--- Comment #12 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2010-07-11 07:51 ---
I agree.
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED
--- Comment #23 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2010-07-11 07:51 ---
This is fixed on ARM, what about PPC?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36758
--- Comment #1 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 07:55 ---
Subject: Bug 44689
Author: janus
Date: Sun Jul 11 07:55:11 2010
New Revision: 162052
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162052
Log:
2010-07-11 Janus Weil
PR fortran/44689
* decl
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 07:58 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Subject: Bug 44689
>
> Author: janus
> Date: Sun Jul 11 07:55:11 2010
> New Revision: 162052
>
> URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162052
Sorry, this commit was actuall
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 08:09 ---
The TARGET check is fixed by r162052:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162052
The runtime segfault persist.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44869
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 08:26 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> The runtime segfault persist.
It seems this segfault comes from the call to 'self%assert' in 'test_a'.
The dump shows
self->$vptr->assert->assert_int ((struct class$test_case *) self, &C.1
--- Comment #2 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 09:15 ---
Subject: Bug 43731
Author: ktietz
Date: Sun Jul 11 09:15:12 2010
New Revision: 162057
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162057
Log:
2010-07-11 Kai Tietz
Merged back from trunk
--- Comment #3 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 09:20 ---
Fixed for head and 4.5.1
--
ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #28 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 09:40 ---
I'll take over this one. Have a fix.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 09:41 ---
Mine. Patch coming soon.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assign
--- Comment #12 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 09:55 ---
back-ported to 4.5 as r162037, closing as fixed
--
iains at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 10:47 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/pr35258.c
> execution test
>
> On Sat, 10 Jul 2010, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> > I get for all memory accesses an alignm
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 10:58 ---
Differing array sizes of the mAutoBuf member, type decls:
unit size
align 64 symtab 0 alias set -1 canonical type 0x75b20c78
fields
ignored BLK file ../../dist/include/nsT
--- Comment #6 from a dot heider at gmail dot com 2010-07-11 11:17 ---
4.4.4 is affected as well
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44455
--- Comment #2 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-07-11 11:25 ---
Confirmed on i686-pc-linux-gnu (with errno fully removed).
4.6.0 works OK.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #3 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 11:37 ---
Should this (and the other one) not be mentioned upstream somehow?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44904
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 11:38 ---
Seems to be bogus merging of complete/incomplete types.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 11:39 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Should this (and the other one) not be mentioned upstream somehow?
Honza is filing bugs with them.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44904
--- Comment #3 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-07-11 11:39 ---
For some reason, we got:
movl$0x4180, 112(%esp)
movl$0x4170, 116(%esp)
movl$0x4160, 120(%esp)
movl$0x4150, 124(%esp)
movl$0x4140, 128(%esp)
--- Comment #13 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 11:40 ---
Does the prototype fix of http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36758#c21
help?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39837
--- Comment #4 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-07-11 11:42 ---
4.4 works OK, so this is 4.5 regression.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
K
--- Comment #5 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-07-11 11:59 ---
Expand expands with uninitialized register r68:
41 [r54:SI-0x20]=r73:V4SF
42 [r54:SI-0x10]=r72:V4SF
> 43 [r56:SI+0x3c]=float_extend(r68:SF)
44 [r56:SI+0x34]=float_extend([r54:SI-0x8])
45 [r56:SI+0x2c]=float_e
> Should this (and the other one) not be mentioned upstream somehow?
I filled in PRs for the ODR violations at Mozilla side already.
Honza
--- Comment #6 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2010-07-11 12:06 ---
Subject: Re: Maybe bogus Use of type ?struct
nsCSSStyleSheet? with two mismatching declarations at field
?mRuleProcessors? warnings in Mozilla
> Should this (and the other one) not be mentioned upstream some
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 12:48 ---
Confirmed, caused by SRA, maybe latent on the trunk.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from davek at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 12:56 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
> 0x006f25bd in lvalue_p_1 (ref=0x70c4fb98) at
> ../../gcc-4.x/gcc/cp/tree.c:71
> 71if (TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (ref)) ==
The following code compiles fine in C++98 with any version of g++, compiles
fine in C++0X with g++-4.4, but fails in C++0X with g++-4.6 with the error
message:
bug.cc: In function void ouin(const Ray&):
bug.cc:35:9: error: use of deleted function Ray::Ray(const Ray&)
bug.cc:28:8: error: Ray::
I have a x-compiler with a custom target for my hobby operating system. In the
x-compiler's installation directory sys-include is symlinked to the directory
in my OS's source tree containing all the userspace headers. Despite this my
build system was passing -I to G++.
When I removed that argument
--- Comment #3 from dougsemler at gmail dot com 2010-07-11 15:11 ---
Does anyone know if pr43538 affects this as well (cxx flags fir target
inheriting from cxxflags on Linux targets)?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44433
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2010-07-11
15:17 ---
Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/pr35258.c
execution test
On Sun, 11 Jul 2010, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
>
> --- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 15:32 ---
That means the configuration of your hobby target doesn't define
NO_IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C and thus all system headers are considered to be
implicitly surrounded by extern "C".
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #19 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 16:07 ---
Subject: Bug 44773
Author: pault
Date: Sun Jul 11 16:06:53 2010
New Revision: 162059
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162059
Log:
2010-07-11 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/44773
* tr
Command line:
$ gcc -O1 -fverbose-asm testcase.c
Compiler output:
$ /mnt/svn/gcc-trunk/binary-162056-lto-fortran-checking-yes-rtl-df/bin/gcc -O1
-fverbose-asm -c testcase.c
/tmp/ccfCayS2.s: Assembler messages:
/tmp/ccfCayS2.s:48: Error: junk at end of line, first unrecognized character is
`{'
/tm
--- Comment #1 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-07-11 16:16 ---
Created an attachment (id=21180)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21180&action=view)
reduced testcase
$ gcc -O1 -fverbose-asm -c pr44911.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44911
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 16:23 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/pr35258.c
> execution test
>
> On Sun, 11 Jul 2010, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > --- Comment #4 from rguen
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 16:30 ---
Confirmed. Mine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedT
--- Comment #8 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 16:33 ---
With 4.5, the block move was emitted as follows:
Breakpoint 2, emit_block_move_hints (x=0x7afcb550, y=0x7afcb630,
size=0x7af312d8, method=BLOCK_OP_NORMAL, expected_align=64,
expected_size=-1) at ../../gcc/
--- Comment #9 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2010-07-11
16:54 ---
Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/pr35258.c execution test
> The above testcase worked? Not the pr35258.c, but the one I gave, with
> the int aligned(1)? The difference on the 4.5 branch is that
Reported by Satish.BD at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2010-07/msg00109.html
The shown (cf. URL) program compiles without any errors, but segfaults at
run time.
It seems that the call to 'get_coefficients' is what produces the segfault.
--
Summary: [OOP] Segmentation fault on TBP
--- Comment #3 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-07-11 17:40 ---
This might be related:
$ gcc testsuite/gcc.dg/debug/pr33316.c -O1 -fverbose-asm
gcc: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault (program cc1)
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See <
--- Comment #20 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 17:45 ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> Subject: Re: [OOP] Dynamic dispatch uses broken types
>
> Dear Tobias,
>
> > Paul, thanks for the check in. Do you plan to backport it to 4.5, which
> > sems to
> > use the same code?
--- Comment #14 from sandra at codesourcery dot com 2010-07-11 17:47
---
Yes, it looks like the prototype fix for PR 36758 fixes the test case at the
top of this issue. The patch needs a little updating, though, and I can't say
I grok the changes to the surrounding code sufficiently to
Command line:
$ gcc -O[123] -ftree-vectorize gcc.dg/pr44838.c && ./a.out
Output:
$ /mnt/svn/gcc-trunk/binary-162056-lto-fortran-checking-yes-rtl-df/bin/gcc -O1
-ftree-vectorize pr44838.i
$ ./a.out
Aborted
Tested revisions:
r162056 - fail
r161659 - fail
r161170 - OK
--
Summary: [4.6
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 20:30
---
I will commit a similar patch, but I would like to add a check for the specific
line ends to make sure we don't get a NULL character inserted some day.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 20:43
---
Subject: Bug 44698
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Jul 11 20:43:25 2010
New Revision: 162060
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162060
Log:
2010-07-11 Kai Tietz
PR libfortran/44698
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 20:52
---
Closing
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNC
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-07-11 20:59 ---
It works with gcc 4.5.0. It is a 4.5.1 regression.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 21:29 ---
Subject: Bug 44702
Author: burnus
Date: Sun Jul 11 21:29:30 2010
New Revision: 162061
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162061
Log:
t...@archimedes:~/scratch/gcc> head -n 15 ../intrinsic_use.diff
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 21:48 ---
FIXED on the trunk (4.6).
Thanks for the bug report!
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
ht
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 21:59 ---
Hm? I checked 4.5.0 and it was broken as well, so someone should double-check
(I can't at the moment).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44900
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 22:04
---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/pr35258.c execution test
>
> > The above testcase worked? Not the pr35258.c, but the one I gave, with
> > the int aligned(1)? The difference
--- Comment #11 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2010-07-11
22:22 ---
Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/pr35258.c execution test
> > The above testcase doesn't work with 4.5 and I doubt it ever worked on
> > PA. The pointer passed to foo is used as is. It's only
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 22:37
---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/pr35258.c execution test
>
> > > The above testcase doesn't work with 4.5 and I doubt it ever worked on
> > > PA. The pointer passed to foo
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 22:47 ---
Works with:
GNU C++ (GCC) version 4.5.0 20100401 (experimental) [trunk revision 157933]
(x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
compiled by GNU C version 4.5.0 20100401 (experimental) [trunk revision
157933], GMP version
--- Comment #15 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 22:48 ---
Well, it's probably worth trying a little harder to grok them, then. Zdenek has
already said that the fix looks OK in principle, but I am not interested at all
in working on this patch anymore (especially not when ot
Command line:
$ gcc -O[123s] -fipa-sra -fnon-call-exceptions testcase.C
Compiler output:
$ gcc -O1 -fipa-sra -fnon-call-exceptions testcase.C
testcase.C: In function 'B::B(int)':
testcase.C:17:4: internal compiler error: in calc_dfs_tree, at dominance.c:396
Please submit a full bug report,
with p
--- Comment #16 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 22:55 ---
Brief explanation about what the patch does:
* have a pointer to the location of the invariant within an rtx. The existing
code assumes a complete RHS is invariant, but with the patch GCC can move
invariants out of
--- Comment #1 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-07-11 22:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=21181)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21181&action=view)
reduced testcase
Command line:
$ gcc -O1 -fipa-sra -fnon-call-exceptions pr44914.C
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #2 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 22:56 ---
Martin, SRA related => yours?
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 22:58 ---
Add TDF_SLIM?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44911
--- Comment #10 from yottui at yahoo dot co dot jp 2010-07-11 23:11 ---
Please use '-m32' if host is x64.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44900
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-07-11 23:11 ---
This is caused by revision 161655:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-07/msg6.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #11 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-07-11 23:35
---
It is very likely caused by revision 158826:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-04/msg00933.html
I will verify it and find out which checkin on trunk
fixes/hides this bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show
--- Comment #11 from davek at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-12 00:14 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > I can't reproduce it with r161865. (on x86_64-linux with -m32)
> >
>
> please confirm that this error introduces from -O1? surely, it would not be
> reproduci
--- Comment #12 from jojelino at gmail dot com 2010-07-12 00:43 ---
reduced testcase
typedef struct _object {
int ob_refcnt; struct _typeobject *ob_type;
} PyObject;
typedef struct bufferinfo {
void *buf;
PyObject *obj;
int len;
int itemsize;
int readonly;
--- Comment #13 from jojelino at gmail dot com 2010-07-12 00:48 ---
extern __attribute__((dllimport)) PyIntObject _Py_TrueStruct;
removing __attribute__((dllimport)) or replacing __attribute__
((visibility("default"))) solves problem...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?
--- Comment #14 from jojelino at gmail dot com 2010-07-12 00:50 ---
then we get more reduced testcase
typedef struct sfoo{
int ob_refcnt;
} foo;
typedef struct sbar{
int ob_refcnt;
} bar;
extern __attribute__((dllimport)) bar bar1;
foo* stub1(){
return (
--- Comment #12 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-07-12 01:05
---
It is caused by revision 158826. On trunk, it
is fixed/hidden by revision 158732:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-04/msg00839.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #13 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-07-12 02:03
---
If you replace
---
vec2 a;
a = vec2::load(p);
---
with
---
vec2 a = vec2::load(p);
---
the testcase will pass.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44900
Command line:
$ g++ -findirect-inlining testcase.C
Valgrind output:
$ valgrind -q --trace-children=yes
/mnt/svn/gcc-trunk/binary-162056-lto-fortran-checking-yes-rtl-df/bin/g++
-findirect-inlining testcase.C
==4614== Invalid read of size 2
==4614==at 0xA692A8: walk_aliased_vdefs_1.constprop.42
--- Comment #1 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-07-12 06:13 ---
Created an attachment (id=21182)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21182&action=view)
reduced testcase
Command line:
$ g++ -findirect-inlining pr44915.C
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #20 from paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
2010-07-12 06:31 ---
Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] Unnecessary temporaries
increase the runtime for channel.f90 by ~70%
4.3 is not so easy - it's throwing a load of regressions. I'll spend
some time tonight to
73 matches
Mail list logo
