http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #3 from Uros Bizjak 2011-08-03 07:00:12
UTC ---
Basically, we should allow ZERO_EXTEND in address:
Trying 117 -> 118:
Failed to match this instruction:
(set (mem:SI (zero_extend:DI (plus:SI (mult:SI (reg/v:SI 150 [ n ])
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49954
Summary: ICE assigning concat expression to an array
deferred-length string (realloc on assignment)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47674
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2011-08-03
07:23:18 UTC ---
The problem seems to be that for strings, the dependency resolver does not
trigger: as there are no strides, certain dependencies are already handled, but
it fails if the LHS/RHS varia
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49938
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48496
--- Comment #7 from Alexander Monakov 2011-08-03
09:00:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Does bootstrap work again?
I haven't checked bootstrap, but the reduced testcase still induces the same
error, and Andreas' gcc-testresults@ mails sugge
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49955
Summary: Fails to do partial basic-block SLP
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Compon
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49956
Summary: [4.7 Regression] FAIL:
gfortran.dg/debug/(pr35154-dwarf2.f|pr37738.f)
-gdwarf-2 -g3 (internal compiler error) on
*-apple-darwin*
Product: gcc
Vers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49957
Summary: Fails to SLP in 410.bwaves
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-opti
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49954
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus 2011-08-03
09:26:09 UTC ---
I thought about something like:
--- a/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c
@@ -7322,8 +7322,8 @@ gfc_alloc_allocatable_for_assignment (gfc_loopinfo *loop,
/* G
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49956
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49951
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49885
--- Comment #10 from Daniel Kraft 2011-08-03
09:37:14 UTC ---
Author: domob
Date: Wed Aug 3 09:37:11 2011
New Revision: 177249
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177249
Log:
2011-08-03 Daniel Kraft
PR fortran/49885
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49950
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2011-08-03
09:38:11 UTC ---
But int i is a common, with -fno-common I get no GOTPCREL but what you expect.
Not sure if we need a GOTPCREL for commons or not.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49949
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49885
Daniel Kraft changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48402
Cheng Sheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jeru.sheng at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49948
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1773
--- Comment #101 from Paolo Carlini
2011-08-03 10:02:44 UTC ---
Thanks Marc. Thus, it seems to me that Rainer should have a look to the
fixincludes, double check make sense to him, aren't library bits and should be
sorted out between you two.
Als
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #4 from Uros Bizjak 2011-08-03 10:24:17
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> Many lea insns can be combined with the load/store insn followed.
I have a patch that generates addr32 prefix. The result:
.file"pr49781.c"
.tex
ffset 8
ret
.cfi_endproc
.LFE1:
.sizemain, .-main
.localheap_len
.commheap_len,4,4
.localheap_max
.commheap_max,4,4
.localheap
.commheap,2292,32
.ident"GCC: (GNU) 4.7.0 20110803 (experimental) [trunk revision
177229]"
.section.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #6 from Uros Bizjak 2011-08-03 10:30:39
UTC ---
Created attachment 24899
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24899
Proposed patch that exploits addr32.
H.J., can you please test this patch on mx32.
The patch bootstra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49473
--- Comment #3 from philb at gnu dot org 2011-08-03 10:38:28 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> This looks like it might be to do with the latency of the call instruction at
> least for the LPIC0 case. The scheduler thinks that r0 isn't ready reall
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49941
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code, patch
Status|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49938
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2011-08-03
11:09:39 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Aug 3 11:09:35 2011
New Revision: 177267
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177267
Log:
2011-08-03 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49938
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49957
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49952
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-08-03 11:19:01 UTC ---
C and C++ reference ISO 10646 instead of Unicode, meaning that it is
natural and proper for the full ISO 10646 range of values to be accepted
instead of the restricte
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49958
Summary: fold performs invalid association
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49952
--- Comment #3 from Kerrek SB 2011-08-03 11:36:41
UTC ---
Maybe it could trigger a warning in -pedantic mode?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
--- Comment #15 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-08-03 11:37:17 UTC ---
> last part of output:
> ---
> libtool: link: /home/htl10/tmp-build/gcc-446-obj/gcc/gcj
> -B/home/htl10/tmp-build/gcc-446-obj/alphaev68-dec-osf5.1a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49958
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49941
--- Comment #8 from Alan Modra 2011-08-03 11:48:24
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Wed Aug 3 11:48:21 2011
New Revision: 177268
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177268
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/49941
* jump.c (mark_jump
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49941
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49952
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2011-08-03
12:00:30 UTC ---
Adding a warning would be easy.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49959
Summary: ABS pattern is not recognized
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49959
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49960
Summary: inconsistant outputs when enabling autopar for a self
-dependence testcase
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49960
--- Comment #1 from razya at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03 12:54:02 UTC ---
Created attachment 24901
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24901
self dependence testcase
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49961
Summary: type bounded function can not return a pointer of a
array
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49961
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-03
13:17:42 UTC ---
With gfortran 4.6.1 and trunk, the code compiles and gives at run time
p1 10
p25
but I get the ICE with 4.5.3. So the bug has been fixed, but not backp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu 2011-08-03 13:26:20
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Created attachment 24899 [details]
> Proposed patch that exploits addr32.
>
> H.J., can you please test this patch on mx32.
>
> The patch bootstraps and regressi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49948
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49958
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2011-08-03
13:33:31 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Aug 3 13:33:28 2011
New Revision: 177270
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177270
Log:
2011-08-03 Richard Guenther
PR middle-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49958
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49948
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40819
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49948
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-08-03
13:44:14 UTC ---
Created attachment 24902
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24902
gcc47-pr49948.patch
Untested patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #20 from H.J. Lu 2011-08-03 13:56:05
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> H.J., I agree with what you write in comment 16. But unless we are sure that
> the problematic composition will never be generated (e.g. by ivopts), we
> canno
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49922
--- Comment #1 from PcX 2011-08-03 14:00:26 UTC
---
Change to lto component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49957
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #21 from Uros Bizjak 2011-08-03 14:05:06
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> and it still has massive failures:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-08/msg00264.html
You broke exceptions. Similar problem can be currently
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47744
--- Comment #40 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
14:07:36 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Aug 3 14:07:32 2011
New Revision: 177271
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177271
Log:
Add testcases for PR target/47744.
2011-08
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu 2011-08-03 14:10:25
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Created attachment 24899 [details]
> Proposed patch that exploits addr32.
>
> H.J., can you please test this patch on mx32.
>
> The patch bootstraps and regressi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49962
Summary: "internal compiler error" when using type-bounded
function returning vector
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49962
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-03
14:22:47 UTC ---
With gfortran 4.6.1 and trunk, the code compiles and gives at run time
1 2 3
but I get the ICE with 4.5.3. So the bug has been fixed, but not ba
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49962
--- Comment #2 from wangmianzhi 2011-08-03
14:24:19 UTC ---
On 2011年08月03日 10:23, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49962
>
> --- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres
> 2011-08-03 14:22:47 UTC ---
>
--disable-shared
--enable-languages=c,c++ --with-dwarf2 --disable-lto
Thread model: single
gcc version 4.7.0 20110803 (experimental) (GCC)
GNU C (GCC) version 4.7.0 20110803 (experimental) (avr)
compiled by GNU C version 4.3.2 [gcc-4_3-branch revision 141291], GMP
version 5.0.1, MPFR versio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49964
Summary: Bootstrap failed with AVX turned on
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
AssignedTo: unassig...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49964
--- Comment #1 from Yukhin Kirill 2011-08-03
14:28:55 UTC ---
Started from here
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/2011-08/msg00051.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49957
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-08-03
14:41:49 UTC ---
The patch now makes us vectorize
shell_lam.f:303: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
shell_lam.f:262: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
shell_lam.f:205: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
compared to just
shell_la
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47383
--- Comment #17 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
14:44:59 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Aug 3 14:44:54 2011
New Revision: 177277
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177277
Log:
Add a testcase for PR middle-end/47383.
20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #9 from Uros Bizjak 2011-08-03 14:45:40
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> > Created attachment 24899 [details]
> > Proposed patch that exploits addr32.
> >
> > H.J., can you please test this patch on mx32.
> >
> > The patch bootst
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #22 from H.J. Lu 2011-08-03 14:48:09
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> H.J., I agree with what you write in comment 16. But unless we are sure that
> the problematic composition will never be generated (e.g. by ivopts), we
> canno
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49900
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Sch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49965
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49740
--- Comment #2 from Douglas Mencken 2011-08-03
14:56:23 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Did it recover?
What shall I try? gcc-4.7-20110730? svn checkout? Some patch? (Nothing has been
attached or reported.)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49965
Summary: libgomp.c++/reduction-4.C and libgomp.c++/task-8.C
FAIL on Solaris 11/SPARC
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #10 from Uros Bizjak 2011-08-03 15:01:10
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
>
> > > Created attachment 24899 [details]
> > > Proposed patch that exploits addr32.
> > >
> > > H.J., can you please test this pa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30282
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49965
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-08-03
15:10:13 UTC ---
for task-8.C, error is a function on linux, so please replace it by errval
or err_atomic or similar instead if err doesn't work on Solaris.
Fur reduction-4.C, perhaps Solaris long dou
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1773
--- Comment #102 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-08-03 15:12:29 UTC ---
> --- Comment #101 from Paolo Carlini
> 2011-08-03 10:02:44 UTC ---
> Thanks Marc. Thus, it seems to me that Rainer should have a look to the
> fixincludes, doub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49955
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49957
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49961
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49962
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49946
--- Comment #1 from Igor Zamyatin 2011-08-03
15:26:57 UTC ---
Used compiler:
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.7.0 20110802 (experimental) (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49963
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49963
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2011-08-03
15:27:36 UTC ---
Probably fails on any 32bit HWI platform.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49966
Summary: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr45034.c execution timeouts
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #12 from Hin-Tak Leung
2011-08-03 15:29:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Did you use an absolute path for the source dir? There have been
> problems with relative paths in the past.
Tried absolute path with 4.6.1, and compilat
ith...
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/darwin_objdir/gcc/xgcc
-B/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/darwin_objdir/gcc/
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/gcc-4.7-20110803/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr45034.c
-w -O2 -lm -m32 -o
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/darwin_objdir/gcc/testsuite/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.6.1
--- Comment #13 from Hin-Tak Leung
ith...
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/darwin_objdir/gcc/xgcc
-B/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/darwin_objdir/gcc/
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/gcc-4.7-20110803/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr45034.c
-w -O2 -lm -m32 -o
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/darwin_objdir/gcc/testsuite/gcc/pr45034
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.6.1
--- Comment #16 from Hin-Tak Leung
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
--- Comment #17 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-08-03 15:42:46 UTC ---
>> > Invalid flag usage: Wl,-rpath, -Wx,-option must appear after
>> > -_SYSTYPE_SVR4
>
>> What I do see is that if you add some -W option to ld, you get exactly
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu 2011-08-03 15:44:59
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> This additional patch prevents zero_extend when we deal with
> wider-than-word-size moves. These moves need offsetable_operand, which
> zero_extend (...) isn't.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49963
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini 2011-08-03
15:45:06 UTC ---
Eh, my way of fixing it would be removing the assert ;) Seriously, too bad, I
can try to look a bit into it but help is welcome of course, I don't think the
project wants to rely on my
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1773
--- Comment #103 from Marc Glisse
2011-08-03 15:52:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #102)
> What would help enormously for this would be a complete justification
> for the individual fixes:
Of course. I tried to keep the fixincludes to the minimum
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #12 from Uros Bizjak 2011-08-03 16:08:47
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> gcc.dg/torture/pr47744-2.c compiled with
>
> -mx32 -O3 -std=gnu99 -ftree-vectorize -funroll-loops
>
> generates codes like
>
> leal(%rax,%r9), %
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu 2011-08-03 16:18:45
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
>
> This additional patch prevents zero_extend when we deal with
> wider-than-word-size moves. These moves need offsetable_operand, which
> zero_extend (...) isn
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49949
--- Comment #2 from Ilker R Capoglu 2011-08-03
16:20:53 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> An attachment is missing. Please try to create a small self-contained
> testcase using .
Sorry, I think it didn't get uploaded because it was above 1000k
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49965
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-08-03 16:26:45 UTC ---
> --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-08-03
> 15:10:13 UTC ---
> for task-8.C, error is a function on linux, so please replace it by errval
> or err_atomic or
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49949
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-08-03
16:27:23 UTC ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/A_guide_to_testcase_reduction is useful
if you can't reduce it then using gzip or bzip2 might make it small enough to
attach
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49950
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49949
--- Comment #4 from Ilker R Capoglu 2011-08-03
16:32:47 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/A_guide_to_testcase_reduction is useful
>
> if you can't reduce it then using gzip or bzip2 might make it small enough to
> attach
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49949
--- Comment #5 from Ilker R Capoglu 2011-08-03
16:34:31 UTC ---
Created attachment 24906
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24906
The preprocessed file with the STL and blitz++ headers. (bzip2'd)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49965
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-08-03
16:37:36 UTC ---
So what values it printed? Did it print -2.0 and 9.0 in some iterations?
The final merging is done in a critical section between GOMP_atomic_start and
GOMP_atomic_end, perhaps you can
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #14 from H.J. Lu 2011-08-03 16:47:09
UTC ---
Created attachment 24907
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24907
A testcase
[hjl@gnu-33 delta]$
/export/build/gnu/gcc-x32-test/release/usr/gcc-4.7.0-x32/bin/gcc -mx32
-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49967
Summary: The -static-libstdc++ does not work on HP-UX (IA64
B.11.23, probably others)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #15 from H.J. Lu 2011-08-03 16:49:12
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> (In reply to comment #10)
> >
> > This additional patch prevents zero_extend when we deal with
> > wider-than-word-size moves. These moves need offsetable_oper
1 - 100 of 153 matches
Mail list logo
