--- Comment #11 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 08:45 ---
I can pretty much see this on a v7 arm-linux-gnueabi target with 157994 (i.e.
using a libgfortran from my 4.5 tree, causes this test to fail and using the
system libgfortran things just work).
On this target peekin
Latest trunk gives a set but not used warning for the following code:
int
foo (int status)
{
if signed char) __extension__ ({ union { __typeof(status) __in; int
__i; } __u; __u.__in = (status); __u.__i; }))) & 0x7f) + 1) >> 1) > 0))
return 0;
else
return 1;
}
It's a reduced te
--- Comment #1 from jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 08:54 ---
Caused by
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-04/msg00317.html
--
jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 08:56 ---
The patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-04/msg00347.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43713
--- Comment #3 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 08:57 ---
Known, with patch awaiting review.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 43699 ***
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 43699 ***
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Rem
--- Comment #5 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 08:57 ---
*** Bug 43713 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
Bootstrapping 4.5 from branch (r158177), configured '--with-system-zlib' on a
newly installed system that lacked development headers:
[...]
gcc -c -g -fkeep-inline-functions -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings
-Wcast-qual -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-format-attribute
-pedant
--- Comment #7 from jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 11:43 ---
For the record, -m4 is needed to reproduce this issue.
--
jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 11:53 ---
Seen on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu too.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #2 from carrot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 13:14 ---
Subject: Bug 42601
Author: carrot
Date: Sat Apr 10 13:13:47 2010
New Revision: 158189
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=158189
Log:
PR target/42601
* config/arm/arm.c (arm_pic_sta
--- Comment #3 from carrot at google dot com 2010-04-10 13:17 ---
Fixed by patch http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=158189.
--
carrot at google dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
Currently configure in gcc 4.5.0 doesn't understand darwin's method of loading
shared library modules when the --enable-plugin option is invoked and fails
as...
Links are now set up to build a native compiler for x86_64-apple-darwin10.3.0.
checking for exported symbols...
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc45-
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-04-10 13:37 ---
It is caused by revision 117493:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2006-10/msg00158.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43555
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-04-10 13:39 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> It is caused by revision 117493:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2006-10/msg00158.html
>
Maybe C++ frontend needs similar adjustment.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?i
--- Comment #23 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 13:46 ---
Subject: Bug 40518
Author: redi
Date: Sat Apr 10 13:46:25 2010
New Revision: 158190
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=158190
Log:
2010-04-10 Jonathan Wakely
Backport:
2009-06-2
--- Comment #24 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 13:48 ---
Fixed for 4.4.4
--
redi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|4.2.2
--- Comment #16 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 14:25 ---
Subject: Bug 43591
Author: burnus
Date: Sat Apr 10 14:24:46 2010
New Revision: 158191
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=158191
Log:
2010-04-10 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/43591
--- Comment #17 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 14:27 ---
Fixed on the trunk (4.6). Planned to be committed also to GCC 4.5.1.
Patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2010-04/msg00093.html
Thanks for the bug report!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43591
--- Comment #1 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-04-10
14:56 ---
One problems seems to be that configure.ac doesn't force '-Wl,-undefined
-Wl,dynamic_lookup' to be passed on darwin when it is testing -shared.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43715
--- Comment #8 from jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 15:12 ---
Subject: Bug 43417
Author: jiez
Date: Sat Apr 10 15:12:14 2010
New Revision: 158192
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=158192
Log:
PR target/43417
* gcc.target/sh/pr43417.c: New test
--- Comment #9 from jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 15:14 ---
Subject: Bug 43417
Author: jiez
Date: Sat Apr 10 15:14:13 2010
New Revision: 158193
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=158193
Log:
PR target/43417
* gcc.target/sh/pr43417.c: New test
--- Comment #10 from jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 15:17 ---
Subject: Bug 43417
Author: jiez
Date: Sat Apr 10 15:17:15 2010
New Revision: 158194
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=158194
Log:
PR target/43417
* gcc.target/sh/pr43417.c: New tes
--- Comment #5 from jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 15:29 ---
The patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-04/msg00466.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43662
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 15:41
---
The fortran-exp branch has a performance regression with these test cases.
Trunk is slow to compile it, but does succeed. The branch can not even get
close to it.
I will start looking at this. Daniel, any ideas?
--- Comment #6 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 15:50 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> I will start looking at this. Daniel, any ideas?
I'd think that the fortran-exp branch tries to unroll the whole thing, which
then doesn't fit into memory any more at some point. Hence the
--- Comment #31 from davek at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 16:20 ---
(In reply to comment #30)
> there is something odd.
> with lto:
> Time: 674.484 sec (11 m 14 s)
> without:
> Time: 419.938 sec (6 m 59 s)
> a lot slower using lto?
Is it possible you're just seeing the effects of
In 64 bit mode (default) with ' -O3 -funsafe-math-optimizations
-ffinite-math-only' revision 158105 miscompiles doduc.f90:
MAIN : FIN S2
MAIN : FIN S1
MAIN : FIN S00011
MAIN : FIN S00022
TEMPS = 33. , NITERA : 1
TEMPS = 34.00030857 , NITERA :186
TEMP
--- Comment #1 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-10 16:36 ---
Created an attachment (id=20354)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20354&action=view)
Fortran source for subroutine S33022
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43716
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-10 16:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=20355)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20355&action=view)
Fortran source for doduc.f90 with subroutine S33022 commented
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #3 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-10 16:39 ---
Created an attachment (id=20356)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20356&action=view)
Working assembly for subroutine S33022
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43716
--- Comment #4 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-10 16:42 ---
Created an attachment (id=20357)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20357&action=view)
Miscompiled assembly for subroutine S3302
The diff between the working (-) and miscompiled (+) assembly files is
--- Comment #5 from mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 18:28
---
Would you please attach doduc.in so that I can reproduce this.
==
At line 161 of file /home/maxim/tmp/doduc_red.f90 (unit = 5, file = 'doduc.in')
Fortran runtime error: End of file
==
Also, what is your configure
--- Comment #6 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-10 18:41 ---
Created an attachment (id=20358)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20358&action=view)
doduc.in
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gfcp
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/opt/gcc/gcc4.6p/libexec/gcc/x86_64-apple-da
--- Comment #7 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-10 18:49 ---
The problem seems to occur within these lines:
tt = -t*rmp/rm
z1at = -Dalb - Dalt
z2at = drg*(alt-2.*al) + drf*(alb-2.*al) + rg*Dalt + &
&rf*Dalb
--- Comment #2 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2010-04-10 19:04 ---
still present in 4.6. The issue seems to be missing location info for the
nested if [if (a>0) ], the missing info in the original dump appears as a
incorrect line:7 in the gimple. It is specific to the 'else if' form, on
--- Comment #8 from mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 19:20
---
Hm, I'm having hard time reproducing this on linux. Would you please attach
dumps produced with -fdump-tree-reassoc for both before and after compilers.
Thanks.
--
mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #9 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-10 19:32 ---
Created an attachment (id=20359)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20359&action=view)
bzipped tar file with the outputs of -fdump-tree-reassoc
reassoc.tar.bz2 contains the files s33022_*.f90.082t.re
--- Comment #4 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2010-04-10 20:43
---
I can't get it to bootstrap with the following:
[monster-mac:~/programs/gcc/gcc-4_4-branch] lucier% cat build-gcc
#!/bin/tcsh
/bin/rm -rf *; ../../gcc-4_4-branch/configure CC='/pkgs/gcc-4.3.2-64/bin/gcc
-mcpu=9
--- Comment #5 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 21:15 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> I can't get it to bootstrap with the following:
> /bin/rm -rf *; ../../gcc-4_4-branch/configure CC='/pkgs/gcc-4.3.2-64/bin/gcc
As you pointed out in comment #2 and as I say in comment #3, 4
--- Comment #6 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2010-04-10 21:18
---
I wrote
>> And I get the same error if I use your configure line.
which means using gcc-4.0.1; I used *exactly* your configure line.
Did you have the gmp and mpfr sources in the gcc-4_4-branch source directory
--- Comment #3 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 21:27 ---
With this :
diff --git a/trans-expr.c b/trans-expr.c
index 7e95ce1..a6f8616 100644
--- a/trans-expr.c
+++ b/trans-expr.c
@@ -1382,6 +1382,8 @@ gfc_conv_expr_op (gfc_se * se, gfc_expr * expr)
else
se->expr = fo
--- Comment #7 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 22:13 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> I wrote
>
> >> And I get the same error if I use your configure line.
>> which means using gcc-4.0.1; I used *exactly* your configure line.
>
> Did you have the gmp and mpfr sources in the
--- Comment #8 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 22:32 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> >> And I get the same error if I use your configure line.
$ ./config.status --version
config.status
configured by ../gcc-4-4-branch/configure, generated by GNU Autoconf 2.59,
with options
The -msse* options are not enabled by -march=core2. The gcc doc states:
core2
Intel Core2 CPU with 64-bit extensions, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3 and SSSE3
instruction set support.
-mtune=core2 is not implied by -march=core2. The gcc doc states:
-march=cpu-type
... Moreover, specifying -march=cpu-type i
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-11 01:49
---
I have an idea.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assign
--- Comment #2 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-04-11
04:37 ---
Patch posted at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-04/msg00516.html.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43715
--- Comment #10 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-11 05:45 ---
Fixed.
--
spop at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-11 06:38
---
Restoring the size check to gfortran-exp branch I get the following results
with the test case in comment #1.
Current trunk (4.6):
$ time gfc pr34554.f90
real8m26.965s
user8m21.252s
sys 0m2.477s
$ .
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-11 06:44
---
Created an attachment (id=20360)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20360&action=view)
patch for fortran-exp branch
Please test on fortran-exp branch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug
49 matches
Mail list logo
