http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48422
Summary: bootstrap failure for i686-*-* targets by ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: un
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48407
Ryan Hill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dirtyepic at gentoo dot org
--- Comment #1 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #61 from Jan Hubicka 2011-04-03
08:34:01 UTC ---
My tree still builds (this is debug info ICE and I use non-debug info by
default). Will update tree and try to reproduce it. Would be handy to have a
testcase.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #62 from Jan Hubicka 2011-04-03
08:36:47 UTC ---
and since it doesn't fail at link time, this is debug info bug, not LTO, so if
you get a testcase, please open a new PR.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44897
--- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka 2011-04-03
09:00:04 UTC ---
Sorry, forgot about the division by zero issue. Testing patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #63 from Jan Hubicka 2011-04-03
09:09:03 UTC ---
Some stats on size of the compilation unit...
There is 4.5GB of GGC memory, it gets down to 3.9MB after type merging and
3.1MB after cgraph merging.
GIMPLE type table: size 524287, 37
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48400
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||peter at pogma dot com
--- Comment #20 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #64 from Jan Hubicka 2011-04-03
10:08:34 UTC ---
Some detailed stats on WPA memory usage.
Before IPA:
ipa-prop.c:2820 (ipa_read_node_info) 0: 0.0%8895232:
1.1% 24998944: 0.7% 395040: 0.1% 558297
t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48421
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48417
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48418
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48412
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48403
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48418
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-04-03 11:21:27 UTC ---
It's deliberate that folding of references to const variables is now
delayed - and ideally it would move out of the front end altogether.
While decl_constant_value_f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48400
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48423
Summary: crash when using lto, linker plugin with bfd ld
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
Component: lto
AssignedTo: un
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #65 from Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-04-03 11:32:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #62)
> and since it doesn't fail at link time, this is debug info bug, not LTO, so if
> you get a testcase, please open a new PR.
You're right, it builds f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48400
--- Comment #21 from Iain Sandoe 2011-04-03 11:43:30
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
on i686-darwin9
the bootstrap still fails with the bus err.
> What are the changes *after* the second patch? The first two hunks
> ought to have disappeare
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48403
revital.eres at linaro dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||revital.eres at linaro dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48422
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build, ice-on-valid-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48424
Summary: C++0x parameter packs expansion problem
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...@g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48425
Summary: installed plugin headers fail to compile, include
non-existent files
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48424
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48422
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48417
--- Comment #2 from licheng.1212 at gmail dot com 2011-04-03 15:43:45 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> You have to build the java runtime with -ffixed-reg also.
The runtime and all my project also have those options
export CFLAGS="-G0 -Wall -ma
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48408
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48422
--- Comment #2 from Eric Botcazou 2011-04-03
16:23:41 UTC ---
> Kai wrote in #gcc that it is due to Rev. 171862.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2011-04/msg00054.html
This patch is a no-op except for Ada. You probably didn't rebuild the enti
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48423
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48422
--- Comment #3 from Kai Tietz 2011-04-03 17:10:22
UTC ---
Yes, a complete rebuild fixed the issue.
The following patch to fortran/Make-lang.in should solve this also for a
partial rebuild:
Index: Make-lang.in
===
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48412
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig 2011-04-03
17:28:14 UTC ---
Hi Joost,
the following patch
Index: frontend-passes.c
===
--- frontend-passes.c (Revision 171913)
+++ frontend-pass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48397
Zdenek Sojka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|gcc.target/i386/pr46419.c |gcc.target/i386/pr46419.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48423
--- Comment #2 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-04-03 17:34:18 UTC ---
thanks hl,
it looks promising.
the thets runs and
nm -C -D libBase.o
shows
00201140 V typeinfo for Base
0fb3 V typeinfo name for Base
like gold
I will test it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48422
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou 2011-04-03
17:36:28 UTC ---
> Ok for apply?
Other languages have langhooks.h $(LANGHOOKS_DEF_H) here. There are other
missing dependencies for this file though.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48340
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-04-03
17:58:14 UTC ---
Created attachment 23858
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23858
handle ctype::mask values that don't fit in 16bits
this should fix it, but changes the size of ct
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48403
--- Comment #23 from revital.eres at linaro dot org 2011-04-03 18:01:23 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > On Linux/x86, revision 171845 failed to bootstrap:
> There is bootsrap failure also on powerpc64-suse-linux usi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48426
Summary: [patch] Quad precision promotion
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassig...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48426
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Kloeckner 2011-04-03
18:05:10 UTC ---
Created attachment 23859
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23859
patch v1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48423
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu 2011-04-03 18:06:23
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> thanks hl,
> it looks promising.
> the thets runs and
> nm -C -D libBase.o
> shows
> 00201140 V typeinfo for Base
> 0fb3 V typeinfo name for Ba
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48400
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #23855|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48427
Summary: ICE: tree check: expected array_type, have
pointer_type in array_ref_low_bound, at expr.c:6253
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48427
--- Comment #1 from Dmitry Gorbachev
2011-04-03 18:09:54 UTC ---
Created attachment 23862
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23862
Compile with `gcc -r -nostdlib -flto foo.c bar.c'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48400
--- Comment #23 from Richard Henderson 2011-04-03
18:16:04 UTC ---
... and if that works, we'll see how much of the other line info
additions we can put back in. Assuming you've a modern debugger
that might be able to use them ...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48366
Vladimir Makarov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at redhat dot com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25708
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48366
--- Comment #7 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-04-03 18:37:07 UTC ---
> I guess that the last patch (for pr48380) I sent should solve the problem too.
> Unfortunately, I did not get an approval for the patch yet.
I'll try it if it isn't i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47888
--- Comment #2 from Dmitry Gorbachev
2011-04-03 18:41:45 UTC ---
Created attachment 23863
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23863
Backtrace from GCC 4.7.0 20110402
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48311
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-03
18:45:18 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Sun Apr 3 18:45:16 2011
New Revision: 171914
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=171914
Log:
2011-04-03 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/483
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48311
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39585
Petteri Aimonen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jpa at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48422
--- Comment #5 from Kai Tietz 2011-04-03 19:01:57
UTC ---
Yes, there are. I added the most obvious one now to my patch.
Index: Make-lang.in
===
--- Make-lang.in(revision 171
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48400
--- Comment #24 from Iain Sandoe 2011-04-03 19:18:31
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #23)
> ... and if that works, we'll see how much of the other line info
> additions we can put back in. Assuming you've a modern debugger
> that might be able to u
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48426
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48400
--- Comment #25 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-04-03 19:27:08 UTC ---
> I wonder if something is un-initialized in ld64 :(
AFAICT the problem occurs for both -m64 and -m32.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48428
Summary: gfortran internal error
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48426
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Kloeckner 2011-04-03
19:49:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> There is already -fdefault-real-8, -fdefault-integer-8, and
> -fdefault-double-8. This is already 3 too many hacks. Adding
> an additional 7 options is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48422
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-03
20:04:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Yes, there are. I added the most obvious one now to my patch.
[...]
> ok for apply?
OK. I think there are more (esp. for other files), but I think it should
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48423
--- Comment #4 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-04-03 20:05:37 UTC ---
thanks for the hint.
the version on
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/devel/binutils/binutils-2.21.51.0.7.x86_64.tar.bz2
seems to be ok
it also produces (as the one in your branch)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48422
--- Comment #7 from Kai Tietz 2011-04-03 20:09:52
UTC ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Sun Apr 3 20:09:46 2011
New Revision: 171916
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=171916
Log:
2011-04-03 Kai Tietz
PR middle-end/48422
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48422
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48407
Joel Sherrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com, joel
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48407
--- Comment #3 from Joel Sherrill 2011-04-03 20:25:18
UTC ---
Sorry.. it was submitted before I was finished...
I have this in my local tree. I recall Ian and I discussing that since
Go and GCJ both need libffi, the logic should be smarter. Bu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48426
--- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl
2011-04-03 20:33:12 UTC ---
On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 07:49:53PM +, inform at tiker dot net wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48426
>
> --- Comment #3 from Andreas Kloeckner 2011-04-03
> 19:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48400
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #23860|0 |1
is obsolete|
On 04/03/2011 12:49 PM, inform at tiker dot net wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48426
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Kloeckner 2011-04-03
19:49:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
There is already -fdefault-real-8, -fdefault-integer-8, and
-fdefault-double-8. This is already
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48426
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at frontier dot com 2011-04-03 21:14:41 UTC ---
On 04/03/2011 12:49 PM, inform at tiker dot net wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48426
>
> --- Comment #3 from Andreas Kloeckner 2011-04-03
> 19:49:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48400
--- Comment #27 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-04-03 21:52:57 UTC ---
With the patch in comment #26 on top of revision 171916, I am now at stage 2,
i.e., past the previous failures. Thanks for the perseverance;-)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48366
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-04-04 00:34:48 UTC ---
On Sun, 03 Apr 2011, John David Anglin wrote:
> > I guess that the last patch (for pr48380) I sent should solve the problem
> > too.
> > Unfortunately, I did not get a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48430
Summary: std::hash partial specialization for std::unique_ptr
and std::shared_ptr are using unary_function
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #66 from froydnj at codesourcery dot com 2011-04-04 01:18:59 UTC ---
On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 10:09:06AM +, hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Kind Nodes Bytes
> ---
> decl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48431
Summary: patch to fix a compile error in lto-plugin.c when
using older C compilers
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48403
--- Comment #24 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-04-04 06:30:12 UTC ---
Bootstrap comparison failure!
gcc/c-family/c-ada-spec.o differs
gcc/c-family/c-format.o differs
gcc/c-parser.o differs
gcc/cfgexpand.o differs
gcc/cp/parser.o differs
gcc/cse.o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48400
--- Comment #28 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-04-04 06:32:26 UTC ---
With the patch in comment #26 on top of revision 171916, bootstrap proceeded up
to pr48403.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48432
Summary: -Wstrict-overflow incorrectly warns for Emacs
src/font.c
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component:
73 matches
Mail list logo