http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49511
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-06-28 18:46:19 UTC ---
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011, ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49511
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49511
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-06-27 17:15:23 UTC ---
could you please run the exact commands used in the run_acats which
function and report the results:
type -p gnatmake 2/dev/null
echo $?
type gnatmake 2/dev
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49500
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-06-23 21:36:05 UTC ---
On Thu, 23 Jun 2011, hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Hi,
the problem is that emultls introduces aliases later and it does not
understand
the new representation
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46350
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-06-21 13:38:12 UTC ---
Try to remove the cast to System.Interrupt_Management.Interrupt_ID in the
call.
It fixes the compile error. Testing in progress...
Dave
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49454
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-06-21 17:23:27 UTC ---
I should have mentioned in comment #2 that the build and test I did included
the proposed patch in comment #11 pf PR 49429.
I assumed so. Richard's comments
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
--- Comment #9 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-06-08 17:59:18 UTC ---
Perhaps something like:
union { int i; char c[8]; } u;
int
main ()
{
int *p;
asm volatile ( : =r (p) : 0 (u.c[1]));
*p++;
return 0;
}
compile+run
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49190
--- Comment #18 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-05-31 00:03:14 UTC ---
Bootstrap restored on i686-apple-darwin9.
Dave
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49007
--- Comment #20 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-05-23 18:52:27 UTC ---
On Mon, 23 May 2011, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
This code fails to handle the case where there already is a use.
This should have been fixed in 4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49007
--- Comment #9 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-05-21 14:57:02 UTC ---
Could this have been fixed by PR 42775 which does not change reorg but rather
free_cfg?
No. I have tried it on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 and just tried it with
darwin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49007
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-05-16 16:22:28 UTC ---
On Mon, 16 May 2011, danglin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
By trial and error, it appears tree-cfgcleanup.c is miscompiled at -O1
without -fno-delayed-branch.
Attached
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48932
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-05-09 13:44:04 UTC ---
On Sun, 08 May 2011, danglin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Appears to be fixed in 4.5 and 4.6.
Actually, bug is in 4.5.1 but not 4.5.3. The only relevant fix that
I see
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48932
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-05-08 22:47:52 UTC ---
Attached sched-deps.i.gz.
The branch has been incorrectly placed in the delay slot. The ldil
instruction is needed when the branch is taken but not when the branch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48905
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-05-07 14:46:56 UTC ---
On Sat, 07 May 2011, danglin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Introduced in revision 173428. Testing cris-elf fix.
The attached patch fixes this PR. It was derived from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48893
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-05-05 23:33:46 UTC ---
Attached .i. cc1 compile args are:
-fpreprocessed pex-unix.i -quiet -dumpbase pex-unix.c -auxbase-strip
pic/pex-unix.o -g -O2 -Wextra -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48752
--- Comment #14 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-04-27 15:20:32 UTC ---
I still can't reproduce the testcase but I guess I can make one myself just by
forcing global constructor. Will try to have patch before lunch.
I realized last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48752
--- Comment #16 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-04-27 21:08:26 UTC ---
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011, hubicka at ucw dot cz wrote:
I hope the problem is now fixed at mainline tree. Could you please give it a
try?
Bug is still present
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48752
--- Comment #11 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-04-26 18:11:43 UTC ---
Any clue what is wrong?
After dinner I will try to look into the add_new_function path and figure out
why summaries are not computed as they should
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48752
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-04-24 13:49:30 UTC ---
Attached .ii file.
Dave
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48752
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-04-24 19:13:22 UTC ---
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2011-04-24 18:27:20 UTC ---
evaulate?!?
I believe it must be Czech...
Dave
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48752
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-04-24 20:24:00 UTC ---
I've comitted patch for bug with similar symptoms today. Does it still
reproduce for you?
I noticed that and started a couple of new builds. Should know in a couple
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48752
--- Comment #6 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-04-25 01:27:59 UTC ---
On Sun, 24 Apr 2011, John David Anglin wrote:
I've comitted patch for bug with similar symptoms today. Does it still
reproduce for you?
I noticed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48441
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-04-04 22:30:50 UTC ---
On Mon, 04 Apr 2011, danglin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Attached .i.
Dave
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48366
--- Comment #7 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-04-03 18:37:07 UTC ---
I guess that the last patch (for pr48380) I sent should solve the problem too.
Unfortunately, I did not get an approval for the patch yet.
I'll try it if it isn't
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48366
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-04-04 00:34:48 UTC ---
On Sun, 03 Apr 2011, John David Anglin wrote:
I guess that the last patch (for pr48380) I sent should solve the problem
too.
Unfortunately, I did not get
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48366
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-03-30 23:30:54 UTC ---
Attached .i and relevant rtl dumps.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48315
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-03-29 17:26:17 UTC ---
On Tue, 29 Mar 2011, ramana at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Could you post a pre-processed file here ?
Attached.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48288
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-03-25 15:52:22 UTC ---
I'd say PA64 should handle iordi3 w/o libgcc, no?
It does. My initial guess is the breakage was introduced by
the fix for PR 48263.
Dave
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48209
--- Comment #9 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-03-22 19:01:21 UTC ---
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, sje at cup dot hp.com wrote:
In running this test on IA64 and x86, the first call is the only one that I
see
getting inlined on both platforms
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48209
--- Comment #11 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-03-22 21:05:32 UTC ---
Yes, I can do that. Do you know how the test fails on HP-UX 10.*?
Does it fail to compile or does it compile and then fail during execution like
it does on HP-UX
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48209
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-03-21 23:03:11 UTC ---
It looks like this is broken for HP-UX 11.11 and 11.23. On 11.31 there is a
object that can be linked in (unix2003.o) to fix this. Just like we
currently
link
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48161
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-03-17 13:51:03 UTC ---
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Can you please attach preprocessed source and gcc options used to compile it?
I'd look with a cross compiler
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48161
--- Comment #6 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-03-17 14:25:36 UTC ---
/home2/dave/gcc-4.6/objdir/./prev-gcc/xgcc
-B/home2/dave/gcc-4.6/objdir/./prev-g
cc/ -B/home2/dave/opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.6.0/hppa-linux/bin/
-B/home2/dave/opt/gnu/gc
c/gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48161
--- Comment #12 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-03-17 18:37:51 UTC ---
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Untested fix. The reason it uses gen_rtx_PLUS directly is to make sure it
doesn't generate code in that case I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #38 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-03-10 16:58:38 UTC ---
While the latter is fixed, I think the _REENTRANT issue isn't. Or is it?
If it it not fixed, I think we should have (a different) PR open to track that
issue
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47571
--- Comment #30 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-03-09 00:10:22 UTC ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47571
--- Comment #29 from Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-08
22:38:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47571
--- Comment #27 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-03-07 17:59:27 UTC ---
All fortran testing is broken on Tru64 UNIX, where libgfortran.so has an
undefined reference to clock_gettime:
The function is defined in librt only.
Also
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #35 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-03-05 17:06:23 UTC ---
In testing fix for above, I see:
../../../gcc/libgfortran/intrinsics/ctime.c: In function 'strctime':
../../../gcc/libgfortran/intrinsics/ctime.c:43:20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #30 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-03-03 13:56:25 UTC ---
On Fri, 25 Feb 2011, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Please shout loudly if there you still encounter a build failure!
TO BE DONE: The HP-UX (et al.?) compile
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #26 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-26 13:59:50 UTC ---
On Fri, 25 Feb 2011, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
I think the build bug is now FIXED; thus:
Please shout loudly if there you still encounter a build failure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #23 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-24 14:55:52 UTC ---
On Thu, 24 Feb 2011, jb at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
libgfortran.sl is built twice on HP-UX 10, once for the single thread
model and once for the dce thread model
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #17 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-23 14:28:38 UTC ---
On Tue, 22 Feb 2011, jb at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-02/msg01453.html
Patch resolves ctime.c build. However, _REENTRANT
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #18 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-23 14:30:15 UTC ---
On Tue, 22 Feb 2011, jb at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Patch which should hopefully fix the getpwuid_r issue on HP-UX 10.2:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-02
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #20 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-23 20:15:34 UTC ---
As there localtime_r is also used in intrinsics/date_and_time.c, I would
assume
that one sees the same message there.
Yes. I see them for all _r uses.
I am
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #12 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-21 19:38:33 UTC ---
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47804
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-18 18:54:59 UTC ---
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Created attachment 23397
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23397
gcc46-pr47804.patch
Works
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-18 20:56:54 UTC ---
Is there no way to get a posix compliant ctime? Alternatively, we'll need
autoconf magic to detect the extra arg. I know at one time it was relatively
common, so
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47792
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-18 00:38:54 UTC ---
Aha! :)
There's a typo in gthr-dce.h
__gthread_mutx_destroy (__gthread_mutex_t *__mutex)
s/mutx/mutex/
Good catch! I wonder how many years it has been
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47792
--- Comment #7 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-18 01:00:35 UTC ---
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
I suppose the safe thing to would be add the right signature and leave that
there, but I can't imagine anyone's
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47622
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-06 16:05:29 UTC ---
Attached dumps.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47610
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-05 17:09:48 UTC ---
Can't reproduce that with a cross to hppa64-hp-hpux11.11, I get the expected
error instantly.
Sorry, this is my fault. I misapplied your patch.
Dave
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47571
--- Comment #21 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-04 14:42:39 UTC ---
Patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-02/msg00196.html
This is my previous janitorial patch, + a kludge which I believe should fix
the
issue on HP-UX
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47610
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-04 20:28:03 UTC ---
On Fri, 04 Feb 2011, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Please provide preprocessed source, so I can try to reproduce it with a cross
compiler.
Attached.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47610
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-05 01:03:51 UTC ---
On Fri, 04 Feb 2011, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-04
23:08:21 UTC ---
Created attachment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47571
--- Comment #20 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-03 15:33:37 UTC ---
on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11. Weak references don't work on this target and
probably others.
If weak symbols do not work, why is then SUPPORTS_WEAK set
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47274
--- Comment #24 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-01-31 19:35:15 UTC ---
What endian-ness are the ppc and hppa targets?
hppa is big. I believe ppc is also big.
Dave
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47274
--- Comment #26 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-01 00:27:21 UTC ---
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, davek at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
If one of you could try the whole thing with --save-temps -v -Wl,-v
-Wl,--verbose, and attach the various .o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47274
--- Comment #27 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-02-01 00:37:22 UTC ---
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, davek at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
If one of you could try the whole thing with --save-temps -v -Wl,-v
-Wl,--verbose, and attach the various .o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47274
--- Comment #18 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-01-27 17:07:34 UTC ---
On Thu, 27 Jan 2011, hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
I need to see the dump from merging, too.
They gets name of one of the .o files when -save-temps is used
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47493
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-01-27 17:27:40 UTC ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47493
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47274
--- Comment #20 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-01-27 18:06:02 UTC ---
On Thu, 27 Jan 2011, hubicka at ucw dot cz wrote:
Merging should happen after unmerged files are dumped. Perhaps they go to
some
funny place,
like /tmp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46967
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-01-27 20:24:02 UTC ---
With r163461 backported (compiler only built with --enable-languages=c this
time) we ran the libgomp testsuite 3 times, failed 11/248 tests, 0/248 tests
and 9/248
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47274
--- Comment #16 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-01-20 00:13:36 UTC ---
On Tue, 18 Jan 2011, dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca wrote:
Here is abs-1.c.000i.cgraph:
The above call graph indicates main_test is not called. Here is
main.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47287
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-01-17 15:12:38 UTC ---
I suppose you are using GNU ld, right?
Yes (gold has not been ported).
On trunk x86_64 with stock binutils 2.21 I get
cat 20010124-1.res
3
20010124-1.o 3
79
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47274
--- Comment #12 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-01-17 18:32:22 UTC ---
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011, hubicka at ucw dot cz wrote:
It seems that we get wrong already when streaming abs-1-lib.o file. Would be
possible to attach cgraph dump from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47274
--- Comment #13 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-01-17 18:39:14 UTC ---
Last graph.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47274
--- Comment #14 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-01-18 00:10:55 UTC ---
This is it!
Dave
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47274
--- Comment #15 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-01-18 00:21:42 UTC ---
Here is abs-1.c.000i.cgraph:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47287
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-01-18 01:36:53 UTC ---
Attached .cgraph files.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47287
--- Comment #9 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-01-18 01:36:54 UTC ---
Created attachment 23011
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23011
20010124-1.c.000i.cgraph
--- Comment #10 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-01
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46950
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-12-20 00:36:28 UTC ---
On Sun, 19 Dec 2010, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
The same revision caused pr46916. Could you try the patch in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46869
--- Comment #13 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-12-18 21:25:30 UTC ---
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010, bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Does this still happen if -g is removed? (Via -g0)
No. Attached change fixes fails on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46915
--- Comment #13 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-12-18 22:42:13 UTC ---
Any chance this gets backported?
It's not a regression, but I think it should be backported since it breaks
Linux in a somewhat random manner. I'm currently testing
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46915
--- Comment #9 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-12-13 12:44:21 UTC ---
Yeah, the insn count for asm is just a guess. You should never put inline asm
into a delay slot, you really don't know how big it is or if it is suitable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46915
--- Comment #10 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-12-13 12:51:51 UTC ---
Thanks, I'll look at that. However, I think branch_to_delay_slot_p can
be improved. It probably should also check for asms and return FALSE
if it finds one
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46913
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-12-12 20:10:51 UTC ---
So post a patch to gcc-patches?
Will do when I complete testing on the system where I see the problem.
It currently doing a full check that I don't want to mess up
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46913
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-12-12 21:14:37 UTC ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46913
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-12
20:18:59 UTC ---
If it doesn't work
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46915
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-12-13 02:45:37 UTC ---
Reduced testcase attached.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46915
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-12-13 02:45:38 UTC ---
Created attachment 22731
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22731
xxx.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46915
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-12-13 02:49:57 UTC ---
Reduced testcase attached.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46915
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-12-13 03:59:08 UTC ---
Testing attached change. branch_to_delay_slot_p didn't correctly
handle asms, etc. When it is fixed, branch_needs_nop_p isn't needed.
It also didn't handle all cases
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46915
--- Comment #6 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-12-13 03:59:09 UTC ---
Created attachment 22734
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22734
pa.c.d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46869
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-12-09 16:46:50 UTC ---
Attached .ii.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46801
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-12-04 18:01:04 UTC ---
Attached tree dump.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46671
--- Comment #6 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-12-03 17:22:07 UTC ---
On Fri, 03 Dec 2010, ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46671
--- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46685
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-11-30 21:52:57 UTC ---
On the other side, the above is still broken with
-freorder-blocks-and-partition and I guess even before Honza's change it has
been broken
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46685
--- Comment #9 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-11-30 22:22:22 UTC ---
On Tue, 30 Nov 2010, John David Anglin wrote:
On the other side, the above is still broken with
-freorder-blocks-and-partition and I guess even before Honza's
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46584
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-11-26 19:04:56 UTC ---
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46584
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46040
--- Comment #7 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-11-23 18:45:14 UTC ---
Any reason why this patch isn't submitted/commited?
No. I was traveling and forgot about it. Access to the arm box
on my desk is unreliable.
Dave
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46595
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-11-22 14:35:17 UTC ---
Have you tried with http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-11/msg02121.html
applied?
No, but it looks like it would fix the failures.
Dave
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46595
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-11-23 02:18:42 UTC ---
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu wrote:
Have you tried with http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-11/msg02121.html
applied?
I had some
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46529
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-11-18 14:05:39 UTC ---
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-18
10:11:00 UTC ---
Huh. But after all it correctly detects the tests won't work
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46510
--- Comment #13 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-11-18 23:37:15 UTC ---
On Thu, 18 Nov 2010, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
What happens if you remove the gcc_assert at line 338 of varpool.c (see
comment
#8)?
hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46510
--- Comment #15 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-11-18 23:53:19 UTC ---
powerpc-apple-darwin9 is currently regtesting without anything obvious so far
(at obj-c++).
My MacPro is darwin9, and I'm only setup to do 32-bit builds
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44970
--- Comment #99 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-11-14 23:12:25 UTC ---
On Sun, 14 Nov 2010, bonzini at gnu dot org wrote:
Minimized testcase:
int f (unsigned long arg, int *cr)
{
int *p = (int *) arg;
int x = *cr;
long
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44970
--- Comment #95 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-11-08 17:00:41 UTC ---
CC fs/ioctl.o
fs/ioctl.c: In function 'do_vfs_ioctl':
fs/ioctl.c:601:1: internal compiler error: in update_df, at fwprop.c:877
Please submit a full bug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636
--- Comment #25 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-11-07 19:44:07 UTC ---
The change was r166378 and if the test failures are the only reason to keep
this bug report open then it we should be able to close it now.
Closing would be ok
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46292
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-11-03 18:19:59 UTC ---
What happens if you just remove the assert?
Testing.
Dave
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46292
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-11-03 19:32:50 UTC ---
Dave, can you please regression test this patch?
Sorry, I'm just about to run out the door for a flight. Possibly,
tomorrow.
Dave
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44970
--- Comment #90 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-10-20 14:39:26 UTC ---
The armv5 failure is a stage2 miscompilation. Is it caused by Bernd's patch
too? Or by fwprop?
Actually, the ICE I saw this morning was in stage3. This box
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42169
--- Comment #19 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-10-18 17:27:04 UTC ---
It looks like this was fixed (for hppa at least) in r163190.
2010-08-12 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
PR tree-optimization/45232
* tree
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
