http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46080
Summary: incorrect precision of sqrtf builtin for x87
arithmetic (-mfpmath=387)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Hello,
After being pointed to a thread about unexpected NaNs
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/1999-10/msg00410.html), I decided to
try here to see if the "ghost" I have in my code rings a bell with
anyone...
In short, I have a trigger series of events that I can set off in my
code (an X11 data man
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46081
Summary: [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-pta-10.c
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Ass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46080
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i?86-*-*
Status|UNCONFIRME
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46078
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46077
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46081
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu 2010-10-19 10:50:54
UTC ---
Executing on host: /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/bld/gcc/xgcc
-B/export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/bld/gcc/
/export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/src-trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-pta-10.c
-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46076
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42169
--- Comment #21 from Richard Guenther 2010-10-19
10:55:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> Not really, there are about 300 lines of new code (mostly in a new routine).
> It might be that only the change in can_reassociate_p is needed to fix th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46081
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2010-10-19
11:06:33 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Oct 19 11:06:29 2010
New Revision: 165697
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=165697
Log:
2010-10-19 Richard Guenther
PR testsui
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46081
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46079
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milest
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46077
Ira Rosen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||irar at il dot ibm.com
--- Comment #1 from Ir
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43414
--- Comment #3 from Francois-Xavier Coudert
2010-10-19 12:30:43 UTC ---
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Tue Oct 19 12:30:35 2010
New Revision: 165699
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=165699
Log:
PR fortran/43414
* dwarf2out.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43414
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46024
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46079
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37360
Jie Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jiez at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #20 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46082
Summary: libgcj fails to build in current 4.5 branch
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: unass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45962
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
--- Comment #16 from Richard Hend
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44970
--- Comment #87 from Steve Ellcey 2010-10-19 16:09:57
UTC ---
My testing on 32 bit and 64 bit PA boxes went fine. The patch looks good to
me.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46083
Summary: gcc.dg/initpri1.c FAILs with -flto/-fwhopr (attribute
constructor/destructor doesn't work)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37360
--- Comment #21 from Jie Zhang 2010-10-19 16:58:58
UTC ---
Another way to fix this bug:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-10/msg00281.html
David, are you still interested to try this patch on sb1?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37360
--- Comment #22 from David Daney 2010-10-19 17:38:32
UTC ---
I no longer have access to an SB1. But you should be able to run the test case
on a cross compiler to see how it is affected by any patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46056
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Klimov 2010-10-19
18:22:11 UTC ---
Created attachment 22086
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22086
simple testcase
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46056
Alexander Klimov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[C++0x] range-based for |[C++0x] range-based for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46084
Summary: gcc.dg/split-4.c failed with -mavx -m32
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassig..
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46085
Summary: [4..6 Regression]
gcc.dg/vect/fast-math-vect-reduc-[57].c failed with
-mavx -ffast-math -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46085
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46085
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu 2010-10-19 19:48:35
UTC ---
[...@gnu-18 gcc]$ cat x.c
extern void abort ();
float b[16] = {0,3,6,9,12,15,18,21,24,27,30,33,36,39,42,45};
float c[16] = {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15};
int main ()
{
int i;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41757
Diego Novillo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dnovillo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46056
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2010-10-19
20:35:01 UTC ---
Many thanks Alexander.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46056
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rodrigorivascosta at gmail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46086
Summary: fail to build gcc 4.5.2 on sparc64-portbld-freebsd9.0
- configure: error: cannot compute suffix of object
files: cannot compile
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46086
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2010-10-19
21:06:26 UTC ---
>cc1: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault: 11
Does this happen every time?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46086
--- Comment #2 from Anton Shterenlikht 2010-10-19
21:10:00 UTC ---
yes
I've repeated it maybe 5-10 times over the last several weeks.
I don't know if this is a regression. I think lapack dependency
in freebsd ports recently moved from gcc44 to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46086
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43657
--- Comment #4 from Changpeng Fang 2010-10-19
21:27:46 UTC ---
for (k = 0; k < 32; k++)
{
res = 0;
for (j = 0; j < 32; j++)
for (i = 0; i < 32; i++)
{
next = a[i][j];
res = c > cond_ar
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46085
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu 2010-10-19 21:32:05
UTC ---
(define_expand "reduc_splus_v8sf"
[(match_operand:V8SF 0 "register_operand" "")
(match_operand:V8SF 1 "register_operand" "")]
"TARGET_AVX"
{
rtx tmp = gen_reg_rtx (V8SFmode);
rtx
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46072
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Richard G. 2010-10-19
21:51:44 UTC ---
I'd like to add: We've been able to work around this issue in our C codebase
simply by ensuring that every static variable is initialized with a value. The
bug behavior makes the u
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44503
Changpeng Fang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46086
--- Comment #4 from Anton Shterenlikht 2010-10-19
22:07:54 UTC ---
what specifically?
The versions of the libraries mentioned on my box are
above the minimum recommended:
mpfr-3.0.0
gmp-5.0.1
binutils-2.20.1_3
or did I miss something else?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23280
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46085
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45962
--- Comment #17 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2010-10-19
22:21:43 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> MAX_STACK_ALIGNMENT should be MAX_OFILE_ALIGNMENT if you support
> the full stack re-alignment scheme.
Is there a particular reason it should be MAX_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46084
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu 2010-10-19 22:42:20
UTC ---
This one fails without AVX instructions:
[...@gnu-18 gcc]$ ./xgcc -B./
/export/gnu/import/git/gcc-avx/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/split-4.c -mavx -m32
-fsplit-stack -S
[...@gnu-18 gcc]$ ./xgcc -B
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46046
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-10-19 22:58:14 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Oct 19 22:58:11 2010
New Revision: 165708
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=165708
Log:
/cp
2010-10-19 Paolo Carlini
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46046
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44776
Zdenek Sojka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zsojka at seznam dot cz
--- Comment #11 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46087
Summary: Double precision values, when read in from data file,
include random trailing numbers
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Prio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46087
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45962
--- Comment #18 from Richard Henderson 2010-10-19
23:21:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> Is there a particular reason it should be MAX_OFILE_ALIGNMENT?
No. For ELF, that just means "arbitrarily large".
> Hm, the default should fall back
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46088
Summary: [4.6 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in
ix86_binary_operator_ok (i386.c:15025) with -Os
-fnon-call-exceptions -fpeel-loops
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46089
Summary: ICE: in gen_reg_rtx, at emit-rtl.c:861 with
-mcmodel=large -fsplit-stack
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46080
--- Comment #2 from Vincent Lefèvre 2010-10-20
01:51:56 UTC ---
Created attachment 22089
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22089
sh script to test sqrtf
Similar problems can also be found with:
printf ("%.60f\n%.60f\n%.60f\n
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42169
Vladimir Makarov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at redhat dot com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46088
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46090
Summary: 16 bit uint16_t puts non-zero in highest bits when
shifting
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46090
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46091
Summary: missed optimization: x86 bt/btc/bts instructions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo:
60 matches
Mail list logo
