19:32 ---
Subject: Re: New: Can't declare an extern "C" friend.
Patch submitted to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-10/msg01486.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41020
--- Comment #12 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-10-23 19:34 ---
> I propose the attached patch. It's an extended version of Paul's patch from
> comment #5, plus Mikael's comment #10. It makes Salvatore's PSBLAS compile
> completely (at least the version I have).
Does the executa
--- Comment #3 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 19:35 ---
There is already a patch for this one.
Paolo, can you perhaps (as build system maintainer) foster-parent it that patch
into the trunk?
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 19:37 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> There is already a patch for this one.
>
> Paolo, can you perhaps (as build system maintainer) foster-parent it that
> patch
> into the trunk?
I think the patch should be the opposite wa
--- Comment #3 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 19:38 ---
This one should just be monitored from week to week. There is so much stuff
going into the trunk right now that results vary from one day to another by +5%
to -5% in the last four days alone.
--
steven at gcc dot
--- Comment #13 from sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it 2009-10-23 19:43 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> > I propose the attached patch. It's an extended version of Paul's patch from
> > comment #5, plus Mikael's comment #10. It makes Salvatore's PSBLAS compile
> > completely (at least the ve
--- Comment #2 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 19:43 ---
With -fno-loop-interchange the code generated is correct but strange as the
statement
S8(scat_1,scat_3) ;
does iterate one less time than the other statements of loop scat_3.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug
--- Comment #3 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 19:46 ---
Also with -O3 the code of the loop body looks much nicer: several statements
disappear as they do not contain code anymore: so we have this LST
transformed_lst (
(root
0 (loop
0 (loop
0 stmt_4
1 (lo
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 14:46, spop at gcc dot gnu dot org
wrote:
> and the code generated by CLooG for the interchange looks like this:
>
> for (scat_1=0;scat_1<=2;scat_1++) {
> for (scat_3=0;scat_3<=2;scat_3++) {
> S4(scat_1,scat_3) ;
> for (scat_5=0;scat_5<=2;scat_5++) {
> S5(scat_1
--- Comment #4 from sebpop at gmail dot com 2009-10-23 19:54 ---
Subject: Re: graphite miscompiles 454.calculix
of the SPEC 2k6
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 14:46, spop at gcc dot gnu dot org
wrote:
> and the code generated by CLooG for the interchange looks like this:
>
> for (sc
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-10-23
19:56 ---
Subject: Re: g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/icf.C
> I haven't had a chance to test it on PA yet but it fixes the problem on
> Itanium.
It fixes the test on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11. Will test hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11
tonig
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfi
--- Comment #14 from sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it 2009-10-23 20:40 ---
I can confirm that my code compiles now.
Whether it runs is an entirely different matter, which I will look at in the
next few days...
Salvatore
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41784
--- Comment #5 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 20:52 ---
The data dependence analysis is not instructed that the iteration
domain of the k loop will be splitted, and thus it answers
"interchanging stmt_5 is a correct transform".
To correct this problem we have to distribute
--- Comment #3 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 21:32 ---
Subject: Bug 40808
Author: dodji
Date: Fri Oct 23 21:32:35 2009
New Revision: 153516
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153516
Log:
Fix for PR c++/40808
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR c++/40808
--- Comment #4 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 21:39 ---
Subject: Bug 40808
Author: dodji
Date: Fri Oct 23 21:38:50 2009
New Revision: 153517
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153517
Log:
Fix for PR c++/40808
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR c++/40808
--- Comment #2 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 21:39 ---
Testing a patch. The C++ problem mentioned in comment#1 is definitely
unrelated to this bug and needs to be reported as a separate bug.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #5 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 21:42 ---
Fixed in 4.4 and 4.5
--
dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--
dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.5.0 |4.3.6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39987
--- Comment #9 from denis dot onischenko at gmail dot com 2009-10-23 21:50
---
In revision 153504 this error is no longer reproduced
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41740
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 22:27 ---
The bugreport is not useful in its current form anyway (no testcase). Let's
close it.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 22:28 ---
*** Bug 41740 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 22:28
---
So it was indeed a dup.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 40556 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 23:46 ---
This really should be a P1, I ran into this with a benchmark we have here
internally.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41611
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 23:49 ---
I almost want to say it was caused by:
2009-06-15 Rafael Avila de Espindola
* cp-objcp-common.h (LANG_HOOKS_COMDAT_GROUP): Remove.
* cp-tree.h (cxx_comdat_group): Change signature.
* decl.
Test gcc.c-torture/execute/20071030-2.c has been failing execution for -m64
with option lists including -O2 and -O3 since this patch was added to trunk:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=149011
r149011 | bonzini | 2009-06-27 14:50:00 + (Sat, 27 Jun 2009)
That patch was added sho
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-23 23:50 ---
Created an attachment (id=18884)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18884&action=view)
minimized testcase
Minimized testcase.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41812
--- Comment #3 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-24 00:44 ---
Subject: Bug 40033
Author: jsm28
Date: Sat Oct 24 00:44:17 2009
New Revision: 153522
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153522
Log:
PR c/40033
* c-typeck.c (c_finish_stmt_expr): Do
--- Comment #4 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-24 00:45 ---
Fixed for 4.5.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIG
gcc.dg/pr28796-2.c execution test fails on sh for a while.
There is a wrong code like
fcmp/eq dr2,dr4
bf/s.L93
fcmp/gt dr2,dr4
bra .L92
movtr2
which should be
fcmp/eq dr2,dr4
bf/s.L53
movtr2
.L92:
...
.L
--- Comment #1 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-24 00:48 ---
For a slightly reduced case, the insns before dbr pass are
configured like as:
(insn 460 456 461
(parallel [(set (reg:SI 147 t)
(eq:SI (reg:DF 68 fr4) (reg:DF 66 fr2)))
(use (reg/v:PSI
--
jlquinn at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfi
--- Comment #3 from jlquinn at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-24 04:06 ---
Created an attachment (id=18885)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18885&action=view)
Candidate patch
This fixes the bootstrap, though a bunch of plugin tests fail compared to
unpatched build with
--
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 #6 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-24 05:16 ---
Fixed by the patch for PR 37276.
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
97 matches
Mail list logo
