[Bug fortran/45636] Failed to fold simple Fortran string
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636 John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|NEW CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution|FIXED | --- Comment #27 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-23 23:45:32 UTC --- (In reply to comment #26) The mempcpy is not inlined with -Os. Presumbably because that would increase the size of the resulting object. Possibly, but based on Rainer's comment, the issue would appear to affect targets with strict alignment. Sorry for the mail spamage. It was caused by a hardware failure at NRC.
[Bug fortran/45636] Failed to fold simple Fortran string
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636 John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #28 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-24 00:26:15 UTC --- Sorry, I didn't intend to reopen. The web interface seems to unexpected change fields sometimes.
[Bug fortran/45636] Failed to fold simple Fortran string
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636 Steve Ellcey sje at cup dot hp.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #26 from Steve Ellcey sje at cup dot hp.com 2010-11-08 16:08:19 UTC --- The mempcpy is not inlined with -Os. Presumbably because that would increase the size of the resulting object.
[Bug fortran/45636] Failed to fold simple Fortran string
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC|danglin at gcc dot gnu.org | --- Comment #24 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-07 07:46:24 UTC --- remove Danglin to avoid mail spamage
[Bug fortran/45636] Failed to fold simple Fortran string
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636 --- Comment #25 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-11-07 19:44:07 UTC --- The change was r166378 and if the test failures are the only reason to keep this bug report open then it we should be able to close it now. Closing would be ok if there is a reason the call to mempcpy shouldn't be eliminated. On darwin, it was eliminated. Dave
[Bug fortran/45636] Failed to fold simple Fortran string
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636 Steve Ellcey sje at cup dot hp.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sje at cup dot hp.com --- Comment #13 from Steve Ellcey sje at cup dot hp.com 2010-11-05 21:12:19 UTC --- I have moved gcc.c-torture/execute/pr45636.c to gcc.dg/torture/pr45636.c and added a check for the mempcpy function so this should not fail on HP-UX or Solaris which don't have a mempcpy function. The change was r166378 and if the test failures are the only reason to keep this bug report open then it we should be able to close it now.
[Bug fortran/45636] Failed to fold simple Fortran string
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636 Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #12 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-28 17:54:17 UTC --- gcc.c-torture/execute/pr45636.c also fails on Solaris 2/SPARC: FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr45636.c compilation, -Os UNRESOLVED: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr45636.c execution, -Os Undefinedfirst referenced symbol in file mempcpy /var/tmp//ccJduPWN.o ld: fatal: Symbol referencing errors. No output written to /var/gcc/regression/trunk/10-gcc-gas/build/gcc/testsuite/gcc2/pr45636.x7 collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
[Bug fortran/45636] Failed to fold simple Fortran string
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636 --- Comment #11 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-10-17 15:41:54 UTC --- In addition, although gcc.c-torture/execute/pr45636.c doesn't fail on hppa-unknown-linux-gnu, it does fail on hpux: Executing on host: /test/gnu/gcc/objdir/gcc/xgcc -B/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/gcc/ /test/gnu/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr45636.c -w -O0 -lm -o /test/gnu/gcc/objdir/gcc/testsuite/gcc/pr45636.x0(timeout = 300) /usr/ccs/bin/ld: Unsatisfied symbols: mempcpy (first referenced in /var/tmp//ccT7jpSk.o) (code) Looking at the hppa-linux .s, there are still many calls to various 'mem*' functions. I don't see any on x86. Dave
[Bug fortran/45636] Failed to fold simple Fortran string
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636 --- Comment #10 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-16 18:58:57 UTC --- Created attachment 22064 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22064 Tree dump. gfortran.dg/pr45636.f90 fails on hppa-unknown-linux-gnu. Tree dump attached.
[Bug fortran/45636] Failed to fold simple Fortran string
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-12 22:01:07 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Tue Oct 12 22:01:04 2010 New Revision: 165401 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=165401 Log: PR fortran/45636 * tree-ssa-forwprop.c: Include expr.h. (constant_pointer_difference, simplify_builtin_call): New functions. (tree_ssa_forward_propagate_single_use_vars): Call simplify_builtin_call on builtin calls. * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr45636.c: New test. * gfortran.dg/pr45636.f90: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr45636.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr45636.f90 Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/Makefile.in trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-ssa-forwprop.c
[Bug fortran/45636] Failed to fold simple Fortran string
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636 Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2010.09.27 06:16:20 date|| CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Severity|normal |enhancement --- Comment #7 from Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-27 06:16:20 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) Created attachment 21891 [details] patch for comment#5 This patch fixes the issue in comment #5 in the Fortran front end. ... but also causes regressions. I'll investigate. Confirmed, BTW.
[Bug fortran/45636] Failed to fold simple Fortran string
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-10 15:12 --- 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. If I replace the SAVE attribute by PARAMETER (which will most likely cause the folding you want), everything compiles fine. The ICE also goes away if I increase the length of DBL from one to any larger value. troutmask:sgk[219] gfc4x -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=/home/sgk/work/4x/bin/gfortran COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/home/sgk/work/4x/bin/../libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-freebsd9.0/4.6.0/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-unknown-freebsd9.0 Configured with: ../gcc4x/configure --prefix=/home/sgk/work/4x --enable-languages=c,fortran --disable-libmudflap --disable-bootstrap --with-quad=/home/sgk/work Thread model: posix gcc version 4.6.0 20100909 (experimental) (GCC) -- kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636
[Bug fortran/45636] Failed to fold simple Fortran string
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-10 15:20 ---
The -fdump-tree-original for HJ's original code look like
rcrdrd (character(kind=1)[1:4] restrict vtyp, integer(kind=4) _vtyp)
{
static character(kind=1) dbl[1:1] = D;
(MEM[(c_char * {ref-all})vtyp] = MEM[(c_char * {ref-all})dbl];, (void *)
vtyp;);
__builtin_memset ((void *) vtyp + 1, 32, 3);
}
If I increase the length of DBL to 2, then the dump looks like
rcrdrd (character(kind=1)[1:4] restrict vtyp, integer(kind=4) _vtyp)
{
static character(kind=1) dbl[1:2] = D ;
__builtin_memmove ((void *) vtyp, (void *) dbl, 2);
__builtin_memset ((void *) vtyp + 2, 32, 2);
}
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636
[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 fortran/45636] Failed to fold simple Fortran string
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-10 15:34 --- (In reply to comment #3) (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 HJ, Thanks. I updated by trunk right before your patch, so I missed it my most recent build. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636
[Bug fortran/45636] Failed to fold simple Fortran string
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-10 15:47 --- For arbitrary lengths (both of the constant string and of the padding) the memmove (which will be optimized to memcpy as the source is read-only) + memset is the best thing to do, replacing say memmove (x, 900 bytes long string, 900); memset (x + 900, ' ', 100); would be very .rodata size unfriendly. So, the question is, do we want to optimize this for very small sizes of both (what sizes? Should we call can_store_by_pieces to determine that from the FE?) in the FE by transforming that say memmove (x, ABCDE, 5); memset (x + 5, ' ', 3); into memcpy (x, ABCDE , 8); or should we do this generically in the middle-end, where we'd do this transformation for such cases even for other languages? -- jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636
