http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55194
--- Comment #2 from Joel Sherrill joel at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04 06:20:02
UTC ---
git bisect should help:
[0e797c2e325bfe0676fc9b9e5baee01aefb164f5] /cp 2012-08-20 Paolo Carlini
paolo.carl...@oracle.com
[joel@baltimore gcc]$ git
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55194
--- Comment #3 from Joel Sherrill joel at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04 06:22:22
UTC ---
I added Jakub because I think this was the patch which broke it:
Author: jakub jakub@138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4
Date: Mon Aug 20 18:56:49
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52466
--- Comment #3 from Joel Sherrill joel at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04 06:33:10
UTC ---
Following up on my earlier message.
Jon Beniston (original author) or Sebastien Bourdeauducq (current maintainer)
... please reply.
This
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55201
Bug #: 55201
Summary: [4.8 regression] libgo.so: undefined reference to
`__atomic_compare_exchange_8'
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55145
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55202
Bug #: 55202
Summary: Building a combined tree is broken for LTO
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55202
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04
08:29:02 UTC ---
Created attachment 28608
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28608
Patch which fixes the problem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55202
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55202
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04
08:36:08 UTC ---
[cannot find ld] -plugin
/home/pinskia/src/toolchain-cavium/thunder-tools/bin/../libexec/gcc/aarch64-thunder-elf/4.8.0/liblto_plugin.so
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55202
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04
08:37:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
I have no patches installed either. The patch above does not work.
That is because I was porting the patch from 4.7 to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55145
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-11-04 10:14:07
UTC ---
It is due to long int usage in real.h. Depending on
size of long int, real.c gives slightly different
results.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55191
Markus Trippelsdorf markus at trippelsdorf dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55203
Bug #: 55203
Summary: No unused warning for variables of non-trivial types
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55203
Lubos Lunak l.lunak at suse dot cz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55145
--- Comment #5 from Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org 2012-11-04 11:04:03
UTC ---
This cannot explain the crashes you see since the difference is just one ULP.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55203
--- Comment #2 from Lubos Lunak l.lunak at suse dot cz 2012-11-04 11:04:52
UTC ---
Created attachment 28609
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28609
gcc patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55145
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-11-04 11:09:12
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
This cannot explain the crashes you see since the difference is just one ULP.
The glibc crash is fixed by
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55199
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55199
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04 11:23:28 UTC ---
Further compactified version of the test case:
module assoc_err_m
implicit none
type :: foo_t
contains
procedure :: func_1
generic :: func =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55204
Bug #: 55204
Summary: [4.8 Regression] ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2140
(unrecognizable insn) with -O --param
loop-invariant-max-bbs-in-loop=0
Classification:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55199
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55201
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org 2012-11-04 12:46:19
UTC ---
Created attachment 28611
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28611
Preliminary patch
Doesn't yet work with -static-libgo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54838
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04
12:49:27 UTC ---
I think the problem is that we somehow arrive at this:
loop_1 (header = 2, multiple latches, niter = )
{
bb_2 (preds = {bb_0 }, succs =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55205
Bug #: 55205
Summary: build gcc-4.7.2 failed on darwin
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55204
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55199
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04 13:40:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
regtesting now ...
Somewhat expected, this fails on:
FAIL: gfortran.dg/associate_1.f03 -O0 (test for excess errors)
FAIL:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55199
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04 13:56:03 UTC ---
Here is an improved patch, which hopefully should be free of testsuite
regressions (will re-check):
Index: gcc/fortran/parse.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55206
Bug #: 55206
Summary: GCC Reports Ambiguity; clang and comeau disagree
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55189
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55184
--- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2012-11-04
14:13:58 UTC ---
I can't reproduce the error with vanilla gcc-4.6.3 on x86_64-linux.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55205
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55189
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55206
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55199
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04 15:46:38 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Here is an improved patch, which hopefully should be free of testsuite
regressions (will re-check):
It is. However, I think there is a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41993
--- Comment #4 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2012-11-04 16:45:51
UTC ---
I have looked a bit into this problem, since AVX vzeroupper insertion now
depends on MODE_EXIT functionality. IMO, the patch in Comment #1 is correct for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55206
--- Comment #2 from Dave Abrahams dave at boostpro dot com 2012-11-04
16:47:37 UTC ---
I hate bugzilla for always tempting me to think I can add attachments when
first submitting a bug, and then refusing the attachment because it's too big.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55206
--- Comment #3 from Dave Abrahams dave at boostpro dot com 2012-11-04
16:48:39 UTC ---
PS my apologies again for the size. Just no time to reduce it now.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55195
--- Comment #3 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-11-04 16:59:07 UTC ---
I have done a -j2 bootstrap on gcc61, and in fails somewhere else in a similar
fashion. I then transplanted some files to my local (faster)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55199
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04 17:13:22 UTC ---
Author: janus
Date: Sun Nov 4 17:13:16 2012
New Revision: 193136
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=193136
Log:
2012-11-04 Janus Weil
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55199
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55195
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55195
--- Comment #5 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-11-04 17:34:47 UTC ---
Created attachment 28613
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28613
here is a proof-of-concept patch that allows the offending
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55184
Mathias Gaunard mathias at gaunard dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #28600|0 |1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55184
--- Comment #4 from Mathias Gaunard mathias at gaunard dot com 2012-11-04
18:01:27 UTC ---
Sorry, I edited the file in between and ended up uploading the wrong test case.
Below is the result on my machine with the fixed testcase.
$ gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55199
--- Comment #9 from Rich Townsend townsend at astro dot wisc.edu 2012-11-04
18:01:53 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
Fixed with r193136. Closing.
Thanks for reporting this!
Hey, thanks for fixing it so quickly -- you never cease
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55207
Bug #: 55207
Summary: Automatic deallocation of variables declared in the
main program
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55207
--- Comment #1 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04 18:32:29 UTC ---
Patch:
Index: gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c
===
--- gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c(revision 193135)
+++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54693
--- Comment #13 from Alexandre Oliva aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04
18:44:18 UTC ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Sun Nov 4 18:44:13 2012
New Revision: 193138
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=193138
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54693
--- Comment #14 from Alexandre Oliva aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04
18:44:32 UTC ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Sun Nov 4 18:44:25 2012
New Revision: 193139
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=193139
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55175
--- Comment #7 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04 18:58:32 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Sun Nov 4 18:58:29 2012
New Revision: 193140
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=193140
Log:
PR target/55175
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55175
--- Comment #8 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2012-11-04 18:59:53
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
I can confirm i386-rtems4.11-gcc now builds.
@Uros: I am inclined to believe this patch probably should be backported to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55175
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.8.0 |4.7.3
to compile the package jfsutils-1.1.13-10
on gcc-4.8 trunk dated 20121104 on an AMD x86_64 box.
The compiler said
log_dump.c:635:6: internal compiler error: in remove_redundant_iv_tests, at
tree-ssa-loop-ivcanon.c:478
void ldmp_xdump(char *saddr, int count)
^
Preprocessed source code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54986
Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55191
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2012-11-04
20:05:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Dup of 55176.
I don't see the connection.
One is an OOM, the other is an ICE.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55204
rsand...@gcc.gnu.org rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55191
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2012-11-04 20:08:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
(In reply to comment #2)
Dup of 55176.
I don't see the connection.
One is an OOM, the other is an ICE.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55168
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55174
--- Comment #3 from harper at msor dot vuw.ac.nz 2012-11-04 20:41:10 UTC ---
On Fri, 2 Nov 2012, janus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 10:54:50 +
From: janus at gcc dot gnu.org gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org
To:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55184
--- Comment #5 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2012-11-04
21:24:44 UTC ---
I can confirm the bug with gcc-4.6.3 and the fixed test case. However, the bug
has since been fixed on 4.6 branch in r187763, the fix for PR52407. The
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54693
Alexandre Oliva aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55195
--- Comment #6 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-11-04 22:23:04 UTC ---
On 4-Nov-12, at 12:31 PM, amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
The instruction call_symref_pic_post_reload has the following length
attribute setting:
(set
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55174
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54225
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||john.harper at vuw dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55207
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04 22:26:44 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Patch:
Note: The patch in comment 1 only fixes the auto-deallocation for scalars.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55207
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-04 22:48:37 UTC ---
The following patch applies the implicit SAVE attribute to variables declared
in the main program:
Index: gcc/fortran/decl.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55145
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-11-04 22:51:46
UTC ---
Here are different internal values from the same input:
32-bit long: 1.57079632679489661925640447970309310221637133509
Input:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21718
--- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-11-04 23:06:27
UTC ---
From:
http://www.sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14803#c1
---
Really I'd consider this just a variant on bug 21718 (real.c rounding not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55145
--- Comment #8 from Vincent Lefèvre vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net 2012-11-04
23:43:44 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
Here are different internal values from the same input:
32-bit long: 1.57079632679489661925640447970309310221637133509
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55195
--- Comment #7 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-11-04 23:50:44 UTC ---
On 4-Nov-12, at 12:31 PM, amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Such a length attribute is not considered variable by
shorten_branches.
You need to include a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55174
--- Comment #5 from harper at msor dot vuw.ac.nz 2012-11-05 00:02:51 UTC ---
On Sun, 4 Nov 2012, janus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 22:23:40 +
From: janus at gcc dot gnu.org gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org
To:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21718
--- Comment #12 from Vincent Lefèvre vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net 2012-11-05
00:16:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
Really I'd consider this just a variant on bug 21718 (real.c rounding not
perfect). That would ideally be fixed by using
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55198
--- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-11-05 00:20:16 UTC ---
On 3-Nov-12, at 10:38 PM, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Exposed as this is a change in the library and the compiler is
crashing with a
valid input that
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55174
--- Comment #6 from harper at msor dot vuw.ac.nz 2012-11-05 00:52:10 UTC ---
On Mon, 5 Nov 2012, John Harper wrote:
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 13:02:37 +1300 (NZDT)
From: John Harper har...@msor.vuw.ac.nz
To: janus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55209
Bug #: 55209
Summary: gdb reports 'No symbol x in current context.' at
-O0 -g
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55209
--- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-05
01:20:08 UTC ---
Created attachment 28616
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28616
pr55030-chk.i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55209
--- Comment #2 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-05
01:21:23 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
Set a breakpoint on line 5084
...in cse.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54938
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21718
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55210
Bug #: 55210
Summary: cannot #define FOO 'a'
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55195
--- Comment #8 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-11-05 02:32:35 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
In some sense, this seems like a hack which might be optimized by an
attribute processor. What about a way to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53113
Ryan Hill dirtyepic at gentoo dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dirtyepic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54413
--- Comment #11 from Ed Smith-Rowland 3dw4rd at verizon dot net 2012-11-05
04:50:20 UTC ---
Here is a patch that should work. it passes on x86_64 linux.
I would like to get this in for 4.8 if possible.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54413
--- Comment #12 from Ed Smith-Rowland 3dw4rd at verizon dot net 2012-11-05
04:55:36 UTC ---
Created attachment 28617
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28617
Patch to implement flags allowing gnu suffixes to be used as
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54402
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-05
07:58:52 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Nov 5 07:58:48 2012
New Revision: 193152
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=193152
Log:
PR
85 matches
Mail list logo
