--- Comment #9 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-17 19:36 ---
Subject: Bug 26114
Author: janis
Date: Mon Apr 17 19:35:56 2006
New Revision: 113010
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113010
Log:
PR c++/26114, c++/26115
*
assigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27187
--- Comment #16 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-18 16:23 ---
I verified that the failure starts with Jeff's patch:
r110705 | law | 2006-02-07 10:31:27 -0800 (Tue, 07 Feb 2006)
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=110705
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-18 16:52 ---
As of mainline 20060417 the test is still failing on powerpc-linux, although it
passes for AIX and Darwin. Until December 2005 when Alan fixed the target
specifier, the test had not been run on powerpc64-linux with
with ICE in
gfc_conv_array_transpose
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gnu dot or
gue
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-20 23:31 ---
This test and obj-c++.dg/try-catch-9.mm get the same ICE on powerpc-linux on
trunk as of 2006-04-20, and have failed since I started including obj-c++ on
2005-11-02.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-21 00:10 ---
try-catch-2.mm still fails the same way on powerpc-linux as of 2006-04-20. The
other one currently gets an ICE.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23616
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-21 00:11 ---
lookup-2.mm still fails the same way for powerpc-linux as of 2006-04-20.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23614
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-21 00:12 ---
isa-field-1.mm still fails the same way for powerpc-linux as of 2006-04-20.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23613
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27232
--- Comment #10 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-25 21:16 ---
A regression hunt of trunk on powerpc-linux using mini.c with -O2 identified:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=109016
r109016 | bonzini | 2005-12-23 16:07:53 + (Fri, 23 Dec 2005)
--
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-25 23:49 ---
The patch that introduced this failure also causes the same ICE in several SPEC
CPU2000 programs on powerpc64-linux for "-O2 -fmodulo-sched" with either -m32
or -m64. I haven't tried the patch that
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-26 17:48 ---
The patch doesn't apply cleanly now, which isn't surprising, but it also
doesn't apply to mainline sources as of 2006-03-28, when it was submitted.
What date or revision can I start with to try this
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-26 20:54 ---
Thanks, although I can wait if you have more pressing things to do.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26855
uct: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC ta
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-26 23:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=11338)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11338&action=view)
recog.c
minimized testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27331
ftree-loop-linear
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy:
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-26 23:05 ---
Created an attachment (id=11339)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11339&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27332
--- Comment #7 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-29 00:02 ---
I tried the patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-04/msg01061.html on
powerpc64-linux and used the resulting compilers with "-O2 -fmodulo-sched" to
build SPEC CPU2000 and run with the small, test
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 00:09 ---
The warning for the original testcase went away with this patch:
r81764 | dnovillo | 2004-05-13 06:41:07 + (Thu, 13 May 2004) | 3 lines
Merge tree-ssa-20020619-branch into mainline.
http
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 16:14 ---
The warning was issued again with this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=101269
r101269 | jason | 2005-06-23 14:44:21 + (Thu, 23 Jun 2005)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cg
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 16:16 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=105682
r105682 | mmitchel | 2005-10-20 18:01:52 + (Thu, 20 Oct 2005)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #8 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 18:18 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the test from comment #4 identified
this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=101295
r101295 | hubicka | 2005-06-24 15:14:04 + (Fri, 24 Jun
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-02 23:04 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the test from comment #0 identified
this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=111608
r111608 | dberlin | 2006-03-01 17:46:56 + (Wed, 01 Mar
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-08 15:08 ---
Very odd; I do nightly builds of mainline on two different systems. On one of
them this failure stopped on 20060430 and on the other it stopped on 20060503,
but failed on 20060502.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-09 23:57 ---
A regression hunt using an i686-linux cross compiler on powerpc-linux with the
testcase attached in comment #1 identified this large merge from gomp-branch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=10
--- Comment #7 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-09 23:59 ---
A regression hunt identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=112869
r112869 | mmitchel | 2006-04-11 22:59:57 + (Tue, 11 Apr 2006)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org cha
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-10 16:03 ---
The test passes on both of my nightly builds now, so I'm closing this.
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 20:38 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the testcase from comment #5
identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=113081
r113081 | mmitchel | 2006-04-19 16:58:23 + (Wed, 19 Apr
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target
--- Comment #9 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-16 17:55 ---
Good grief, if it "might not work with Linux" then it shouldn't be available
for GNU/Linux targets.
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #10 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-16 18:26 ---
By the way, I found this by running SPEC CPU2000, FreePOOMA, FTensor, and
Blitz++ with several sets of options plus either "-m32", "-m64", or "-m32
-mpowerpc64" and this was the onl
--- Comment #11 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-16 22:42 ---
As mentioned above, the Linux kernel does not provide context switching support
needed for "-m32 -mpowerpc64". I'm looking into disabling it for
powerpc64-linux.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
at to int conversion doesn't raise invalid exception
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc d
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-19 16:13 ---
This is related to PR21360, although that one is about the result of an
out-of-range conversion.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27682
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-19 17:25 ---
This has been brought up to the glibc developers in the past:
http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2005-03/msg00196.html
It's unfortunate that they don't agree that "an implementation"
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-22 18:40 ---
I get errors for both the submitter's testcase and the testcase in comment #1.
With the comment #1 testcase on powerpc-linux:
elm3b11% /opt/gcc-nightly/3.4/bin/g++ -c 27648.cc
27648.cc: In function `int mai
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-22 19:48 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the testcase from comment #4
identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=112869
r112869 | mmitchel | 2006-04-11 22:59:57 + (Tue, 11 Apr
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-22 21:18 ---
A regression hunt of mainline on powerpc-linux identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=111229
r111229 | mmitchel | 2006-02-18 08:36:11 + (Sat, 18 Feb 2006)
The patch was applied to
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-22 23:02 ---
A regression hunt for mainline on powerpc-linux identified this patch as the
one for which the testcase starts getting an ICE instead of the error messages
shown for GCC 3.4 (branch) in comment #3:
http://gcc.gnu.org
t gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: powerpc-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27745
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-24 18:23 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=109336
r109336 | rth | 2006-01-04 16:33:38 + (Wed, 04 Jan 2006)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-24 21:17 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=109336
r109336 | rth | 2006-01-04 16:33:38 + (Wed, 04 Jan 2006)
This is the same one that started
t gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: powerpc-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27770
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-25 16:30 ---
There's also a problem in the parser file analyze-linkage.c.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27770
--- Comment #7 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-26 18:36 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the testcase from comment #5 with
--ffast-math identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=107218
r107218 | rguenth | 2005-11-19 11:2
--- Comment #7 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-30 16:59 ---
If the value doesn't fit then the result is undefined and doesn't matter;
getting the invalid flag is what's important.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27682
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: powerpc-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27865
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-01 17:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=11574)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11574&action=view)
minimized testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27865
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-01 17:50 ---
A regression hunt using an alpha-linux cross compiler on powerpc64-linux with
the testcase mini.c identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=113632
r113632 | sayle | 2006-0
--- Comment #7 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-05 19:45 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the less-reduced test case with the
options "-O2 --param ggc-min-expand=0 --param ggc-min-heapsize=0" identified
this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-05 20:58 ---
I haven't yet had time to continue trying to come up with a minimized testcase
but hope to get to that soon. I had a vague hope that someone who understands
the section anchor support and has access to SPEC CP
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-06 20:48 ---
Gosh, I don't remember ever seeing this stuff about new exit codes for ICEs. I
can rethink how the testsuite detects them, now that we know where to look.
Does the ICE message get translated for different lo
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-07 18:23 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux with the testcase in comment #3 identified
this mainline patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=112709
r112709 | rguenth | 2006-04-05 15:41:18 + (Wed, 05
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-07 21:52 ---
A regression hunt using an alpha-linux cross compiler on powerpc-linux with the
first testcase from comment #1 identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=110912
r110912 | rakdver |
--- Comment #7 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-07 22:44 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the testcase in the description with
"ulimit -v 50" identified this patch as the start of the failures:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=10252
--- Comment #8 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-07 23:19 ---
The failures stop on mainline with this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=109580
r109580 | hubicka | 2006-01-11 13:13:37 + (Wed, 11 Jan 2006)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org cha
--- Comment #12 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-09 18:10 ---
The reduced testcase from comment #7 doesn't fail with my i686 cross compilers
on powerpc-linux, so I did a regression hunt using the testcase from comment
#4. It identified this patch as the fix on mai
--- Comment #13 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-09 18:44 ---
The test starts failing on mainline with this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=83858
r83858 | rth | 2004-06-29 16:25:28 + (Tue, 29 Jun 2004)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugz
ormal
Priority: P3
Component: other
AssignedTo: janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28002
0
tmp:
.zero 4000
--
Summary: section anchors break -fprofile-generate
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgomp
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28046
--- Comment #10 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-16 18:59 ---
The regression hunt to find when the testcase starts passing identified this
mainline patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=106400
r106400 | rth | 2005-11-02 21:44:17 + (Wed, 02 Nov
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-16 21:12 ---
A regression hunt confirmed that this was fixed by:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=114119
r114119 | mmitchel | 2006-05-25 20:18:26 + (Thu, 25 May 2006)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugz
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-19 21:08 ---
I tried the patch with a C-only bootstrap for biarch powerpc64-linux and ran
the three CPU2000 tests that had failed with profile generate/use; with the
patch they work.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: powerpc-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-20 23:34 ---
Subject: Bug 28113
Author: janis
Date: Tue Jun 20 23:33:58 2006
New Revision: 114832
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=114832
Log:
PR c++/28113
* g++.dg/ext/altivec-3.C
--- Comment #7 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-05 20:35 ---
Regression tests using the reduced testcase from comment #3 on mainline for
powerpc-linux identified this patch where the test starts failing:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=103604
r10
--- Comment #18 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-13 18:18 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the C testcase from comment #6
identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=100793
r100793 | rth | 2005-06-09 07:43:40 + (Thu, 09
--- Comment #8 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-14 00:20 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using an i686-linux cross compiler
identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=102570
r102570 | hubicka | 2005-07-29 22:22:41 + (Fri, 29 Jul
--- Comment #14 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 17:48 ---
Subject: Bug 37202
Author: janis
Date: Wed Nov 12 17:47:13 2008
New Revision: 141794
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141794
Log:
2008-11-12 Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 17:53 ---
Subject: Bug 38008
Author: janis
Date: Wed Nov 12 17:52:24 2008
New Revision: 141795
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141795
Log:
2008-11-12 Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-12 21:35 ---
Subject: Bug 38010
Author: janis
Date: Wed Nov 12 21:33:34 2008
New Revision: 141803
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141803
Log:
2008-11-12 Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-14 18:38 ---
Subject: Bug 38098
Author: janis
Date: Fri Nov 14 18:36:41 2008
New Revision: 141862
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141862
Log:
2008-11-14 Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #24 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-17 19:41 ---
Subject: Bug 38099
Author: janis
Date: Mon Nov 17 19:39:54 2008
New Revision: 141948
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141948
Log:
2008-11-14 Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-17 20:19 ---
Fixed by Jack's patch.
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-17 20:20 ---
Fixed by Jack's patch.
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-17 20:21 ---
Fixed by Jack's patch.
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #25 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-17 20:23 ---
Fixed by Jack's patch.
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #21 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-18 22:48 ---
Interesting that you should ask, I modified the patch yesterday and intend to
submit it as soon as I've done some more testing.
The current version adds dg-timeout, which sets the timeout for running the
compil
--- Comment #23 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-21 00:58 ---
I posted a patch for compiler tests at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-11/msg01066.html
but after playing around more realized that it shouldn't be necessary to allow
setting a default in .dejagnurc,
--- Comment #24 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-21 01:28 ---
For the libstdc++ tests, which are the original focus of this PR, is it enough
to provide dg-timeout and dg-timeout-factor and either leave the 600 default,
or else take the larger of that and [target_info gcc
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 18:07 ---
Subject: Bug 38076
Author: janis
Date: Mon Nov 24 18:05:50 2008
New Revision: 142163
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142163
Log:
2008-11-24 Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 18:12 ---
Subject: Bug 38241
Author: janis
Date: Mon Nov 24 18:11:12 2008
New Revision: 142164
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142164
Log:
2008-11-24 Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #25 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 22:31 ---
I'm still tweaking this, to support dg-timeout and dg-timeout-factor plus
tool-specific default timeouts for gcc, libstdc++-v3, libgomp, and libmudflap.
As for picking up gcc,timeout for the target bo
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgomp
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-26 17:39 ---
This is the same problem as in PR37938, as H.J. said, but for powerpc*-linux.
I'll try copying the ia64 solution.
I see that my objections to having a separate libgomp mutex.h for powerpc have
already been rais
--- Comment #26 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-26 18:52 ---
Subject: Bug 28870
Author: janis
Date: Wed Nov 26 18:51:07 2008
New Revision: 142225
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142225
Log:
gcc/
PR testsuite/28870
* doc/sourcebu
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-26 22:08 ---
I'm about to take off for a long holiday weekand and haven't finished testing,
but it fixes the test failures to copy mutex.h from libgomp/config/linux/ia64
to libgomp/config/linux/powerpc and update th
--- Comment #27 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-26 22:16 ---
Subject: Bug 28870
Author: janis
Date: Wed Nov 26 22:15:07 2008
New Revision: 142230
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142230
Log:
PR testsuite/28870
* lib/
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-02 00:00 ---
This test also fails on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu for both -m32 and -m64. It
passed on 2008-08-24 (r138089) and failed on 2008-08-25 (r138121). Let me know
if you'd like me to run a regression hunt and/or pr
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-02 00:05 ---
This test also fails on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu for both -m32 and -m64.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38219
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-02 00:20 ---
Subject: Bug 38270
Author: janis
Date: Tue Dec 2 00:18:56 2008
New Revision: 142341
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142341
Log:
PR libgomp/38270
* config/linux/powerpc
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-02 00:50 ---
Fixed.
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
words broke test for
__vector bool
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gn
--- Comment #28 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-02 17:45 ---
Subject: Bug 28870
Author: janis
Date: Tue Dec 2 17:44:08 2008
New Revision: 142366
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142366
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2008-11-2
--- Comment #29 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-02 17:49 ---
Fixed in trunk (4.4) and 4.3; 4.2 isn't expected to have additional releases so
I haven't backported it there.
The patch solves the original reported problem, a hard-coded timeout for
libstdc++ tests, b
--- Comment #10 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-02 22:13 ---
Subject: Bug 29056
Author: janis
Date: Tue Dec 2 22:11:55 2008
New Revision: 142374
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142374
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2008-08-2
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-02 22:28 ---
Adding "--param sra-max-structure-size=32" as suggested in comment #1 makes the
test pass on powerpc64-linux with -m32 and -m64. Jan, is that an appropriate
fix/workaround?
--
http://gcc.gnu.or
1 - 100 of 930 matches
Mail list logo
