--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-20 04:09 ---
Revision 148512:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-06/msg00492.html
is the cause.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-20 04:11 ---
Revision 148512 failed to build binutils. You may need to remove -Werror
from CFLAGS in Makefile by hand when building binutils. See PR 40500.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-20 04:21 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> This is expected behavior, y's variable initialization is skipped.
>
y is never used by "goto l1". The code is perfectly deterministic.
--
hjl dot tools at
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-20 04:33 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > (In reply to comment #2)
> > > This is expected behavior, y's variable initialization is skipped.
> > >
> >
> &g
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-20 13:21 ---
Created an attachment (id=18032)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18032&action=view)
A patch to avoid warning from -Wall
You can apply this patch to binutils to avoid
warning from -Wall
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-22 13:37 ---
Fixed.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40520
--- Comment #11 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-23 13:40
---
(In reply to comment #10)
> The miscompiled file seems to be gas/tc-i386.o. Early SRA is enough to
> trigger
> the problem. Digging deeper...
>
tc-i386.c uses union with bit fields. See opcodes/i3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40528
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-24 13:09 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> _mm_load_sd( (const doubleA*)(from) )
>
> does not work because the prototype of _mm_load_sd does not have a type
> with the may-alias attribute, so it gets stripped again.
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-24 13:20 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> Since my update to version 4.5 06-18-2009 i have some errors on compiling.
> Here are my logs for ppp-2.4.4 and xorg-server-1.6.1.901
>
> These are my first packages after com
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-24 15:28 ---
With option 3, we can check the return value of an ifunc
function since we know the return value is a pointer to
the ifunc function. We don't need a separate prototype
nor asm statement.
--
http://gcc.gn
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-24 15:31 ---
Created an attachment (id=18060)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18060&action=view)
Ifunc examples
Here are some ifunc examples with option 3.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-24 16:07 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Option 2) is certainly the least intrusive in the compiler and you can use it
> even with foo's prototype and calling it from the same CU, just use asm.
> __typeof (foo) *
&
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-24 19:31 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> What do you do if the function has arguments, because ifunc shouldn't have
> arguments? While C++ has unnamed arguments and you could perhaps enforce
> them,
For unnamed
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-25 00:15 ---
Can you provide a testcase?
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-25 14:12 ---
It is easier to support C++ with option 3.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40528
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40554
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-26 16:14 ---
For C++:
class Foo
{
private:
virtual void foo1 ()
{
printf ("I am %s\n", __PRETTY_FUNCTION__);
}
public:
virtual void __attribute__ ((ifunc)) foo ()
{
return
org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40559
--- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-26 20:20 ---
Created an attachment (id=18076)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18076&action=view)
Ifunc examples in C and C++
Here are some C/C++ examples with valid and invalid cases.
--
hjl dot t
--- Comment #10 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-26 20:39
---
Created an attachment (id=18077)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18077&action=view)
A C++ program with ifunc attribute
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40528
--- Comment #11 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-26 20:41
---
Created an attachment (id=18078)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18078&action=view)
Static Linux/ia32 binary of prog.C
I got
[...@gnu-6 c++]$ ./static
I have SSE4.2
I support 64bit.
Summary: [4.5 Regression] Extra failures
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gma
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-27 00:43 ---
It was introduced revision 145565 and 145569.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40274
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-27 00:45 ---
It is caused by revision 145566:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-04/msg00188.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
riority: P3
Component: testsuite
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40567
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-28 14:06 ---
Fixed.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-29 16:18 ---
Revision 139590 (IRA):
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2008-08/msg01152.html
is very likely the cause.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-29 16:57 ---
Revision 139590 is the cause.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-29 21:51 ---
This is caused by revision 147995:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-05/msg00974.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-29 21:54 ---
This is related to PR 40304.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40596
--
Summary: [4.5 Regression] Errors in "make check"
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
Re
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-01 13:46 ---
Fixed.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-01 17:19 ---
Fixed.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40613
Summary: [4.5 Regression] Revision 149170 breaks bootstrap
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl do
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-02 13:51 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> For 4.5 you mean?
>
Yes. Only on Linux/ia32. Linux/x86-64 passed that failure
point.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|R
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-02 14:36 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Ok, I see it with stage3 only :(
>
> build/genmodes > tmp-modes.c
> /bin/sh: line 1: 16996 Segmentation fault build/genmodes > tmp-modes.c
> make[3]: *** [s-mode
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-04 18:56 ---
I think icc has an option to limit pointer size to 32bit.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-04 19:03 ---
/Qauto-ilp32 (-auto-ilp32): Specifies that the application cannot exceed
a 32-bit address space, which allows the compiler to use 32-bit pointers
whenever possible.
To use this option, you must also specify /Qipo
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-07 14:41 ---
I think it is related to PR 39137.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40667
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
GCC target triplet: ia64-*-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40674
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-07 17:31 ---
27_io/basic_filebuf/imbue/wchar_t/14975-2.cc also hangs.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40674
t org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40683
--- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-09 13:57 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> on -m32 we ever decrease the stack alignment, this shouldn't break anything.
> BTW, the patch also changes something that looks like a thinko to me:
> unsi
--- Comment #11 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-09 16:34
---
(In reply to comment #10)
> I'm not sure what you mean MINIMUM_TYPE_ALIGN should be. A new type field?
> That would be IMHO an overkill, would enlarge types too much.
> If it is just a macro
Version: lto
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40704
nent: testsuite
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40707
ary: [4.5 regression] Revision 149113 caused testsuite error
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
Reported
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-10 03:58 ---
I still see them with revision 149365 on Linux/ia64.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40674
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-10 04:04 ---
Revision 147761 is bad:
FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/imbue/char/13171-2.cc execution test
Revision 147732 is OK. On Linux/ia64, revision 147761 has extra
1180 failures vs. revision 147732.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-10 04:06 ---
The only change between revision 147732 and revision 147761 is
r147738 | dnovillo | 2009-05-20 06:36:30 -0700 (Wed, 20 May 2009) | 5 lines
* testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp: Perform -flto test after
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-10 04:09 ---
I got
12309 ?S 0:00 ./13171-2.exe
18148 ?S 0:00 ./14975-2.exe
[...@gnu-11 src-lto]$ strace -p 12309
Process 12309 attached - interrupt to quit
open("tmp_fifo_13171-2", O_WRON
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-10 16:18 ---
A patch is posted at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-07/msg00602.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-10 16:30 ---
A patch is posted at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-07/msg00603.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40719
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-12 18:19 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> These were added by HJ. Either we need to fixinclude stdlib.h or not define
> these based on a configure test (I guess the former is more robust if
> ia32intrin.h defines thes
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-12 18:23 ---
Revision 149518 is OK. I am running Fedora 11. I can't reproduce it
even with revision 149512.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-12 18:32 ---
It doesn't work. On Linux/ia32, I got
FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr40388.C -O0 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr40388.C -O1 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr40388.C -O2 (tes
--- Comment #10 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-12 18:33
---
The same failure happens on Linux/Intel64 and Linux/ia64.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40745
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40781
: other
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40784
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40791
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40798
dle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40799
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-18 16:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=18219)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18219&action=view)
A testcase
It failed to compile at -O0, -O1, -O2, -O3.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-18 16:30 ---
Revision 149750 is the cause. Gcc is configured with
../src-trunk/configure --prefix=/export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/usr
--enable-clocale=gnu --with-system-zlib --enable-shared --with-demangler-in-ld
--enable
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-20 21:13 ---
Vectorizer needs to check signs when vectorizing conversions from
unsigned int to float if int > float vector insn is used. For example:
cvtdq2ps u4(%rip), %xmm2
movaps%xmm2, %x
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-20 21:16 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Vectorizer needs to check signs when vectorizing conversions from
> unsigned int to float if int > float vector insn is used. For example:
>
Should it be done in vectorizer o
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-20 22:51 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> PR 39943 ?
>
Yes, it is. Gcc 4.5.0 revision 149104 works fine. Should the fix
backported to 4.3/4.4 branches?
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|R
[...@gnu-6 tmp]$ cat x.c
#define N 4
extern unsigned int u4[N] __attribute__ ((aligned(16)));
extern float f4[N] __attribute__ ((aligned(16)));
void
cvt_u4_f4()
{
int j;
for (j=0; jhttp://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40811
--- Comment #10 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-21 02:48
---
[...@gnu-6 tmp]$ vi v.c
[...@gnu-6 tmp]$ cat v.c
#include
#define N 4
void
cvt_u4_f4(int n, unsigned int* u4, float* f4)
{
int j;
for (j=0; jhttp://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39943
--- Comment #11 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-21 02:49
---
I think the fix should be back ported to 4.3/4.4.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-21 02:52 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> What about unsigned int -> double?
>
We don't even support int -> double.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40811
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40827
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-22 14:56 ---
Testcase fails on Linux/ia32 and Linux/x86-64:
FAIL: g++.dg/lookup/using21.C (test for excess errors)
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-22 17:09 ---
Pilot error.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40830
+
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
BugsThisDependsOn: 40799
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40834
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-23 02:34 ---
Fixed.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-23 13:43 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 39315 ***
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-23 13:43
---
*** Bug 40838 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-23 13:56 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
>
> Another point: if gcc realigns the stack, why then use movdqu to store the
> values on the stack? That is suboptimal.
>
This is a dup for PR 39315.
--
http://gcc.gnu.
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-23 14:38 ---
Fixed.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-23 14:40 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Can you try with the patch for 40799 applied before gimplification
> unit-at-a-time? Does the failure reproduce with the test data or only with the
> ref data?
>
I applied t
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40684
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-23 18:15 ---
FunctionSubstringAfter.cpp FunctionSubstringBefore.cpp FunctionSubstring.cpp
are miscompiled. I have to replace all of them to get a working binary,
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40834
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-23 18:19 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> FunctionSubstringAfter.cpp FunctionSubstringBefore.cpp FunctionSubstring.cpp
> are miscompiled. I have to replace all of them to get a working binary,
>
It fails even with -O0
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-23 18:48 ---
Created an attachment (id=18246)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18246&action=view)
A testcase
You can compare the outputs before and after change.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/b
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-23 18:56 ---
Here are the differences between good and bad
GOOD const struct XalanDOMString & theFirstString = (const struct
XalanDOMString &) (const struct XalanDOMString *) OBJ_TYPE_REF(*(SAVE_EXPR
(&arg
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-23 18:57 ---
Jason, can you take a look at this?
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-23 19:16 ---
This patch:
Index: cp-gimplify.c
===
--- cp-gimplify.c (revision 149933)
+++ cp-gimplify.c (working copy)
@@ -804,15 +804,6
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-24 01:52 ---
It works for me on RHEL 4 with gcc 4.4.1:
[...@gnu-14 tmp]$ cat foo.cc
#include
using namespace std;
void f(const char * filename)
{
ifstream is;
throw 2;
}
int main()
{
try {
f("v3");
} c
--- Comment #11 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-24 14:16
---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] Revision 149750 failed
> 483.xalancbmk in SPEC CPU 2006
>
> On Thu, 23 Jul 2009, hjl dot tools at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> > --
--- Comment #16 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-24 20:06
---
(In reply to comment #14)
> Index: cp/cp-gimplify.c
> ===
> --- cp/cp-gimplify.c(revision 150041)
> +++ cp/cp-gimplify.c(
--- Comment #17 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-24 21:55
---
Created an attachment (id=18251)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18251&action=view)
A testcase
[...@gnu-34 bad]$ make
/export/gnu/import/rrs/149748-fixed/usr/bin/g++ -S pr40834.C -
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-27 19:07 ---
I also see it on Linux/x86. It is an known issue:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-07/msg00266.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40891
501 - 600 of 3390 matches
Mail list logo
