Gcc puts the section markers incorrect, resulting in a basically dummy effect
Take this simple example:
void simple_test(int X)
{
if (__builtin_expect((X==3),0))
call_slowpath_function();
else
call_fastpath_function();
}
this leads to the following
--- Comment #11 from dorit at il dot ibm dot com 2006-02-28 08:26 ---
Created an attachment (id=10935)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10935action=view)
tentative patch
I get a similar error message when trying to bootstrap mainline with
vectorization enabled:
--- Comment #23 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 08:43 ---
Fixed in 4.0 and higher.
Won't fix for 3.4.x
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #40 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 08:46 ---
Fixed in 4.1. and up.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #24 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 08:47 ---
Fixed im 4.0 and up.
Won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #22 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 08:49 ---
No interest in fixing for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #20 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 08:51 ---
Fixed in 4.0 and up.
Won't fix for 3.4.5
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #22 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 08:52 ---
Fixed in 4.0.
Won't fix in 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 08:53 ---
Fixed in 4.0. and up.
Won't fix in 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 08:54 ---
Fixed in 4.0. Won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2006-02-28 09:02
---
Subject: Re: [3.4 only] Use of 'mov' may violate WAW dependency 'GR%, % in 1 -
127' (impliedf), specific resource number is 14
wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
| As a
--- Comment #9 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:13 ---
Fixed in 3.4.6 too.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #8 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:14 ---
Fixed in 4.0 and up. Won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:15 ---
Fixed in 4.0 and up. Won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:17 ---
Works in 4.0 and up. Won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:19 ---
Fxed in 4.0.2.
Won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:22 ---
Fixed in 4.0 and higher. Won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from Ralf dot Wildenhues at gmx dot de 2006-02-28 09:23
---
Regarding the hardcoding problem, the HP-UX 11 ld option '+nodefaultrpath'
looks like it might be useful. It seems to be used for ia64 but not
hppa*64*, or hppa in general on hpux11.
I can not find
--- Comment #10 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:23 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:24 ---
Fixed in 4.0 and up.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:25 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #16 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:27 ---
Fixed in 4.2 and up.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:28 ---
Fixed in 4.0 and up.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #18 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:29 ---
Fixed in 4.0 and up. Won't fix in 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:30 ---
won't fix in 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #16 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:32 ---
Fixed in 4.0 and up. Won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #30 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:34 ---
Fixed in 4.0 and up.
Won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #14 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:35 ---
Fixed in 4.1.0. won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:36 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #23 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:37 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:38 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:39 ---
Fixed in 4.0 and higher. Won't fix in 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:40 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #7 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:40 ---
Fixed in 4.0.x and up.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:41 ---
not cirtical.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #8 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:41 ---
Fixed in 4.0. Won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:43 ---
won't fix.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #3 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:44 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:44 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:45 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:46 ---
Fixed in 4.0 and up
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target
--- Comment #4 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:47 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #6 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:47 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #6 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:48 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #12 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:49 ---
Fixed in 4.0 and up.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:50 ---
Fixed in 4.0.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #8 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:50 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #4 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:52 ---
Fixed in 4.1 and up.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from yuri at tsoft dot com 2006-02-28 09:53 ---
So there should be no performance-related bugs reported any more since you only
care about correctness?
This IS a performance-related problem in gcc.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17332
--- Comment #3 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:53 ---
fixed for 4.1.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #14 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:54 ---
Fixed in 4.0.0
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #9 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:54 ---
fixed for 4.0.0
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #3 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:55 ---
won't fix.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:58 ---
Fixed in 4.0.0
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #3 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:59 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 09:59 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #3 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:00 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:01 ---
won't fix in 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:02 ---
fixed in 4.0.0
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #5 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:02 ---
fixed for 4.0.0
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #17 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:03 ---
fixed for 4.0.0
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #6 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:04 ---
won;t fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:04 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:06 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #2 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:06 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:10 ---
Happens in forwprop, after it we have
;; basic block 3, loop depth 1, count 0
;; prev block 2, next block 4
;; pred: 2 [90.0%] (true,exec) 5 [90.0%] (dfs_back,true,exec)
;; succ: 4 [50.0%]
--- Comment #8 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:10 ---
No activity happens since the debate. Closing as won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:10 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #5 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:11 ---
Fixed in 4.0 and up. Won't fix for 3.4.6.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2006-02-28 10:13
---
Subject: Re: [3.4 Regression] Missed inline opportunity
yuri at tsoft dot com [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| So there should be no performance-related bugs reported any more
| since you only care about
--- Comment #8 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:14 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #2 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:14 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #8 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:15 ---
Fixed in 4.0.1 and up.
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:16 ---
fixed for 4.0.0; won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:17 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #10 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:18 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
Created an attachment (id=10817)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10817action=view) [edit]
Patch against current 3.4 sources
Could you get it reviewed by the appropriate
--- Comment #2 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 10:19 ---
won't fix for 3.4.6
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 11:29 ---
Subject: Bug 26055
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Feb 28 11:29:41 2006
New Revision: 111563
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=111563
Log:
2006-02-28 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
This simple incorrect program:
int main() { puts(Hello); }
when compiled with gcc -std=c99 -pedantic-errors is rejected with
test.c: In function main:
test.c:1: error: implicit declaration of function puts
However, add -Wall to the options, and it becomes:
test.c: In function main:
--- Comment #5 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 11:35
---
Fixed.
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 11:36 ---
Subject: Bug 25682
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Feb 28 11:36:26 2006
New Revision: 111564
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=111564
Log:
PR c/25682
* c-typeck.c (build_unary_op): Fold
--- Comment #4 from mark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 11:38 ---
Confirmed. It looks like getHeader(int), getHeader(String) and getHeaders()
have slightly different semantics. Where the first should return the actual
n-th header field value only, the second should return the value
Hi,
here is the result of a bootstrap under a recent cygwin using
../gcc-4.1.0-20060219/configure --prefix=/home/arend/opt/install/gcc-4.1.0
--enable-languages=ada,c,c++,fortran,java,objc,obj-c++ --enable-libgcj
--with-x --enable-java-awt=xlib --enable-threads
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 12:44
---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 12:45 ---
Really this should not be causing a problem as gcj-dbtool is optional at this
point.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 12:58 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 12:59 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 13:11
---
This one is growing in popularity :)
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from mark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 13:11 ---
This seems to be also tracked as a GNU Make bug at:
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailitemitem_id=15182
Make uses too much memory
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24154
The following code snipped causes an internal compiler error:
===
#include algorithm
#include iostream
#include iterator
#include memory
#include string
using namespace std;
class Distribution {
public:
Distribution() { }
virtual ~Distribution() { }
virtual double sample();
};
double
--- Comment #1 from dwoovseesp at kriocoucke dot mailexpire dot com
2006-02-28 13:17 ---
Created an attachment (id=10937)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10937action=view)
Source code
This was compiled as follows:
g++ -v -save-temps smalltest.cc
Using built-in
--- Comment #2 from dwoovseesp at kriocoucke dot mailexpire dot com
2006-02-28 13:18 ---
Created an attachment (id=10938)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10938action=view)
Source code after preprocessing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26496
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 13:30 ---
Hmm, in 4.0.3 I get:
t.cc: In function int main():
t.cc:35: error: no matching function for call to mem_fun(double
(Distribution::)())
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26496
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 13:32 ---
This should be fixed for real on the mainline now since the removal of loop.c.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21323
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 13:41 ---
Hmm, I might be wrong but I think -freorder-blocks-and-partition only works
when there is true profile information gathered. The reason that is because it
does not trust the user or GCC's estimated information.
--- Comment #4 from dwoovseesp at kriocoucke dot mailexpire dot com
2006-02-28 13:42 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Hmm, in 4.0.3 I get:
t.cc: In function int main():
t.cc:35: error: no matching function for call to mem_fun(double
(Distribution::)())
Interesting. What happens
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 13:46 ---
Interesting. What happens if you remove the mem_fun call:
===
generate_n(ostream_iteratordouble(cout, \n), 100, rng-*ptr);
===
my gcc still reports an internal compiler error.
Yes I can reproduce it
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Known to fail|
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 14:07 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2006-02-28 14:12 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
won't fix.
I kind of gathered that after a year or so of inactivity.
Would you be willing to give us some more detail on
why no fix ?
For instance, is this fixed in some later version of gcc
1 - 100 of 299 matches
Mail list logo
