[Bug tree-optimization/45750] [4.6 Regression] ICE: in iterative_hash_expr, at tree.c:6831 on invalid code
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-23 06:46 --- It is caused by revision 161655: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-07/msg6.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-23 06:46:05 date|| Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45750
[Bug target/45752] [4.5 regression] ICE in ix86_vectorize_builtin_vec_perm_ok
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-23 07:20 --- It is caused by revision 155584: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-01/msg00043.html and fixed by revision 161655: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-07/msg6.html on trunk. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Target Milestone|--- |4.5.2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45752
[Bug middle-end/45234] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE in expand_call, at calls.c:2845 when passing aligned function argument from unaligned stack after alloca
--- Comment #23 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-22 21:36
---
(In reply to comment #22)
The 4.5/4.4 backports of this patch break:
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options -march=i586 { target ilp32 } } */
struct S { union { double b[4]; } a[18]; } s, a[5];
void foo (struct S);
struct S bar (struct S, struct S *, struct S);
void
foo (struct S arg)
{
}
void
baz (void)
{
foo (bar (s, a[1], a[2]));
}
We are trying to adjust stacking when calling builtin functions. This patch
works for me:
index aef823f..0c7588a 100644
--- a/gcc/calls.c
+++ b/gcc/calls.c
@@ -2369,7 +2369,7 @@ expand_call (tree exp, rtx target, int ignore)
preferred_unit_stack_boundary = preferred_stack_boundary / BITS_PER_UNIT;
- if (SUPPORTS_STACK_ALIGNMENT)
+ if (SUPPORTS_STACK_ALIGNMENT fndecl !DECL_IS_BUILTIN (fndecl))
{
/* All variable sized adjustments must be multiple of preferred
stack boundary. Stack alignment may change preferred stack
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45234
[Bug middle-end/45753] New: [4.6 Regression] Revision 162918 failed gcc.target/i386/pr38240.c
On Linux/ia32, revision 162918: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-08/msg00129.html caused: [...@gnu-35 rrs]$ /export/gnu/import/rrs/162918/usr/bin/gcc -m32 -march=i586 -S pr38240.c pr38240.c: In function \u2018g\u2019: pr38240.c:8:21: internal compiler error: in convert_move, at expr.c:326 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html for instructions. [...@gnu-35 rrs]$ -- Summary: [4.6 Regression] Revision 162918 failed gcc.target/i386/pr38240.c Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 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=45753
[Bug middle-end/45753] [4.6 Regression] Revision 162918 failed gcc.target/i386/pr38240.c
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-23 00:20 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 45325 *** -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45753
[Bug middle-end/45325] [4.6 Regression] target attribute doesn't work with -march=i586
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-23 00:20 --- *** Bug 45753 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45325
[Bug middle-end/45738] [4.6 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected var_decl, have debug_expr_decl in const_value_known_p, at varpool.c:375
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-21 12:23 --- It is caused by revision 164438: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00734.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-21 12:23:29 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45738
[Bug tree-optimization/45563] [4.6 Regression] g++.dg/opt/devirt1.C ICEs in ipcp_init_cloned_node, at ipa-cp.c:190 with -fno-early-inlining -fipa-cp-clone
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-21 14:46 --- It is caused by revision 162911: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-08/msg00122.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-21 14:46:17 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45563
[Bug c++/45562] [4.6 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in cp_build_unary_op (typeck.c:5083) with -std=gnu++0x -fipa-cp-clone -fcompare-debug
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-21 14:54 --- It is caused by revision 162911: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-08/msg00122.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-21 14:54:00 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45562
[Bug c/45741] [4.6 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in string_constant (expr.c:9863) when parsing memcmp()
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-21 17:37 --- It is caused by revision 164438: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00734.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-21 17:37:53 date|| Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45741
[Bug middle-end/45706] [4.6 regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-114.c
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-20 13:54 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Whoops. Yeah, I only added x86_64-*-* to the vect_perm targets. Obviously,
as sse2 is active by default for the vectorizer testsuite I also need to
add the i?86-*-* targets. H.J., can you try with this patch on a native
system
(so that we may see any possible fallout)?
Index: testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
===
--- testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp (revision 164367)
+++ testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp (working copy)
@@ -2426,6 +2426,7 @@ proc check_effective_target_vect_perm {
set et_vect_perm_saved 0
if { [istarget powerpc*-*-*]
|| [istarget spu-*-*]
+|| [istarget i?86-*-*]
|| [istarget x86_64-*-*] } {
set et_vect_perm_saved 1
}
It works.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45706
[Bug tree-optimization/45734] [4.6 Regression] Devirtualization results in wrong-code
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-20 15:27 --- It is caused by revision 161655: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-07/msg6.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-20 15:27:10 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45734
[Bug lto/45702] [4.6 Regression] New LTO test failures
--- Comment #13 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-20 16:56 --- Here is the deal: 1. The linker default search paths are /lib, /usr/lib. 2. ld -r disables the linker default search paths. 3. Gcc always passes -Lmulti-lib-dir to ld when multi-lib is enabled. On Linux/ia32, gcc never passes -L/lib -L/usr/lib to linker. It works with the linker default search paths. But gcc -r disables the linker default search paths and gcc -r -lm doesn't work. On Linux/x86-64, gcc always passes -Lmulti-lib-dir to linker and gcc -r -lm works with -m32/-m64. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45702
[Bug lto/45702] [4.6 Regression] New LTO test failures
--- Comment #14 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-20 17:10 --- One solution is always pass -L to linker even if the directory is known to linker. Gcc always does that for multi-lib. This will make gcc more consistent. It may also allow using system linker with native sysroot toolchain. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45702
[Bug tree-optimization/45733] [4.6 Regression] ICE: verify_stmts failed: invalid conversion in gimple call with -fstrict-overflow -ftree-vectorize
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-20 19:50 --- (In reply to comment #2) Looks like it is caused by revision 164367: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00661.html Revision 164367 is the cause. Revision 164367 also caused PR 45720. Don't know if they are related. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45733
[Bug middle-end/45234] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE in expand_call, at calls.c:2845 when passing aligned function argument from unaligned stack after alloca
--- Comment #21 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-20 20:40 --- Fixed. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45234
[Bug middle-end/45712] [4.6 Regression] Segmentation violation when compiling spec source on either x86 or ppc with debugging
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-21 00:00 --- It is caused by revision 163808: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00099.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45712
[Bug debug/44645] [4.5 Regression] missing debug info for pointer types
--- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 13:26 --- This is caused by revision 154354: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-11/msg00575.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at redhat dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44645
[Bug debug/43628] [4.5/4.6 Regression] in-class func-ptr type parameter has unspecified DW_AT_type
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 14:13 --- *** Bug 44645 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||redi at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43628
[Bug debug/44645] [4.5 Regression] missing debug info for pointer types
--- Comment #10 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 14:13 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 43628 *** -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44645
[Bug debug/43628] [4.5 Regression] in-class func-ptr type parameter has unspecified DW_AT_type
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 14:13 --- 4.5 isn't fixed. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED | Summary|[4.5/4.6 Regression] in-|[4.5 Regression] in-class |class func-ptr type |func-ptr type parameter has |parameter has unspecified |unspecified DW_AT_type |DW_AT_type | Target Milestone|4.6.0 |4.5.2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43628
[Bug debug/43628] [4.5 Regression] in-class func-ptr type parameter has unspecified DW_AT_type
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 14:49 --- Fixed. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43628
[Bug c/45719] gcc.target/i386/pad-3.c scan-assembler-not nop fails at -m32 for-fPIC
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 15:11 --- Does adding -fno-pic work on Darwin? -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45719
[Bug middle-end/45720] New: [4.6 regression] Revision 164367 miscompiled SPEC CPU 2K
Revision 164367: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00661.html miscompiled SPEC CPU 2K at -O3. On Linux/x86-64, I got Running 186.crafty ref peak lnx32e-gcc default *** Miscompare of crafty.out, see /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/spec/2000/x86_ 64/spec/benchspec/CINT2000/186.crafty/run/0004/crafty.out.mis ... Running 200.sixtrack ref peak lnx32e-gcc default *** Miscompare of inp.out, see /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/spec/2000/x86_64/ spec/benchspec/CFP2000/200.sixtrack/run/0004/inp.out.mis with -O3 -funroll-loops -ffast-math. On Linux/ia32, I got Running 254.gap ref peak lnx32-gcc default *** Miscompare of ref.out, see /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/spec/2000/i686/sp ec/benchspec/CINT2000/254.gap/run/0004/ref.out.mis with -O3 -funroll-loops -msse2 -mfpmath=sse -ffast-math. -- Summary: [4.6 regression] Revision 164367 miscompiled SPEC CPU 2K Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 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=45720
[Bug testsuite/45719] gcc.target/i386/pad-3.c scan-assembler-not nop fails at -m32 for-fPIC
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 16:27 --- Fixed. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Component|c |testsuite Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45719
[Bug middle-end/45720] [4.6 regression] Revision 164367 miscompiled SPEC CPU 2K
-- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
[Bug lto/45702] New: [4.6 Regression] New test failures
On Linux/x86, revision 164357 gave FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 -g1 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 -g1 -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 -g1 -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 -g3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 -g3 -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 -g3 -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+ (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+ -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+ -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+1 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+1 -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+1 -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+3 -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+3 -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs1 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs1 -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs1 -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs3 -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs3 -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr27898.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr28706.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr28712.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr30762-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr31529-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr34457-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr34668-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr34989-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr43557-1.c (test for excess errors) Revision 164355 is OK. -- Summary: [4.6 Regression] New test failures Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: lto 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=45702
[Bug rtl-optimization/45685] [4.6 Regression] GCC optimizer for Intel x64 generates inefficient code
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 13:04 --- (In reply to comment #4) This all happens in IF conversion pass. 4.6 regresses in the sense that a branch is emitted instead of cmov for: This is caused by revision 159106: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-05/msg00156.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||matz at suse dot de Summary|GCC optimizer for Intel x64 |[4.6 Regression] GCC |generates inefficient code |optimizer for Intel x64 ||generates inefficient code Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 Version|4.4.3 |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45685
[Bug lto/45702] [4.6 Regression] New LTO test failures
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 13:35 --- I got # /export/build/gnu/gcc-32bit/build-i686-linux/gcc/xgcc -B/export/build/gnu/gcc-32bit/build-i686-linux/gcc/ /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c -flto -r -nostdlib /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c -lm -o pr28712.exe -v /export/build/gnu/gcc-32bit/build-i686-linux/gcc/collect-ld --eh-frame-hdr -m elf_i386 -dynamic-linker /lib/ld-linux.so.2 -o pr28712.exe -r -L/export/build/gnu/gcc-32bit/build-i686-linux/gcc /tmp/ccLvxKIY.o /tmp/ccpjReNk.o /tmp/ccBVusXG.o -lm /usr/local/bin/ld: cannot find -lm collect2: ld returned 1 exit status For some reason, gcc driver failed to pass -L/usr/lib to collect-ld. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45702
[Bug lto/45702] [4.6 Regression] New LTO test failures
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 13:36 --- -m32 works on Intel64 since gcc driver passes /export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/gcc/collect-ld --eh-frame-hdr -m elf_i386 -dynamic-linker /lib/ld-linux.so.2 -o pr28712.exe -r -L/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/gcc/32 -L/lib/../lib -L/usr/lib/../lib -L/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/gcc /tmp/ccLRsGQH.lto.o -lm to collect-ld. Only ia32 fails. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45702
[Bug lto/45702] [4.6 Regression] New LTO test failures
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 13:52 --- Works fine in 64bit with -m32 [...@gnu-6 gcc]$ /export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/gcc/xgcc -B/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/gcc/ /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c -flto -r -nostdlib /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c -lm -m32 -o pr28712.exe [...@gnu-6 gcc]$ Failed on ia32. [...@gnu-6 gcc]$ /export/build/gnu/gcc-32bit/build-i686-linux/gcc/xgcc -B/export/build/gnu/gcc-32bit/build-i686-linux/gcc/ /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c -flto -r -nostdlib /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c -lm -o pr28712.exe /usr/local/bin/ld: cannot find -lm collect2: ld returned 1 exit status [...@gnu-6 gcc]$ -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45702
[Bug lto/45702] [4.6 Regression] New LTO test failures
--- Comment #10 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 14:08 --- (In reply to comment #6) With -r -nostdlib when -lm is mentioned on the command line, it is looking for libm.a. Guess you have it installed on one box and not on the other one. That said, the tests really shouldn't have -lm on their link line. /usr/lib/libm.a is available. 32bit gcc driver doesn't pass -L/usr/lib to ld and 64bit gcc driver does. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45702
[Bug lto/45702] [4.6 Regression] New LTO test failures
--- Comment #11 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 14:11 --- (In reply to comment #9) Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] New LTO test failures On Fri, 17 Sep 2010, jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: --- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-17 14:04 --- Dejagnu adds it always for dg-do link/run, and there doesn't seem to be a way to bypass that. Hm, so I'd say blame it on the host system of HJ. Or alternatively As I said, it is a REGRESSION, which means it passed before. I believe it is caused by your --combine change. See: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/2010-09/msg00267.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-17 14:11:09 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45702
[Bug middle-end/45699] [4.6 Regression] Incorrect copy constructor generated with -O
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 14:29 --- It is caused by revision 159362: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-05/msg00414.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mjambor at suse dot cz http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45699
[Bug middle-end/45699] [4.6 Regression] Incorrect copy constructor generated with -O
-- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-17 14:29:19 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45699
[Bug middle-end/45706] New: [4.6 regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-114.c
On Linux/ia32, revision 164369 gave FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-114.c scan-tree-dump-times vect vectorized 0 loops 1 Revision 164366 is OK. It may be caused by revision 164367: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00661.html -- Summary: [4.6 regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-114.c Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 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=45706
[Bug middle-end/45706] [4.6 regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-114.c
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 16:30 --- (In reply to comment #1) This passes for me, even in -m32 mode (if -msse is added, like vect.exp does): % ./cc1 -ftree-vectorize -fno-vect-cost-model -msse2 -O2 \ vect-114.c -ftree-vectorizer-verbose=2 21 | grep note: vect-114.c:13: note: LOOP VECTORIZED. vect-114.c:6: note: vectorized 1 loops in function. Please note. The failure is FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-114.c scan-tree-dump-times vect vectorized 0 loops 1 ^^^ -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45706
[Bug middle-end/45706] [4.6 regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-114.c
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 16:30 --- For some reason, it only fails with 32bit gcc. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45706
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #24 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 16:35 --- Created an attachment (id=21821) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21821action=view) A patch The problem is we failed to update stack alignment when we increase alignment of local variable. This patch works for me. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #25 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 17:26 --- A patch is posted at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-09/msg01425.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc- ||patches/2010- ||09/msg01425.html http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug c++/45709] New: internal compiler error: in add_phi_arg, at tree-phinodes.c:395
[...@gnu-35 rrs]$ cat foo.cc
struct foo {
virtual void bar();
struct Rect {
int bottom;
};
struct Region {
static Region subtract(const Rect lhs, const Rect rhs)
{
Region reg;
Rect* storage = reg.storage;
{
if (lhs.bottom rhs.bottom)
storage++;
reg.count = storage - reg.storage;
}
return reg;
}
Rect storage[4];
int count;
};
Rect dirtyRegion;
Rect oldDirtyRegion;
};
void foo::bar()
{
const Region copyBack(Region::subtract(oldDirtyRegion, dirtyRegion));
}
[...@gnu-35 rrs]$ /export/gnu/import/rrs/164143/usr/bin/gcc -S -O foo.cc
foo.cc: In member function virtual void foo::bar():
foo.cc:27:70: internal compiler error: in add_phi_arg, at tree-phinodes.c:395
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html for instructions.
[...@gnu-35 rrs]$
--
Summary: internal compiler error: in add_phi_arg, at tree-
phinodes.c:395
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
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=45709
[Bug target/44542] expand_one_stack_var_at may set DECL_ALIGN to a too high value
--- Comment #19 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 20:24 --- It comes back with revision 164375: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00669.html for PR 45678. On Linux/ia32, I got FAIL: gcc.target/i386/incoming-9.c scan-assembler-not andl[\\t ]*\\$-16,[\\t ]*%esp It is because we are using stack offset of local variable for its alignment. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||45678 nThis|| Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|FIXED | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44542
[Bug middle-end/45709] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 regression] internal compiler error: in add_phi_arg, at tree-phinodes.c:395
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 22:02 --- It was introduced between revision 127644 and 127649. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45709
[Bug middle-end/45709] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 regression] internal compiler error: in add_phi_arg, at tree-phinodes.c:395
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 22:17 --- Revision 127647: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2007-08/msg00541.html introduced: [...@gnu-26 gcc]$ ./xgcc -B./ -S -O ../../../pr45709.cc ../../../pr45709.cc: In member function virtual void foo::bar(): ../../../pr45709.cc:27: error: PHI def is not a GIMPLE value storage_8 = PHI copyBack.1_1-storage[0](2), copyBack.1_1-storage[1](3) copyBack.1_1-storage[0]; ../../../pr45709.cc:27: error: PHI def is not a GIMPLE value storage_8 = PHI copyBack.1_1-storage[0](2), copyBack.1_1-storage[1](3) copyBack.1_1-storage[1]; ../../../pr45709.cc:27: error: invalid operand to unary operator copyBack.1_1-storage; ../../../pr45709.cc:27: internal compiler error: verify_stmts failed Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See URL:http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html for instructions. [...@gnu-26 gcc]$ -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45709
[Bug c++/45709] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 regression] internal compiler error: in add_phi_arg, at tree-phinodes.c:395
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 22:20 --- Revision 127647 is the first revision which failed to compile this. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at redhat dot com Component|middle-end |c++ http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45709
[Bug c++/45709] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 regression] internal compiler error: in add_phi_arg, at tree-phinodes.c:395
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 02:59 --- This patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-09/msg01459.html fixes the bug, but caused: FAIL: g++.dg/conversion/op5.C (test for errors, line 18) FAIL: g++.dg/conversion/op5.C (test for excess errors) Now, we get [...@gnu-6 gcc]$ ./xgcc -B./ -S -O /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/conversion/op5.C -ansi -pedantic-errors /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/conversion/op5.C: In function \u2018void foo(const B)\u2019: /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/conversion/op5.C:18:15: error: conversion from \u2018const B\u2019 to non-scalar type \u2018A\u2019 requested [...@gnu-6 gcc]$ const is missing. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.3.6 |--- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45709
[Bug c++/45709] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 regression] internal compiler error: in add_phi_arg, at tree-phinodes.c:395
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 03:36 --- A patch is posted at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-09/msg01461.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc- ||patches/2010- ||09/msg01461.html http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45709
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 13:02 ---
This also failed:
---
typedef float V __attribute__ ((vector_size (16)));
V g;
float d[4] = { 4, 3, 2, 1 };
int
main ()
{
V e;
__builtin_memcpy (e, d, sizeof (d));
V f = { 5, 15, 25, 35 };
e = e * f;
g = e;
return 0;
}
---
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x0804837e in main () at foo.c:11
11e = e * f;
Missing separate debuginfos, use: debuginfo-install glibc-2.12.1-2.0.f13.i686
(gdb) disass
Dump of assembler code for function main:
0x08048374 +0: push %ebp
0x08048375 +1: mov%esp,%ebp
0x08048377 +3: movaps 0x8048470,%xmm0
= 0x0804837e +10:mulps 0x8049644,%xmm0
0x08048385 +17:movaps %xmm0,0x8049670
0x0804838c +24:mov$0x0,%eax
0x08048391 +29:pop%ebp
0x08048392 +30:ret
End of assembler dump.
(gdb) q
There is no stack involved. Somehow we failed to align
array of float properly.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 13:05 --- If __builtin_memcpy generates instructions which require bigger alignment than alignments of source or destination, it should increase the alignment of source or destination. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #10 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 13:10 --- When __builtin_memcpy increases the alignment of source or destination, it should update needed stack alignment if source or destination is on stack. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #11 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 13:21 --- This code: if (TREE_CODE (srcvar) == ADDR_EXPR var_decl_component_p (TREE_OPERAND (srcvar, 0)) tree_int_cst_equal (TYPE_SIZE_UNIT (srctype), len) (!STRICT_ALIGNMENT || !destvar || src_align = TYPE_ALIGN (desttype))) srcvar = fold_build2 (MEM_REF, destvar ? desttype : srctype, srcvar, off0); does float d[4]; __m128 *p = (__m128 *) d; and treats p as properly aligned. I don't see how it can ever work with SSE. It has nothing to do with stack alignment. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #12 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 13:32 --- (In reply to comment #4) Created an attachment (id=21809) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21809action=view) [edit] patch to fix half STRICT_ALIGNMENT targets memcpy folding Might need this patch to fix as well. i?86 / x86_64 isn't really !STRICT_ALIGNMENT. We need a HARD_ALIGNMENT which depends on type for x86. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #15 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 13:54 --- Created an attachment (id=21810) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21810action=view) A patch This patch adds HARD_ALIGNMENT_MODE_P and works for me. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #16 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 13:59 --- (In reply to comment #13) With that patch the assignment generated from memcpy doesn't need more that int alignment, but still cfgexpand.c sets DECL_ALIGN of the decl to 128 so expand uses aligned instructions. cfgexpand.c should not increase alignment and not set 'needs stack alignment' then, based on your comment #10. So this _is_ about stack alignment (but maybe not exclusively). When we do float d[4]; __m128 *p = (__m128 *) d; all bets are off. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #19 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 14:17 --- (In reply to comment #17) That's true. But many expanders can make use of DECL_ALIGN information, e.g. to choose faster code. If cfgexpand keeps doing what it does now, namely bumping DECL_ALIGN of variables up to PREFERRED_STACK_BOUNDARY even when in the end the stack block doesn't end up being aligned that way, then it lies to the expander The problem isn't limited to stack. and that will hit us again and again. On x86-64/i686, I don't think we want to prevent memcpy folding as your patch does, at least not for CPUs where movu* is fast. That is true. Whatever we do, we can't lie about alignment, on stack or not. Once we fix that, the rest shouldn't be too hard to fix. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #21 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 14:30 --- (In reply to comment #20) The patch in comment #4 makes memcpy folding not lie about alignment. X86 only cares about alignment for vector modes. Can we combine 2 patches into one? cfgexpand still lies about alignment though. Let's open a new bug and fix it separately. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug c++/45665] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected class 'type', have 'exceptional' (error_mark) in grokdeclarator, at cp/decl.c:8797 on invalid code
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-14 16:02 --- It is caused by revision 159939: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-05/msg00996.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at redhat dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45665
[Bug c++/45635] [4.6 regression] Failed to bootstrap on Linux/ia64
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-14 19:22 --- (In reply to comment #6) Created an attachment (id=21793) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21793action=view) [edit] Proposed patch Hi, this patch should solve the problem (dive into ADDR_EXPR to get actual fndecl).I no longer have any ia-64 machine able to bootstrap, but will try to find one tonight. I would be very happy if someone did beat me on this ;) It seems to work. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635
[Bug c++/45635] [4.6 regression] Failed to bootstrap on Linux/ia64
--- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-15 04:09 --- (In reply to comment #5) Created an attachment (id=21792) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21792action=view) [edit] gcc46-pr45635.patch Alternatively, we can avoid computing the address of fn altogether on TARGET_VTABLE_USES_DESCRIPTORS targets. This one can bootstrap. But it caused FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-2.c execution, -O1 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-2.c execution, -Os But it doesn't trigger Sep 14 11:06:05 gnu-11 kernel: 20040709-2.x7(8794): unaligned access to 0x6000f4ae, ip=0x40004e70 which http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635#c6 does. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635
[Bug tree-optimization/45671] Reassociate expressions for greater parallelism
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-15 04:29 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 44382 *** -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED GCC build triplet|powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu | GCC host triplet|powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu | GCC target triplet|powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu | Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45671
[Bug middle-end/44382] Slow integer multiply
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-15 04:29 --- *** Bug 45671 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44382
[Bug target/45670] Less efficient x86 addressing mode selection on 4.6, causes -Os size regression from 4.5
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-15 05:25 --- It is caused by revision 162618: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-07/msg00972.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-15 05:25:27 date|| Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45670
[Bug middle-end/45675] New: [4.6 Regression] New guality test failures
On Linux/x86, revision 164252: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00546.html caused: FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O2 line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O2 -flto line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O2 -fwhopr line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O3 -g line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -Os line 42 a.j == 14 -- Summary: [4.6 Regression] New guality test failures Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 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=45675
[Bug middle-end/45675] [4.6 Regression] New guality test failures
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-15 05:45 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 45663 *** -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45675
[Bug middle-end/45663] [4.6 regression] New test failures
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-15 05:45 --- *** Bug 45675 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45663
[Bug c++/45651] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE in import_export_decl, at cp/decl2.c:2344
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-13 18:53 --- It is caused by revision 115086: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2006-06/msg00805.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45651
[Bug middle-end/45662] New: [4.6 regression] New x86 test failures
On Linux/x86, revision 164250: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00544.html caused FAIL: gcc.target/i386/funcspec-1.c scan-assembler addps[ \t] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/funcspec-1.c scan-assembler fsubs[ \t] FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/fast-math-pr38968.f90 scan-tree-dump vect vectorized 1 loops -- Summary: [4.6 regression] New x86 test failures Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 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=45662
[Bug middle-end/45662] [4.6 regression] New x86 test failures
-- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45662
[Bug middle-end/45663] New: [4.6 regression] New test failures
On Linux/x86, revision 164252: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00546.html caused: FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O2 line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O2 -flto line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O2 -fwhopr line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O3 -g line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -Os line 42 a.j == 14 -- Summary: [4.6 regression] New test failures Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 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=45663
[Bug c/45647] compiler segfault when building coreutils-8.5 head program with -Os, -O2 or -O3
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-11 13:41 --- It has been fixed at least since revision 163804. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45647
[Bug rtl-optimization/44281] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] Global Register variable pessimisation
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-11 13:49 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
GCC snapshot has regressed compared to gcc-4.5:
#include assert.h
#include stdint.h
#define LIKELY(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), 1)
#define UNLIKELY(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), 0)
register uint32_t *Iptr __asm__(rbp);
typedef void (*inst_t)(uint64_t types, uint64_t a, uint64_t b);
__attribute__ ((noinline)) void dec_helper(uint64_t types, uint64_t a,
uint64_t
b) {
assert(FIXME==);
}
void dec(uint64_t types, uint64_t a, uint64_t b) {
if (LIKELY((types 0xFF) == 1)) {
uint32_t next = Iptr[1];
--a;
++Iptr;
((inst_t) (uint64_t) next)(types, a, b);
} else dec_helper(types, a, b);
}
This is caused by revision 160124:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-06/msg00036.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44281
[Bug middle-end/45634] New: [4.6 regression] Revision 163973 faild to compile 191.fma3d in SPEC CPU 2K
On Linux/x86-64, revision 163997 failed to build 191.fma3d in SPEC CPU 2K: [...@gnu-27 0001]$ /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/usr/bin/gfortran -c -o getirv.o -DSPEC_CPU2000_LP64 -O3 -funroll-loops -ffast-math getirv.f90 getirv.f90: In function #65533;rcrdrd#65533;: getirv.f90:213:0: internal compiler error: in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1218 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html for instructions. [...@gnu-27 0001]$ This is caused by revision 163973: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00265.html It isn't fixed as of revision 164143. -- Summary: [4.6 regression] Revision 163973 faild to compile 191.fma3d in SPEC CPU 2K Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 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=45634
[Bug middle-end/45634] [4.6 regression] Revision 163973 faild to compile 191.fma3d in SPEC CPU 2K
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 13:39 --- [...@gnu-16 0001]$ cat pr45634.f90 SUBROUTINE RCRDRD (VTYP) CHARACTER(4), INTENT(OUT) :: VTYP CHARACTER(1), SAVE :: DBL = D VTYP = DBL END [...@gnu-16 0001]$ /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/usr/bin/gcc -S -O2 pr45634.f90 pr45634.f90: In function \u2018rcrdrd\u2019: pr45634.f90:1:0: internal compiler error: in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1218 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html for instructions. [...@gnu-16 0001]$ -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45634
[Bug c++/45635] New: [4.6 regression] Failed to bootstrap on Linux/ia64
On Linux/ia64, revision 164164 gave ../../../../src-trunk/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/array_type_info.cc:33:1: internal compiler error: tree check: expected tree that contains 'decl with RTL' structure, have 'addr_expr' in output_constant, at varasm.c:4408 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html for instructions. make[7]: *** [array_type_info.lo] Error 1 make[7]: Leaving directory `/export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/bld/ia64-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++' Revision 164140 is OK. -- Summary: [4.6 regression] Failed to bootstrap on Linux/ia64 Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal 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=45635
[Bug middle-end/45634] [4.6 regression] Revision 163973 faild to compile 191.fma3d in SPEC CPU 2K
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 14:39 --- A patch is posted at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-09/msg00951.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc- ||patches/2010- ||09/msg00951.html http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45634
[Bug fortran/45636] New: Failed to fold simple Fortran string
For this simple Fortran string: [...@gnu-6 pr45634]$ cat pr45634.f90 SUBROUTINE RCRDRD (VTYP) CHARACTER(4), INTENT(OUT) :: VTYP CHARACTER(1), SAVE :: DBL = D VTYP = DBL END GCC generates: [...@gnu-6 pr45634]$ cat pr45634.s .file pr45634.f90 .text .p2align 4,,15 .globl rcrdrd_ .type rcrdrd_, @function rcrdrd_: .LFB0: .cfi_startproc movzbl dbl.1557(%rip), %eax movw$8224, 1(%rdi) movb$32, 3(%rdi) movb%al, (%rdi) ret .cfi_endproc .LFE0: .size rcrdrd_, .-rcrdrd_ .section.rodata .type dbl.1557, @object .size dbl.1557, 1 dbl.1557: .ascii D .ident GCC: (GNU) 4.6.0 20100910 (experimental) .section.note.GNU-stack,,@progbits IFORT generates: [...@gnu-6 pr45634]$ cat icc.s # -- Machine type EFI2 # mark_description Intel(R) Fortran Compiler XE for applications running on Intel(R) 64, Version 12.0.0 Beta Build 20100512; # mark_description -O3 -S; .file pr45634.f90 .text ..TXTST0: # -- Begin rcrdrd_ # mark_begin; .align16,0x90 .globl rcrdrd_ rcrdrd_: # parameter 1: %rdi # parameter 2: %rsi ..B1.1: # Preds ..B1.0 ..___tag_value_rcrdrd_.1: #1.18 movl $538976324, (%rdi)#4.7 ret #5.7 -- Summary: Failed to fold simple Fortran string Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 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=45636
[Bug c++/45635] [4.6 regression] Failed to bootstrap on Linux/ia64
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 14:52 --- It may be caused by revision 164148: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00440.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635
[Bug fortran/45636] Failed to fold simple Fortran string
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 15:32 --- (In reply to comment #1) I have a slightly different result with your code. troutmask:sgk[212] gfc4x -c -O g.f90 g.f90: In function 'rcrdrd': g.f90:1:0: internal compiler error: in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1218 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html for instructions. It is fixed by http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00475.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636
[Bug middle-end/45634] [4.6 regression] Revision 163973 faild to compile 191.fma3d in SPEC CPU 2K
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 18:41 --- Fixed. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45634
[Bug middle-end/45644] New: [4.6 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 is miscompiled
On Linux/x86-64, revision 164143 miscompiled 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006: Running 450.soplex ref peak lnx32e-gcc default 450.soplex: copy 0 non-zero return code (exit code=0, signal=11) I used -DSPEC_CPU -DNDEBUG -O3 -funroll-loops -ffast-math -DSPEC_CPU_LP64 -fno-strict-aliasing. -- Summary: [4.6 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 is miscompiled Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 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=45644
[Bug middle-end/45644] [4.6 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 is miscompiled
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-11 00:20 --- It is caused by revision 164135: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00427.html I got *** glibc detected *** ../run_base_test_lnx32e-gcc./soplex_base.lnx32e-gcc: double free or corruption (out): 0x00722970 *** === Backtrace: = /lib64/libc.so.6[0x3099675676] ../run_base_test_lnx32e-gcc./soplex_base.lnx32e-gcc[0x449466] ../run_base_test_lnx32e-gcc./soplex_base.lnx32e-gcc[0x4408e6] ../run_base_test_lnx32e-gcc./soplex_base.lnx32e-gcc[0x406c4d] /lib64/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xfd)[0x309961ec5d] ../run_base_test_lnx32e-gcc./soplex_base.lnx32e-gcc[0x401e3d] === Memory map: 0040-00464000 r-xp 08:11 56688876 /export/gnu/import/rrs/spec/2006/spec/benchspec/CPU2006/450.soplex/run/run_base_test_lnx32e-gcc./soplex_base.lnx32e-gcc 00663000-00664000 rw-p 00063000 08:11 56688876 /export/gnu/import/rrs/spec/2006/spec/benchspec/CPU2006/450.soplex/run/run_base_test_lnx32e-gcc./soplex_base.lnx32e-gcc 00664000-00732000 rw-p 00:00 0 [heap] 309920-309921e000 r-xp 08:05 1177353 /lib64/ld-2.12.1.so 309941e000-309941f000 r--p 0001e000 08:05 1177353 /lib64/ld-2.12.1.so 309941f000-309942 rw-p 0001f000 08:05 1177353 /lib64/ld-2.12.1.so 309942-3099421000 rw-p 00:00 0 309960-3099786000 r-xp 08:05 1177356 /lib64/libc-2.12.1.so 3099786000-3099986000 ---p 00186000 08:05 1177356 /lib64/libc-2.12.1.so 3099986000-309998a000 r--p 00186000 08:05 1177356 /lib64/libc-2.12.1.so 309998a000-309998b000 rw-p 0018a000 08:05 1177356 /lib64/libc-2.12.1.so 309998b000-30 rw-p 00:00 0 309a60-309a683000 r-xp 08:05 1177374 /lib64/libm-2.12.1.so 309a683000-309a882000 ---p 00083000 08:05 1177374 /lib64/libm-2.12.1.so 309a882000-309a883000 r--p 00082000 08:05 1177374 /lib64/libm-2.12.1.so 309a883000-309a884000 rw-p 00083000 08:05 1177374 /lib64/libm-2.12.1.so 77879000-77acb000 rw-p 00:00 0 77acb000-77ae r-xp 08:11 24960103 /export/gnu/import/rrs/164135/usr/lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 77ae-77cdf000 ---p 00015000 08:11 24960103 /export/gnu/import/rrs/164135/usr/lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 77cdf000-77ce rw-p 00014000 08:11 24960103 /export/gnu/import/rrs/164135/usr/lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 77ce-77ce1000 rw-p 00:00 0 77cf9000-77cfa000 rw-p 00:00 0 77cfa000-77ddf000 r-xp 08:11 24960082 /export/gnu/import/rrs/164135/usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6.0.15 77ddf000-77fde000 ---p 000e5000 08:11 24960082 /export/gnu/import/rrs/164135/usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6.0.15 77fde000-77fe6000 r--p 000e4000 08:11 24960082 /export/gnu/import/rrs/164135/usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6.0.15 77fe6000-77fe8000 rw-p 000ec000 08:11 24960082 /export/gnu/import/rrs/164135/usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6.0.15 77fe8000-77ffe000 rw-p 00:00 0 77ffe000-77fff000 r-xp 00:00 0 [vdso] 7ffde000-7000 rw-p 00:00 0 [stack] ff60-ff601000 r-xp 00:00 0 [vsyscall] -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mjambor at suse dot cz Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45644
[Bug middle-end/45644] [4.6 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 is miscompiled
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-11 00:23 --- It also failed with -DSPEC_CPU -DNDEBUG -O2 -ffast-math -DSPEC_CPU_LP64 -fno-strict-aliasing -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45644
[Bug rtl-optimization/45614] [4.6 Regression] ICE: RTL check: expected code 'reg', have 'subreg' in rhs_regno, at rtl.h:1056 with -ftree-vectorize
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-09 13:26 --- I think it is fixed by revision 164071: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00363.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45614
[Bug rtl-optimization/45614] [4.6 Regression] ICE: RTL check: expected code 'reg', have 'subreg' in rhs_regno, at rtl.h:1056 with -ftree-vectorize
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-09 14:09 --- Fixed. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45614
[Bug c++/45606] [4.5/4.6 Regression] match a method prototyped a typedef alias with the original type (using stdlib)
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-09 18:23 --- It is caused by revision 156316: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-01/msg00784.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at redhat dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45606
[Bug target/45623] GCC 4.5.[01] breaks our ffi on Linux64. ABI break?
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 00:38 --- Mozilla bugs say Platform: x86 Linux. But gcc bug says powerpc64-*-linux. What is going on? -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl dot tools at gmail dot ||com Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45623
[Bug target/45623] GCC 4.5.[01] breaks our ffi on Linux64. ABI break?
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 00:51 --- I am not ware any x86-64 psABI changes in gcc 4.5. Please provide a testcase. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45623
[Bug target/45623] GCC 4.5.[01] breaks our ffi on Linux64. ABI break?
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 02:56 --- (In reply to comment #0) See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=594611 and https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=590683 for more details. This breaks users of Firefox Sync on GCC 4.5. The bug isn't present in gcc 4.4 or trunk. What would it take to cherry-pick a fix for 4.5.x? You either identify which checkin fixes it or find a testcase so that I can use it to find the fix. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45623
[Bug tree-optimization/45626] Segfault in fold_const_aggregate_ref
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 04:27 --- It is caused by revision 163808: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00099.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-10 04:27:15 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45626
[Bug tree-optimization/45598] [4.6 Regression] ICE; in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1218
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-08 15:30 --- On Linux/x86-64, revision 163997 failed to build 191.fma3d in SPEC CPU 2K: [...@gnu-27 0001]$ /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/usr/bin/gfortran -c -o getirv.o -DSPEC_CPU2000_LP64 -O3 -funroll-loops -ffast-math getirv.f90 getirv.f90: In function rcrdrd: getirv.f90:213:0: internal compiler error: in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1218 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html for instructions. [...@gnu-27 0001]$ -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl dot tools at gmail dot ||com GCC build triplet|x86_64-apple-darwin10 | GCC host triplet|x86_64-apple-darwin10 | GCC target triplet|x86_64-apple-darwin10 | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45598
[Bug tree-optimization/45598] [4.6 Regression] ICE; in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1218
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-08 16:19 --- This is caused by revision 163973: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00265.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45598
[Bug testsuite/45604] New: [4.6 regression] New test failures
On Linux/x86, revision 164033 gave FAIL: g++.dg/opt/pr30965.C scan-tree-dump-times optimized variable_..D. = v_..D. 2 FAIL: g++.dg/tree-ssa/pointer-reference-alias.C scan-tree-dump-times optimized \*a 1 FAIL: g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr27090.C scan-tree-dump optimized f_..D.-x; Revision 164022 is OK. It may be caused by revision 164031: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00323.html -- Summary: [4.6 regression] New test failures Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 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=45604
[Bug tree-optimization/45580] [4.6 Regression] Building WebKit fails with compiler catching SIGSEGV in gimple_fold_obj_type_ref_known_binfo()
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-07 16:51 --- It is caused by revision 161655: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-07/msg6.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-07 16:51:12 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45580
[Bug tree-optimization/45580] [4.6 Regression] Building WebKit fails with compiler catching SIGSEGV in gimple_fold_obj_type_ref_known_binfo()
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-07 17:02 --- Valgrind reports: Compiler executable checksum: 49fb87eb28749ed7ad604cc77a74ec38 ==24854== Invalid read of size 2 ==24854==at 0x1258998: gimple_fold_obj_type_ref_known_binfo (gimple-fold.c:1383) ==24854==by 0x1258E57: gimple_fold_obj_type_ref (gimple-fold.c:1416) ==24854==by 0x1259081: fold_gimple_call (gimple-fold.c:1460) ==24854==by 0x125931D: fold_stmt_1 (gimple-fold.c:1522) ==24854==by 0x12596C6: fold_stmt (gimple-fold.c:1601) ==24854==by 0xDE9EC7: substitute_and_fold (tree-ssa-propagate.c:1135) ==24854==by 0xD4FD07: ccp_finalize (tree-ssa-ccp.c:877) ==24854==by 0xD58452: do_ssa_ccp (tree-ssa-ccp.c:2357) ==24854==by 0xB5B1A0: execute_one_pass (passes.c:1569) ==24854==by 0xB5B38F: execute_pass_list (passes.c:1624) ==24854==by 0xB5B3B0: execute_pass_list (passes.c:1625) ==24854==by 0xCE6503: tree_rest_of_compilation (tree-optimize.c:452) ==24854== Address 0x0 is not stack'd, malloc'd or (recently) free'd ==24854== ../3rdparty/javascriptcore/JavaScriptCore/runtime/JSGlobalData.cpp: In static member function static void QTJSC::JSGlobalData::storeVPtrs(): ../3rdparty/javascriptcore/JavaScriptCore/runtime/JSGlobalData.cpp:79:6: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html for instructions. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45580
[Bug middle-end/45589] New: [4.6 Regression] 200.sixtrack in SPEC CPU 2000 is miscompiled
On Linux/x86, 200.sixtrack in SPEC CPU 2000 is miscompiled at -O3: Running 200.sixtrack ref peak lnx32e-gcc default *** Miscompare of inp.out, see /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/spec/2000/x86_64/ spec/benchspec/CFP2000/200.sixtrack/run/0004/inp.out.mis [...@gnu-16 x86_64]$ cat /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/spec/2000/x86_64/spec/benchspec/CFP2000/200.sixtrack/run/0004/inp.out.mis 'inp.out' short [...@gnu-16 x86_64]$ -- Summary: [4.6 Regression] 200.sixtrack in SPEC CPU 2000 is miscompiled Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 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=45589
[Bug middle-end/45589] [4.6 Regression] 200.sixtrack in SPEC CPU 2000 is miscompiled
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-07 22:25 --- Revision 163963 is bad. Revision 163913 is OK. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45589
[Bug middle-end/45589] [4.6 Regression] 200.sixtrack in SPEC CPU 2000 is miscompiled
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-08 00:18 --- It is caused by revision 163915: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00207.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45589
[Bug middle-end/45589] [4.6 Regression] 200.sixtrack in SPEC CPU 2000 is miscompiled
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-08 00:29 --- I used -O3 -funroll-loops -ffast-math on Linux/x86-64. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45589
[Bug target/40959] build fails - No rule to make target `/usr/ports/lang/gcc43/work/build/ia64-portbld-freebsd8.0/libgcc/crtfastmath.o', needed by `T_TARGET'. Stop.
--- Comment #18 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-08 00:32
---
(In reply to comment #17)
(In reply to comment #9)
unwind-ia64_s.o(.text+0x30b2): In function `uw_frame_state_for':
../.././../gcc-4.5-20091112/libgcc/../gcc/config/ia64/unwind-ia64.c:1788:
undefined reference to `_Unwind_FindTableEntry'
unwind-ia64_s.o(.text+0x7632): In function `_Unwind_FindEnclosingFunction':
../.././../gcc-4.5-20091112/libgcc/../gcc/config/ia64/unwind-ia64.c:1745:
undefined reference to `_Unwind_FindTableEntry'
/usr/bin/ld: ./libgcc_s.so.1.tmp: hidden symbol `_Unwind_FindTableEntry'
isn't
defined
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
gmake[3]: *** [libgcc_s.so] Error 1
gmake[3]: Leaving directory
`/usr/ports/lang/gcc45/work/build/ia64-portbld-freebsd9.0/libgcc'
gmake[2]: *** [all-stage1-target-libgcc] Error 2
After making the change to libgcc/config.host that is also described in
comment #5 I get the same.
libc indeed does feature _Unwind_FindTableEntry() as I can easily verify
with the following program:
void _Unwind_FindTableEntry();
int main() { _Unwind_FindTableEntry(); }
Just, why do we then get this link failure? Adding -v I see that
/lib/libc.so.7 is explicitly part of the collect2 invocation.
Because _Unwind_FindTableEntry is marked hidden.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40959
[Bug target/36502] i386/darwin generates unnecessary stack ops in every function
--- Comment #49 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-08 02:16 --- Fixed. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36502
