[Bug target/20036] gcc.dg/compat/vector-[12]_y.c fails to compile
-- What|Removed |Added Component|c |target Keywords||ice-on-valid-code http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20036
[Bug ada/20035] failed run-time assertion : Tasking not implemented on this configuration on sparc-linux
--- Additional Comments From christian dot joensson at gmail dot com 2005-02-17 20:33 --- v9 version is for sparc64-linux... -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20035
[Bug libfortran/20037] New: libfortran: format termination bug in formatted write
Hi, gfortran does not properly terminate the I/O list in the following example: ! format termination problem: gfortran prints a superfluous parenthesis ! character (len=*), parameter :: fmt = '(2(1x,(,f7.2,,,f7.2,),:))' write (*,fmt) 1.0, 2.0 end % gfortran ./a.out ( 1.00, 2.00) ( The final parenthesis should not be printed. Cheers, -ha -- Summary: libfortran: format termination bug in formatted write Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: libfortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: anlauf at hep dot tu-darmstadt dot de CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20037
[Bug tree-optimization/19903] ACATS cxa4006 cxa4017 fail at runtime
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-17 20:44 --- Recategorizing. -- What|Removed |Added Component|ada |tree-optimization Summary|ACATS cxa4006 cxa4017 |ACATS cxa4006 cxa4017 fail |ada.string.(un)bounded fail |at runtime |at runtime | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19903
[Bug c/20038] New: test for cpu pentium3 enabled when multilib=no
Running testsuite with upcoming gcc-3.4.4 (20050217) configured with: ../gcc/configure --prefix=/usr --enable-shared --with-gnu-ld --with-gnu-as --sysconfdir=/etc --localstatedir=/var --enable-multilib=no Executing on host: /home/winfried/gcc-cvs/winni/gcc/xgcc -B/home/winfried/gcc-cvs/winni/gcc/ /home/winfried/gcc-cvs/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/i386-sse-8.c -march=pentium3 -S - o i386-sse-8.s(timeout = 300) /home/winfried/gcc-cvs/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/i386-sse-8.c:1: error: CPU you selected does not support x86-64 instruction set /home/winfried/gcc-cvs/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/i386-sse-8.c:1: error: CPU you selected does not support x86-64 instruction set compiler exited with status 1 output is: /home/winfried/gcc-cvs/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/i386-sse-8.c:1: error: CPU you selected does not support x86-64 instruction set /home/winfried/gcc-cvs/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/i386-sse-8.c:1: error: CPU you selected does not support x86-64 instruction set FAIL: gcc.dg/i386-sse-8.c (test for excess errors) -- Summary: test for cpu pentium3 enabled when multilib=no Product: gcc Version: 3.4.4 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: c AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: winfried dot magerl at mch dot sbs dot de CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20038
[Bug target/20038] test for cpu pentium3 enabled when multilib=no
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-17 20:48 --- Fixed on the mainline by: 2004-11-17 Janis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] * lib/gcc-dg.exp (dg-skip-if): New function. (dg-forbid-option): Remove. * g++.dg/abi/bitfield3.C: Use dg-skip-if i?86 -m64. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Component|c |target Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20038
[Bug c++/20039] uninitialized const in `new' of `const struct'
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-17 21:04 --- Confirmed, not a regression. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Keywords||accepts-invalid Known to fail||2.95.3 3.0.4 3.2.3 3.3.3 ||3.4.0 4.0.0 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-17 21:04:22 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20039
[Bug c++/20028] [3.4 Regression] class and then template class gives an ICE
--- Additional Comments From jcobyrne at cox dot net 2005-02-17 21:09
---
(In reply to comment #4)
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg01020.html for
3.4.x.
The following code _IS_ correct and _DOES_ compile on 3.2.
template class T class A
{ protected: typedef T someType; };
template class T class B
{ protected: typedef T anotherType; };
// we should be able to access protected members of classes X and Y here,
// because we are inheriting them.
template typename T, template class class X, template class class Y
class Foo : public X T, public Y typename XT::someType
{ typedef Ytypename XT::someType yetAnotherType; };
int main ()
{ Fooint, A, B x; return 0; }
---
I guess I stumbled on the segfault by mistake in my vain attempts to get the
code to compile on 3.3 and greater. Syntactically and semantically, I have
confirmed that this code does work, and it is also used similarly in
Alexandrescu's book on C++ Design Patterns.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20028
[Bug c++/20028] [3.4 Regression] class and then template class gives an ICE
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-17 21:14 --- (In reply to comment #5) (In reply to comment #4) I guess I stumbled on the segfault by mistake in my vain attempts to get the code to compile on 3.3 and greater. Syntactically and semantically, I have confirmed that this code does work, and it is also used similarly in Alexandrescu's book on C++ Design Patterns. Yes you did stumbled on the segfault but note this is not valid code still, yes a C++ book can get it wrong. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20028
[Bug c++/20028] [3.4 Regression] class and then template class gives an ICE
--- Additional Comments From jcobyrne at cox dot net 2005-02-17 21:21 --- If the code is wrong, what accounts for the fact that wrong code would compile on 3.2 and not on 3.3 or 3.4? Also, Alexandrescu did not write it wrong, as it is also used in his Loki library that is known to compile under GCC as well as other compilers. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20028
[Bug c++/20040] New: A new expression must check the access level of delete operator
Sourc code for t.cpp:
class X
{
void operator delete(void *p) throw ();
};
X xa;
void X::operator delete(void *p) throw ()
{
}
int mymain()
{
X *p = new X; /* error - can't access X::operator delete */
return 0;
}
Expected Behaviour:
t.cpp:9: `static void X::operator delete(void*)' is private
t.cpp:14: within this context
Actual Behaviour:
None.
t.ii generated with -save-temps option
# 1 t.cpp
# 1 t.cpp
# 1 built-in
# 1 command line
# 1 t.cpp
class X
{
void operator delete(void *p) throw ();
};
X xa;
void X::operator delete(void *p) throw ()
{
}
int mymain()
{
X *p = new X;
return 0;
}
Release:
GCC Version: 3.2.0
Environment:
System Type:
Reading specs from
/usr/local/bin/../lib/gcc-lib/powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0/3.2/specs
Configured with: /scratch/gcc-3.2/configure --prefix=/usr/local/gcc.3.2.0
--enable-threads=aix --disable-nls
Thread model: aix
gcc version 3.2
/usr/local/bin/../lib/gcc-lib/powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0/3.2/cpp0 -lang-c++
-D__GNUG__=3 -D__DEPRECATED -D__EXCEPTIONS -v -iprefix
/usr/local/bin/../lib/gcc-lib/powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0/3.2/ -D__GNUC__=3
-D__GNUC_MINOR__=2 -D__GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__=0 -D__GXX_ABI_VERSION=102 -D_IBMR2
-D_POWER -D_LONG_LONG -D_AIX -D_AIX32 -D_AIX41 -D_AIX43 -D_AIX51 -D_IBMR2
-D_POWER -D_LONG_LONG -D_AIX -D_AIX32 -D_AIX41 -D_AIX43 -D_AIX51 -Asystem=unix
-Asystem=aix -D__NO_INLINE__ -D__STDC_HOSTED__=1 -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=500
-D_XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED=1 -D_LARGE_FILE_API -D_ALL_SOURCE
-D__WCHAR_TYPE__=short unsigned int -D_ARCH_COM
/home/msadoghi/scenario/common/t.cpp t.ii
GNU CPP version 3.2 (cpplib)
ignoring nonexistent directory
/usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/../../powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0/include
ignoring nonexistent directory
/usr/local/gcc.3.2.0/powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0/include
ignoring duplicate directory /usr/local/gcc.3.2.0/include/c++/3.2
ignoring duplicate directory
/usr/local/gcc.3.2.0/include/c++/3.2/powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0
ignoring duplicate directory /usr/local/gcc.3.2.0/include/c++/3.2/backward
ignoring duplicate directory
/usr/local/gcc.3.2.0/lib/gcc-lib/powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0/3.2/include
#include ... search starts here:
#include ... search starts here:
/usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/../../include/c++/3.2
/usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/../../include/c++/3.2/powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0
/usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/../../include/c++/3.2/backward
/usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0/3.2/include
/usr/local/include
/usr/local/gcc.3.2.0/include
/usr/include
End of search list.
/usr/local/bin/../lib/gcc-lib/powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0/3.2/cc1plus -fpreprocessed
t.ii -quiet -dumpbase t.cpp -version -o t.s
GNU CPP version 3.2 (cpplib)
GNU C++ version 3.2 (powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0)
compiled by GNU C version 3.2.
/home/msadoghi/scenario/common/t.cpp:2: warning: all member functions in class
`X' are private
as -u -mcom -o t.o t.s
How-To-Repeat:
g++ -v -save-temps -c -std=iso9899:199409 t.cpp
Note:
This is a diagnostic test case. Compilation failure is expected. However the
compilation
is successful and no error or warning messages are produced. According to C++
ANSI Standard
the test cases should produces an error. Therefore, in the strict mode compiler
should
produce a server error and in the extended mode it should at least produces a
warning.
C++ ANSI Standard:
new-expression that creates object of class type or array thereof must check
access for
allocation function, deallocation function, and constructor this checks access
for operator delete
AIX, MACOS and LINUX all have a similar behaviors.
--
Summary: A new expression must check the access level of delete
operator
Product: gcc
Version: 3.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: msadoghi at ca dot ibm dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20040
[Bug c++/20028] [3.4 Regression] class and then template class gives an ICE
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-17 21:26 --- (In reply to comment #7) If the code is wrong, what accounts for the fact that wrong code would compile on 3.2 and not on 3.3 or 3.4? Also, Alexandrescu did not write it wrong, as it is also used in his Loki library that is known to compile under GCC as well as other compilers. Because it was a bug in 3.2 and before. It does not compile with a slightly older EDG front-end. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20028
[Bug c++/20040] A new expression must check the access level of delete operator
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-17 21:28 --- Confirmed, not a regression. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Keywords||accepts-invalid Known to fail||2.95.3 3.0.4 3.2.3 3.3.3 ||3.4.0 4.0.0 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-17 21:28:11 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20040
[Bug c++/20041] New: request for member `operator delete' is ambiguous
Sourc code for t.cpp:
struct D1
{
void operator delete(void *p) throw (){}
};
struct D2
{
void operator delete(void *p) throw (){}
};
class MD : public D1, public D2
{
};
int mymain()
{
MD *p = new MD; /* error - ambiguous operator delete */
return 0;
}
Expected Behaviour:
t.cpp: In function `int mymain()':
t.cpp:18: request for member `operator delete' is ambiguous
t.cpp:8: candidates are: static void D2::operator delete(void*)
t.cpp:3: static void D1::operator delete(void*)
Actual Behaviour:
None.
t.ii generated with -save-temps option
# 1 t.cpp
# 1 t.cpp
# 1 built-in
# 1 command line
# 1 t.cpp
struct D1
{
void operator delete(void *p) throw (){}
};
struct D2
{
void operator delete(void *p) throw (){}
};
class MD : public D1, public D2
{
};
int mymain()
{
MD *p = new MD;
return 0;
}
Release:
GCC Version: 3.2.0
Environment:
System Type:
Reading specs from
/usr/local/bin/../lib/gcc-lib/powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0/3.2/specs
Configured with: /scratch/gcc-3.2/configure --prefix=/usr/local/gcc.3.2.0
--enable-threads=aix --disable-nls
Thread model: aix
gcc version 3.2
/usr/local/bin/../lib/gcc-lib/powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0/3.2/cpp0 -lang-c++
-D__GNUG__=3 -D__DEPRECATED -D__EXCEPTIONS -v -iprefix
/usr/local/bin/../lib/gcc-lib/powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0/3.2/ -D__GNUC__=3
-D__GNUC_MINOR__=2 -D__GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__=0 -D__GXX_ABI_VERSION=102 -D_IBMR2
-D_POWER -D_LONG_LONG -D_AIX -D_AIX32 -D_AIX41 -D_AIX43 -D_AIX51 -Asystem=unix
-Asystem=aix -D__NO_INLINE__ -D__STDC_HOSTED__=1 -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=500
-D_XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED=1 -D_LARGE_FILE_API -D_ALL_SOURCE
-D__WCHAR_TYPE__=short unsigned int -D_ARCH_COM
/home/msadoghi/scenario/common/t.cpp -std=iso9899:199409 t.ii
GNU CPP version 3.2 (cpplib)
ignoring nonexistent directory
/usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/../../powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0/include
ignoring nonexistent directory
/usr/local/gcc.3.2.0/powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0/include
ignoring duplicate directory
/usr/local/gcc.3.2.0/lib/gcc-lib/powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0/3.2/include
#include ... search starts here:
#include ... search starts here:
/usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0/3.2/include
/usr/local/include
/usr/local/gcc.3.2.0/include
/usr/include
End of search list.
/usr/local/bin/../lib/gcc-lib/powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0/3.2/cc1plus -fpreprocessed
t.ii -quiet -dumpbase t.cpp -std=iso9899:199409 -version -o t.s
GNU CPP version 3.2 (cpplib)
GNU C++ version 3.2 (powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0)
compiled by GNU C version 3.2.
as -u -mcom -o t.o t.s
How-To-Repeat:
g++ -v -save-temps -c -std=iso9899:199409 t.cpp
Note:
This is a diagnostic test case. Compilation failure is expected. However the
compilation
is successful and no error or warning messages are produced. According to C++
ANSI Standard
the test cases should produces an error. Therefore, in the strict mode compiler
should
produce a server error and in the extended mode it should at least produces a
warning.
C++ ANSI Standard:
new-expression that creates object of class type or array thereof must check
ambiguity for
allocation function, deallocation function, and constructor this checks access
for operator delete
AIX, MACOS and LINUX all have a similar behaviors.
--
Summary: request for member `operator delete' is ambiguous
Product: gcc
Version: 3.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: msadoghi at ca dot ibm dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20041
[Bug c++/20041] request for member `operator delete' is ambiguous
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-17 21:36 --- Confirmed, not a regression. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Keywords||accepts-invalid Known to fail||2.95.3 3.0.4 3.2.3 3.3.3 ||3.4.0 4.0.0 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-17 21:36:03 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20041
[Bug target/20020] x86_64 - 128 bit structs not targeted to TImode
--- Additional Comments From gary at intrepid dot com 2005-02-17 21:41 --- Also note MAX_FIXED_MODE_SIZE was changed on rs6000 for a reason and not for an optimization issue. Based on my interpretaion of the procedure call ABI, both this problem and a related Bug #19566 demonstrate a variance from the AMD 64 bit ABI (see System V Application Binary Interface AMD64 Architecture Processor Supplement, Draft Version 0.95, January 14, 2005, section 3.2.3). If this is a correct interpretation of the ABI, then both bugs are not just performance related. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20020
[Bug target/20020] x86_64 - 128 bit structs not targeted to TImode
--- Additional Comments From matz at suse dot de 2005-02-17 22:06 --- I think that #19566 is a real bug. The ABI specifies to pass 16byte structs in registers. Anyway MAX_FIXED_MODE_SIZE doesn't influence the calling convention, only how such struct is handled by transforming code. I.e. changing MAX_FIXED_MODE_SIZE shouldn't fix any ABI bug (in fact shouldn't change how parameters are passed at all). At least from my understanding and if there aren't other bugs making this false ;) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20020
[Bug ada/19408] [4.0 Regression] ACATS c391002 failure on powerpc-darwin, wrong .space
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-02-17 22:16 --- Current behaviour as of 20050216 is an ICE /Users/pinskia/src/local2/gcc/objdir/gcc/xgcc -c -B/Users/pinskia/src/local2/gcc/objdir/gcc/ -gnatws -O2 -I/Users/pinskia/src/local2/gcc/objdir/gcc/testsuite/ada/acats/support c391002.adb +===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+ | 4.0.0 20050216 (experimental) (powerpc-apple-darwin7.7.0) GCC error: | | in categorize_ctor_elements_1, at expr.c:4374| | Error detected at c391002.adb:232:5 | -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19408
[Bug ada/20042] New: ACATS cxaca01 assembler Bad Absolute Expression error on ppc-darwin
As of 20050216 on ppc-darwin: /Users/pinskia/src/local2/gcc/objdir/gcc/xgcc -c -I./ -B/Users/pinskia/src/local2/gcc/objdir/gcc/ -gnatws -O2 -I/Users/pinskia/src/local2/gcc/objdir/gcc/testsuite/ada/acats/support -I- /Users/pinskia/src/local2/gcc/objdir/gcc/testsuite/ada/acats/support/fxaca00.ads /var/tmp//ccXIqMNB.s:241:Bad Absolute Expression, absolute 0 assumed. /var/tmp//ccXIqMNB.s:241:Repeat 0, .space ignored /var/tmp//ccXIqMNB.s:247:Bad Absolute Expression, absolute 0 assumed. /var/tmp//ccXIqMNB.s:247:Repeat 0, .space ignored /var/tmp//ccXIqMNB.s:253:Bad Absolute Expression, absolute 0 assumed. /var/tmp//ccXIqMNB.s:253:Repeat 0, .space ignored /var/tmp//ccXIqMNB.s:259:Bad Absolute Expression, absolute 0 assumed. /var/tmp//ccXIqMNB.s:259:Repeat 0, .space ignored /var/tmp//ccXIqMNB.s:265:Bad Absolute Expression, absolute 0 assumed. /var/tmp//ccXIqMNB.s:265:Repeat 0, .space ignored -- Summary: ACATS cxaca01 assembler Bad Absolute Expression error on ppc-darwin Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: ada AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: laurent at guerby dot net CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20042
[Bug ada/19959] [4.0 Regression] Can't compile gnattools for the AVR target
-- What|Removed |Added CC||ericw at evcohs dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19959
[Bug target/20016] Compiling libgcc2.c with -Os for avr-gcc?
-- What|Removed |Added CC||ericw at evcohs dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20016
[Bug tree-optimization/19917] [4.0 regression] Weak const function mishandled inside loop
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-17 22:32 --- Subject: Bug 19917 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-17 22:32:30 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog tree-eh.c Log message: PR tree-optimization/19917 * tree-eh.c (tree_could_trap_p): Consider calls to weak functions to be potentially trapping. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=2.7515r2=2.7516 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/tree-eh.c.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=2.24r2=2.25 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19917
[Bug target/20020] x86_64 - 128 bit structs not targeted to TImode
--- Additional Comments From gary at intrepid dot com 2005-02-17 22:39 --- I think that Bug #19566 is a real bug. The ABI specifies to pass 16byte structs in registers. Anyway MAX_FIXED_MODE_SIZE doesn't influence the calling convention ... Thanks for the clarification. After re-reading classify_argument() in config/i386/i386.c, I agree. I had thought that for all BLKmode values that it would target the argument into memory, however, for aggregate types (records/unions, etc) it ignores the mode and looks at each field (per the ABI). Thus, I agree this Bug #20020 is performance-related only, and Bug #19566 illustrates a variance from the procedure call ABI. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20020
[Bug target/20016] Compiling libgcc2.c with -Os for avr-gcc?
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-02-17 22:47 --- got my vote. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20016
[Bug tree-optimization/19917] [4.0 regression] Weak const function mishandled inside loop
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-17 23:06 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19917
[Bug c/20043] New: transparent_union doesn't allow restrict qualifier removal
GCC 4 now produces a conflicting types error for code that gcc 3.4 accepts without complaint. This usage pattern occurs when using glibc's sys/socket.h with _GNU_SOURCE defined, followed by a POSIX-compliant redeclaration of function like `accept'. This is what transparent_union was invented to support. -- Summary: transparent_union doesn't allow restrict qualifier removal Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: c AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: roland at redhat dot com CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20043
[Bug c/20043] transparent_union doesn't allow restrict qualifier removal
--- Additional Comments From roland at redhat dot com 2005-02-17 23:16 --- Created an attachment (id=8218) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8218action=view) small test case for this bug 3.4 likes this fine, but 4.0 does not. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20043
[Bug c/20043] [4.0 Regression] transparent_union doesn't allow restrict qualifier removal
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-17 23:19 --- Been failing since 20040909. Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Keywords||rejects-valid Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-17 23:19:58 date|| Summary|transparent_union doesn't |[4.0 Regression] |allow restrict qualifier|transparent_union doesn't |removal |allow restrict qualifier ||removal Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20043
[Bug c/20043] [4.0 Regression] transparent_union doesn't allow restrict qualifier removal
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-17
23:25 ---
What is werid is that 3.4.0 rejects the follow legal code though:
typedef union { int *__restrict i; long *__restrict l; } u
__attribute__((transparent_union));
extern void foobar(u arg);
extern void foobar(int *__restrict);
Though 4.0.0 does compile it so we traded one bug for another.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20043
[Bug c/19978] overflow in expression of constants should not cause multiple warnings
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-02-17 23:37 --- (In reply to comment #2) The problem is that we reset TREE_OVERFLOW: It would seem it overflows incremented, and underflow's decremented, only a terminal non-zero count would represent an over/underflow for addition/subtraction, (as an intermediate over/underflow is not observable)? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19978
[Bug java/20044] New: Wrong method call semantics (maybe instanceof/invokespecial)
This is a very small testcase, in which the code generated by gcj does not behave correctly at runtime. I set the severity as critical because there is no notification that something went wrong while the wrong method gets called, and I see no workaround. I suppose that there is a problem either with an instanceof test, or with the implementation of invokespecial. Feel free to update the summary if this turns out to be the wrong intuitition. Attached are three small bytecode classes (I could not reproduce the bug from Java sources). # Normal behaviour, using Sun's JDK $ java test.fun true $ gcj --main=test.fun test/*.class $ ./a.out false Tested with gcj 4.0.0 20050212. -- Summary: Wrong method call semantics (maybe instanceof/invokespecial) Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: critical Priority: P2 Component: java AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: bonniot at users dot sf dot net CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,java-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC host triplet: i386-debian-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20044
[Bug java/20044] Wrong method call semantics (maybe instanceof/invokespecial)
--- Additional Comments From bonniot at users dot sf dot net 2005-02-17 23:49 --- Created an attachment (id=8219) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8219action=view) testcase -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20044
[Bug tree-optimization/18947] [4.0 Regression] [non-UAAT] external inline and normal function of the same name
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-17 23:50 --- Subject: Bug 18947 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-17 23:50:03 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog cgraphunit.c gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog Added files: gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile: 20050215-2.c 20050215-3.c 20050215-1.c Log message: PR tree-optimization/18947 * cgraphunit.c (cgraph_finalize_function): When redefining an extern inline, remove all nodes that are inlined into the extern inline being redefined. * gcc.c-torture/compile/20050215-1.c: New test. * gcc.c-torture/compile/20050215-2.c: New test. * gcc.c-torture/compile/20050215-3.c: New test. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=2.7517r2=2.7518 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cgraphunit.c.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=1.91r2=1.92 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=1.5044r2=1.5045 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/20050215-2.c.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=NONEr2=1.1 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/20050215-3.c.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=NONEr2=1.1 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/20050215-1.c.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=NONEr2=1.1 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18947
[Bug java/20044] Wrong method call semantics (maybe instanceof/invokespecial)
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-17 23:51 --- Well it cannot be really that critial because nobody has hit this before. -- What|Removed |Added Severity|critical|normal Keywords||wrong-code http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20044
[Bug tree-optimization/18947] [4.0 Regression] [non-UAAT] external inline and normal function of the same name
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-17 23:52 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18947
[Bug c++/20023] [4.0 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-17 23:57 --- Subject: Bug 20023 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-17 23:56:55 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog convert.c gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog Added files: gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile: 20050217-1.c gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt: switch3.C Log message: PR c++/20023 PR tree-optimization/20009 * convert.c (convert_to_integer): Revert 2005-02-16 change. * gcc.c-torture/compile/20050217-1.c: New test. * g++.dg/opt/switch3.C: New test. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=2.7518r2=2.7519 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/convert.c.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=1.56r2=1.57 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=1.5045r2=1.5046 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/20050217-1.c.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=NONEr2=1.1 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/switch3.C.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=NONEr2=1.1 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20023
[Bug tree-optimization/20009] [4.0 regression] cris-elf testsuite failures: gcc.c-torture/unsorted/USIcmp.c, -O1 and above
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-17 23:57 --- Subject: Bug 20009 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-17 23:56:55 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog convert.c gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog Added files: gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile: 20050217-1.c gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt: switch3.C Log message: PR c++/20023 PR tree-optimization/20009 * convert.c (convert_to_integer): Revert 2005-02-16 change. * gcc.c-torture/compile/20050217-1.c: New test. * g++.dg/opt/switch3.C: New test. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=2.7518r2=2.7519 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/convert.c.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=1.56r2=1.57 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=1.5045r2=1.5046 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/20050217-1.c.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=NONEr2=1.1 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/switch3.C.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=NONEr2=1.1 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20009
[Bug java/20044] Wrong method call semantics (maybe instanceof/invokespecial)
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-18 00:00 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-18 00:00:09 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20044
[Bug target/20045] New: gcc.dg/ia64-fptr-1.c fails on ia64-hpux
The test gcc.dg/ia64-fptr-1.c fails on ia64-hpux. Not a regression relative to 3.4.x. ld: Unsatisfied symbol _GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_ in file /var/tmp//ccU3vrUt.o -- Summary: gcc.dg/ia64-fptr-1.c fails on ia64-hpux Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: target AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC target triplet: ia64-*-hpux11.* http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20045
[Bug tree-optimization/20009] [4.0 regression] cris-elf testsuite failures: gcc.c-torture/unsorted/USIcmp.c, -O1 and above
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-18 00:22 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20009
[Bug c++/20023] [4.0 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-18 00:22 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20023
[Bug java/20044] Wrong method call semantics (maybe instanceof/invokespecial)
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-18 00:53 --- This bug occurs in 3 places. * In the interpreter and the old abi, the problem is similar. We do not properly implement the ACC_SUPER semantics of the invokespecial opcode. The fix in both these cases is similar, the invokespecial Object.equals must be changed into a non-virtual call to A.equals * In the BC ABI, the problem is the same, but the solution is different. We can't search the concrete class hierarchy in the compiler. Instead we must emit an atable (not otable, as the resulting call will be nonvirtual) reference for the method. However, it must be a special atable reference, since we cannot know the precise name of the declaring class. One approach to fixing this would be to emit a name like +ClassNameHere to indicate that we must search. Or, better, some magic value like (void*)1 or NULL would suffice here (since we know we must always start the search with the current class' superclass) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20044
[Bug tree-optimization/14752] [tree-ssa] ~a should be changed to a if used in the condition of an if statement
--- Additional Comments From phython at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-18 00:53 --- Shouldn't comment #3 say ~a is the same as a ^ -1? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14752
[Bug target/20046] New: [3.3 regression] [powerpc-linux] 3.3 CVS miscompiles bind 9.3.0
[forwarded from http://bugs.debian.org/292958] seen with CVS 3.3 20050130, works with 3.2.3 and 3.4 CVS 20050207 gcc 3.3 -O2 apparently does not compile correctly lib/dns/rbt.c from BIND 9.3 and bind9-9.3.1beta2, which then will die on startup with an assertion failure. Workarounds known to fix this: - compiling rbt.c without -O2 - removing inline from rotate_left() and rotate_right() gcc -g -O2 -I/VAR2/tmp/bb/bb/bind9-9.3.1beta2 -I. -Iinclude -I/VAR2/tmp/bb/bb/bind9-9.3.1beta2/lib/dns/include -I../../lib/dns/include -I/VAR2/tmp/bb/bb/bind9-9.3.1beta2/lib/isc/include -I../../lib/isc -I../../lib/isc/include -I../../lib/isc/unix/include -I../../lib/isc/nothreads/include -DUSE_MD5 -DOPENSSL -W -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wcast-qual -Wwrite-strings -Wformat -save-temps -c rbt.c -o rbt.o preprocessed files attached (taken from http://www.bofh.it/~md/TEMPS/) -- Summary: [3.3 regression] [powerpc-linux] 3.3 CVS miscompiles bind 9.3.0 Product: gcc Version: 3.3.6 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: critical Priority: P2 Component: target AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC host triplet: powerpc-linux GCC target triplet: powerpc-linux http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20046
[Bug target/20046] [3.3 regression] [powerpc-linux] 3.3 CVS miscompiles bind 9.3.0
-- What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Known to fail||3.3.5 Known to work||3.2.3 3.4.3 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20046
[Bug target/20046] [3.3 regression] [powerpc-linux] 3.3 CVS miscompiles bind 9.3.0
--- Additional Comments From debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org 2005-02-18 01:01 --- Created an attachment (id=8220) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8220action=view) preprocessed source (gcc-3.3 -O2) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20046
[Bug target/20046] [3.3 regression] [powerpc-linux] 3.3 CVS miscompiles bind 9.3.0
--- Additional Comments From debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org 2005-02-18 01:02 --- Created an attachment (id=8221) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8221action=view) assembler (gcc-3.3 -O2) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20046
[Bug target/20046] [3.3 regression] [powerpc-linux] 3.3 CVS miscompiles bind 9.3.0
--- Additional Comments From debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org 2005-02-18 01:04 --- Created an attachment (id=8222) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8222action=view) preprocessed source (gcc-3.3 -O2, two functions not inlined) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20046
[Bug target/20046] [3.3 regression] [powerpc-linux] 3.3 CVS miscompiles bind 9.3.0
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-18 01:05 --- I don't know if there is anything we can do about 3.3.x but who knows. -- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |3.3.6 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20046
[Bug target/20046] [3.3 regression] [powerpc-linux] 3.3 CVS miscompiles bind 9.3.0
--- Additional Comments From debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org 2005-02-18 01:05 --- Created an attachment (id=8223) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8223action=view) assembler (gcc-3.3 -O2, two functions not inlined) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20046
[Bug target/20046] [3.3 regression] [powerpc-linux] 3.3 CVS miscompiles bind 9.3.0
-- What|Removed |Added CC||md at linux dot it http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20046
[Bug libgcj/20047] New: runtime 'protected' access checks
Various jvm opcodes such as invokespecial and getfield have runtime restrictions on access to protected members. For instance, when using getfield, the object reference must be the current class or a subclass of it. These access checks are not currently performed. They should be. In some cases it may be possible to determine this statically, or to treat it as equivalent to a runtime type assertion. I'm not sure this can be done in all cases; some testing is required. (The question is really whether the verifier catches this during its modeling, or whether the check is performed during execution.) -- Summary: runtime 'protected' access checks Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: libgcj AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,java-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20047
[Bug target/19115] long double should be changed over to 128bit by default
--- Additional Comments From jlquinn at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-18 02:59 --- (In reply to comment #5) libstdc++ is calling frexpl in libc.a, which expects an AIX format long double value, not a double. Things work if one uses -mlong-double-128. At some point we need to default to long-double-128 for AIX for things to be self-consistent. What are the concerns with making this switch? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19115
[Bug tree-optimization/19633] local address incorrectly thought to escape
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-18 03:22 --- Hmm, the testcase now fails on ppc-darwin. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19633
[Bug tree-optimization/20048] New: gcc4 miscompiles binutils
The attached testcase extracted from bfd/elf.c aborts and -O and higher on both i686-linux and powerpc64-linux. -- Summary: gcc4 miscompiles binutils Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-code Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: tree-optimization AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: amodra at bigpond dot net dot au CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC target triplet: i686-linux http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20048
[Bug tree-optimization/20048] [4.0 Regression] gcc4 miscompiles binutils
-- What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Summary|gcc4 miscompiles binutils |[4.0 Regression] gcc4 ||miscompiles binutils Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20048
[Bug tree-optimization/20048] [4.0 Regression] gcc4 miscompiles binutils
--- Additional Comments From amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2005-02-18 04:12 --- Created an attachment (id=8224) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8224action=view) testcase -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20048
[Bug tree-optimization/20048] [4.0 Regression] gcc4 miscompiles binutils
-- What|Removed |Added GCC target triplet|i686-linux |i686-linux, powerpc64-linux http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20048
[Bug tree-optimization/20048] [4.0 Regression] gcc4 miscompiles binutils
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-18 04:14 --- This is a dup of bug 19937. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19937 *** -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20048
[Bug tree-optimization/19937] [4.0 regression] Wrong loop exit
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-18 04:14 --- *** Bug 20048 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added CC||amodra at bigpond dot net ||dot au http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19937
[Bug web/20049] New: Documentation on web is incorrect
If you look at http://www.dis.com/gnu/gcc/X86-Built-in-Functions.html, you will find the following statement: .. The following built-in functions are available when -msse is used. v4sf __builtin_ia32_loadaps (float *) Generates the movaps machine instruction as a load from memory. void __builtin_ia32_storeaps (float *, v4sf) Generates the movaps machine instruction as a store to memory. v4sf __builtin_ia32_loadups (float *) Generates the movups machine instruction as a load from memory. void __builtin_ia32_storeups (float *, v4sf) Generates the movups machine instruction as a store to memory. v4sf __builtin_ia32_loadsss (float *) Generates the movss machine instruction as a load from memory. ... This last line is incorrect. The correct function would be v4sf __builtin_ia32_loadss (float *) Notice that there are only 2 's' at the end, while the incorrect documentation has 3 's' Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Kirk Korver -- Summary: Documentation on web is incorrect Product: gcc Version: 3.3.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor Priority: P2 Component: web AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: kirk_korver at hotmail dot com CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20049
[Bug c/20050] New: va-arg-25.c
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/va-arg-25.c execution, -Os -- Summary: va-arg-25.c Product: gcc Version: 3.4.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: c AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: giftbound at verizon dot net CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20050
[Bug target/20050] va-arg-25.c
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-18 04:44 --- Please search for dup bugs before filing new ones. Testcases which fail almost known to have bugs associated with them. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 16354 *** -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Component|c |target Resolution||DUPLICATE Summary|va-arg-25.c |va-arg-25.c http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20050
[Bug target/16354] va-arg-25.c -Os regression fails on i686
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-18 04:44 --- *** Bug 20050 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added CC||giftbound at verizon dot net http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16354
[Bug target/20049] __builtin_ia32_loadsss is still documented
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-18 04:50 --- Well this builtin function now has been removed. -- What|Removed |Added Severity|minor |normal Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Component|web |target Ever Confirmed||1 Keywords||documentation, ssemmx Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-18 04:50:45 date|| Summary|Documentation on web is |__builtin_ia32_loadsss is |incorrect |still documented http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20049
[Bug libgcj/20047] runtime 'protected' access checks
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-18 04:52 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-18 04:52:41 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20047
[Bug tree-optimization/19937] [4.0 regression] Wrong loop exit (causes binutils to fail)
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-02-18 04:52 --- (In reply to comment #7) Subject: Re: [4.0 regression] Wrong loop exit I don't understand the comment. Comparisons constructed due to may_eliminate_iv are always either EQ_EXPRs or NE_EXPRs. Comparing directly with a value in a different type (regardless of what comparison operator is used) is however always an invalid gimple. Yes you're correct, my comment was misguided, and simply wrong. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19937
[Bug target/15617] building groff-1.19.1 with -Os -march=pentium4 causes sig 11
--- Additional Comments From uros at kss-loka dot si 2005-02-18 06:45 --- FYI: gcc 4.0 doesn't generate any SSE instructions for testcase.cc: gcc -Os -march=pentium4 -S testcase.cc grep xmm testcase.s | wc -l 0 -- What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.0.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15617
[Bug c++/19813] [4.0 Regression] wrong code with -finline-limit
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-18 06:58 --- Subject: Bug 19813 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-18 06:58:40 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog emit-rtl.c gcc/cp : ChangeLog Log message: PR c++/19813 * emit-rtl.c (set_mem_attributes_minus_bitpos): Add assertion that ref to be marked MEM_READONLY_P doesn't have base that needs constructing. * decl.c (start_decl_1): Clear TREE_READONLY flag if its type has TYPE_NEEDS_CONSTRUCTING. (complete_vars): Likewise. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=2.7520r2=2.7521 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/emit-rtl.c.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=1.433r2=1.434 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=1.4633r2=1.4634 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19813
