Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com writes:
-fmemory-model=single - Enable all data races introductions, as they
are today. (relax all 4 internal restrictions.)
One could still use this mode with a multi-threaded program as long as
explicit synchronization is done, right?
-Miles
--
Road,
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 05:15:51PM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
The most obvious change in your data is that the number of hash
buckets dropped from 4099 to 2053. It's entirely possible that you
were close to the boundary of when the linker decides to increase the
number of hash buckets.
Solaris 2.9 x86 gcc 4.5.0 configure -without-gnu-as -with-as=/usr/ccs/bin/as
= Assembly syntax errors in gcov.c whereever there is rep prefix.
I was actually looking for a problem with lock prefixes on 4.3 -- testing
4.5.0, found this instead, which is about about the same.
See:
Proposed patch below/attached.
(-w to hide indent change)
See http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html for guidelines.
I'll open a bug.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs for guidelines.
Generally speaking, posting a patch inlined in a message on gcc@gcc.gnu.org
will most likely result in it being
Hello All,
I want to know if it is possible to modify AST of the C/C++-Language.
What I would like to do is to add some arguments to some function calls or add
statements somewhere in the tree.
Now I am looking for the root node to modify it. Which is the best pass for
that? Is there anywhere
Hello,
I have a question regarding the process of bundling and NOPs insertion for
VLIW architecture
and I appreciate your answer:
I am calling the second scheduler from the machine reorg pass; similar to
what is done for IA64.
I now want to handle the bundling and NOPs insertion for VLIW
Understood, but I'll have to stick to small changes as I can't get the papers.
Uros pointed to:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-05/msg00657.html
which appears to just be *very* coincident timing.
So I Rainer will fix it soon.
I have a patch now based on that discussion.
I used:
case
On Tue, 11 May 2010, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
And you can use -Wl,-O1 (pass -O1 to the linker) to let the linker
determine optimal size of the hash table (minimum number of collisions
for reasonably sized section).
Was it considered enabling this automatically with -O3 (or -Ofast) when we
know
On Tue, 11 May 2010, Revital1 Eres wrote:
Hello,
I have a question regarding the process of bundling and NOPs insertion for
VLIW architecture
and I appreciate your answer:
I am calling the second scheduler from the machine reorg pass; similar to
what is done for IA64.
I now want to
Hi,
I have a backend and I would like to have a systematic way to know if
my testsuite covers all the define_insn and define_expand rules in my
md file.
What's the best way to achieve this?
I initially thought I could use gcov to check the coverage of the code
that is generated from the md
Miles Bader wrote:
Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com writes:
-fmemory-model=single - Enable all data races introductions, as they
are today. (relax all 4 internal restrictions.)
One could still use this mode with a multi-threaded program as long as
explicit synchronization is
[ Moved to gcc@gcc.gnu.org ]
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 08:46, Sandeep Soni soni.sande...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 4:53 PM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 02:24, Sandeep Soni soni.sande...@gmail.com wrote:
I installed
Marc Glisse marc.glisse+...@normalesup.org writes:
On Tue, 11 May 2010, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
And you can use -Wl,-O1 (pass -O1 to the linker) to let the linker
determine optimal size of the hash table (minimum number of collisions
for reasonably sized section).
Was it considered enabling
On 05/11/2010 11:34 AM, wolfgang8...@gmx.de wrote:
Hello All,
I want to know if it is possible to modify AST of the C/C++-Language.
You can modify a middle end representation of source program. I am not
sure if it always should be called an AST.
What I would like to do is to add some
Jay K jay.kr...@cornell.edu writes:
Understood, but I'll have to stick to small changes as I can't get the
papers.
Note that for copyright purposes a series of unrelated small changes
counts as a big change. If you truly can't do the paperwork, then
it's probably best for the project if you
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:30 PM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
[ Moved to gcc@gcc.gnu.org ]
Hmm, it did not detect elf_getshdrstrndx and yet it tried to use it
later on. I think that's the bug. Yes, please file a bug. I believe
it's going to be easy to fix, though. There should
On Tue, 11 May 2010, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Marc Glisse marc.glisse+...@normalesup.org writes:
On Tue, 11 May 2010, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
And you can use -Wl,-O1 (pass -O1 to the linker) to let the linker
determine optimal size of the hash table (minimum number of collisions
for reasonably
Paulo J. Matos pocma...@gmail.com writes:
I have a backend and I would like to have a systematic way to know if
my testsuite covers all the define_insn and define_expand rules in my
md file.
What's the best way to achieve this?
For define_insn you can use the -da option, and scan the
Note that for copyright purposes a series of unrelated small changes
counts as a big change. If you truly can't do the paperwork, then
it's probably best for the project if you avoid sending actual
patches. Sorry about that.
A series of *related* small changes certainly would count as a big
Hi,
I created a branch for 256bit vectorizer, branches/vect256/. Richard
and I will work on it to extend vectorizer to 256bit.
Jason, can you include it in git mirror? We can drop the ix86 branch
in git since there are several branches under branches/ix86.
Thanks.
--
H.J.
On 05/11/2010 10:30 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
I created a branch for 256bit vectorizer, branches/vect256/. Richard
and I will work on it to extend vectorizer to 256bit.
Jason, can you include it in git mirror? We can drop the ix86 branch
in git since there are several branches under branches/ix86.
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 7:49 AM, Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/11/2010 10:30 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
I created a branch for 256bit vectorizer, branches/vect256/. Richard
and I will work on it to extend vectorizer to 256bit.
Jason, can you include it in git mirror? We can drop the
On 05/11/2010 11:21 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 7:49 AM, Jason Merrillja...@redhat.com wrote:
git config --add remote.origin.fetch
refs/remotes/vect256:refs/remotes/origin/vect256
git config --add svn-remote.svn.fetch
branches/vect256:refs/remotes/origin/vect256
I was
H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com writes:
From:
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GitMirror
remotes/origin/ix86 is still listed. I did a clone of
git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git
and I got x86 branch.
Try running git remote prune origin.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/11/2010 11:21 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 7:49 AM, Jason Merrillja...@redhat.com wrote:
git config --add remote.origin.fetch
refs/remotes/vect256:refs/remotes/origin/vect256
git config --add
On 05/11/2010 02:28 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
It isn't very clear that refs/heads was changed to refs/remotes.
Sure. The git-svn mirror puts everything under refs/remotes, then the
git mirror maintainers manually create the equivalent of symbolic links
under refs/heads for some branches.
I don't
Not sure where to send this, who is responsible for the mail server
for gcc.gnu.org?
--- Start of forwarded message ---
Subject: [gnu.org #572859] [gcc-bugs-h...@gcc.gnu.org: ezmlm warning]
From: Ward Vandewege via RT sysad...@gnu.org
To: a...@gnu.org
Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 10:28:41
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 01:12:45PM -0700, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
Not sure where to send this, who is responsible for the mail server
for gcc.gnu.org?
The admins can be reached at overse...@gcc.gnu.org .
On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 10:42 -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Steve Ellcey s...@cup.hp.com wrote:
I was wondering if anyone has built GCC using a CFLAGS (and CXXFLAGS)
setting
that causes GCC to generate code that is not compatibile with the default
GCC output.
I discovered that if you build a plain arm-elf toolchain, the default
float-abis for gcc and gas don't match. I added this patch locally to
make it just work but it seems to me it would be better to have the
defaults match, although I'm not sure how to enforce that. Comments?
Suggestions?
Snapshot gcc-4.4-20100511 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4-20100511/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.4 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com writes:
-fmemory-model=single - Enable all data races introductions, as they
are today. (relax all 4 internal restrictions.)
One could still use this mode with a multi-threaded program as long as
explicit synchronization is done, right?
Right. Its
--- Comment #2 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-05-11 06:32 ---
Confirmed with 4.6.0 mainline:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x0056d5b8 in cfg_layout_finalize ()
at ../../gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/cfglayout.c:477
477 if (loc == prologue_locator || loc
--- Comment #3 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-05-11 06:45 ---
Oops, wrong cut-n-paste. This is correct:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x000120192df8 in fixup_reorder_chain ()
at ../../gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/cfglayout.c:889
889 if (bb-aux ==
--- Comment #12 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 06:48 ---
Subject: Bug 44023
Author: jakub
Date: Tue May 11 06:48:15 2010
New Revision: 159254
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=159254
Log:
PR debug/44023
* df-problems.c (struct
--- Comment #24 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-05-11 06:51 ---
Your gcc appears confused about whether to use the newer _Unwind_GetIPInfo() or
the older _Unwind_GetIP(). Most likely it's because you're building for uclibc
rather than glibc. I think you need to bisect between the
Compile the following code with options -march=armv7-a -mthumb -Os
int bar5(int x)
{
if (x == -1)
return 3;
return 5;
}
GCC generates
cmp r0, #-1 // A
ite ne
movne r0, #5
moveq r0, #3
bx lr
If we replace instruction A with 'add
--- Comment #13 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 07:11 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 07:23 ---
(Cross reference: PR 44065 is the same, except using two files, which leads to
a linking error instead of an ICE.)
I get - as written at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2010-05/msg00099.html:
hjf.f90:37:0: internal
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 07:37 ---
Is this still an issue ? My armv5te box was bootstrapping without the issue you
mention in cortex-a9.md and there is a test result from an armv5te-linux-eabi
variant here.
void f1(int *a, int *b, int *c)
{
int d = 0xE0E0E0E0;
*a = *b = *c = d;
}
produces
_f1:
LFB0:
movl$-522133280, (%rdx)
movl$-522133280, (%rsi)
movl$-522133280, (%rdi)
ret
on x86-64 at -Os. It would save instruction space and probably not be any
--- Comment #3 from laurent at guerby dot net 2010-05-11 08:15 ---
Native bootstrap on mips-linux fails with the same ICE:
...
/n/42/guerby/build/./gcc/xgcc -B/n/42/guerby/build/./gcc/
-B/n/42/guerby/install-trunk-159243/mips64el-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/
-B/n/42/guerby/insta\
Solaris 2.9 x86 gcc 4.5.0 configure -without-gnu-as -with-as=/usr/ccs/bin/as
= Assembly syntax errors in gcov.c whereever there is lock prefix.
I was actually looking for a problem with lock prefixes on 4.3 -- testing
4.5.0,
found this instead, which is about about the same.
See:
--- Comment #1 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-05-11 08:26 ---
See the thread starting at [1].
[1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-05/msg00657.html
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 08:42 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.5.1 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44071
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 08:43 ---
*** Bug 44070 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 08:43 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 44063 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44063
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 08:47 ---
I will have a look.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from laurent at guerby dot net 2010-05-11 08:47 ---
backtrace:
(gdb) bt
#0 internal_error (gmsgid=0x13b2f720 in %s, at %s:%d) at
../../trunk/gcc/diagnostic.c:755
#1 0x10837bd4 in fancy_abort (file=0x13cac5e8 ../../trunk/gcc/ipa-inline.c,
line=208, function=0x13cac5c0
--- Comment #6 from laurent at guerby dot net 2010-05-11 08:50 ---
(gdb) l
203 static int
204 cgraph_estimate_size_after_inlining (int times, struct cgraph_node *to,
205 struct cgraph_node *what)
206 {
207 int size =
--- Comment #7 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 08:52 ---
Can you please check if always_inline is involved in your testcase and if to
node has disreagard_inline_limits set.
Honza
--
hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #4 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-05-11 08:56 ---
I don't know why locations are all mixed up here, but this is correct place of
failure:
0x0056598a in fixup_reorder_chain ()
at ../../gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/cfglayout.c:866
866 || e_fall-dest
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 09:00 ---
I'd say the testcase is invalid, of course GCC must not ICE on it though,
but you can't expect it to do what you want.
I don't think we guarantee anywhere that the jump is exactly to the user
label provided, so you
--- Comment #11 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 09:06
---
Subject: Bug 43812
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue May 11 09:05:59 2010
New Revision: 159265
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=159265
Log:
2010-05-11 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz
PR
--- Comment #12 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 09:13
---
This is now fixed on both the trunk and the 4.5 branch.
--
jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from laurent at guerby dot net 2010-05-11 09:18 ---
(gdb) p *to
$4 = {decl = 0x2ad21800, callees = 0x2ac7e280, callers = 0x0, next =
0x2adf38e0, previous = 0x2adf2760, indirect_calls = 0x0, origin = 0x0, nested =
0x0, next_nested = 0x0, next_needed = 0x0,
--- Comment #9 from laurent at guerby dot net 2010-05-11 09:23 ---
For __always_inline the answer seems to be yes if I don't misinterpret the
source:
res = _fpmul_parts (a, b, tmp);
static inline __attribute__ ((__always_inline__)) const fp_number_type *
_fpmul_parts (
--- Comment #2 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 09:28 ---
How did you configure your tools in ? Have you considered using the --with-cpu
and --with-mode options while building your tools i.e. --with-cpu=cortex-m3
--with-mode=thumb.
Ramana
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot
At any optimisation level other than -O0, it seems that __builtin_eh_return
loses its handler arg. For -m32 -O2 -S the following:
long offset;
void *handler;
void foo (void)
{
__builtin_eh_return (offset, handler);
}
compiles to:
foo:
stwu 1,-32(1)
lis 9,off...@ha
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 10:01 ---
Created an attachment (id=20625)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20625action=view)
partial fix of the ICE
The ICE is when going out of cfglayout mode.
When going into the cfglayout mode
cat test.c
#include test.h
int main(void)
{
return 0;
}
/* EOF */
gcc -c -o test.o -MMD -MT other.c test.c
cat test.d
other.c: test.c test.h
== seems to be correct
gcc -c -o test.o -MMD -MTother.c test.c
cat test.d
other.c test.o: test.c test.h
== seems to be wrong
-MTfile should
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-05-11 10:11
---
I think this can be safely closed as fixed for 4.5.0.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matz at gcc dot gnu dot org
Component|c
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 10:20 ---
Created an attachment (id=20626)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20626action=view)
gcc46-pr44071.patch
Untested fix for the ICE part (and, with __builtin_unreachable the generated
code is even
--- Comment #25 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 10:22 ---
Subject: Bug 43259
Author: paolo
Date: Tue May 11 10:22:18 2010
New Revision: 159268
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=159268
Log:
2010-05-11 Silvius Rus silvius@gmail.com
PR
--- Comment #26 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 10:23 ---
Subject: Bug 43259
Author: paolo
Date: Tue May 11 10:23:20 2010
New Revision: 159269
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=159269
Log:
2010-05-11 Silvius Rus silvius@gmail.com
PR
--- Comment #2 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 10:24 ---
There is a GIMPLE uncprop pass for this. Could you verify that after this pass
there is just one assignment of the constant to an SSA_NAME? If so, the problem
is in the RTL CPROP pass, otherwise we have to look at
--- Comment #3 from astrange at ithinksw dot com 2010-05-11 10:36 ---
It's propagated by vrp1, and then nothing removes it again. tree-uncprop
doesn't change it - it looks like it doesn't have anything to handle this,
actually.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44073
--- Comment #25 from dougmencken at gmail dot com 2010-05-11 11:31 ---
(In reply to comment #24)
Okay, I'm ready to bisect. I know it would take weeks. I cloned gcc repo using
git clone git://git.infradead.org/toolchain/gcc.git gcc-git , but this repo
doesn't use tags (i.e. I can't
For the small testcase below gcc-4.4.3 neither warns about the initialization
of var1 nor about the comparison against an integer. Nevertheless the
comparison
is optimized away.
// gcc -O2 -Wtype-limits
_Bool var1 = 3;
int test(void)
{
if (var1 == 3)
return 1;
return 0;
}
This maybe
--- Comment #10 from joel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 11:50 ---
FWIW also seen on sparc-rtems, powerpc-rtems, and i386-rtems.
This did not happen building mips-rtems.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44063
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2010-05-11
12:05 ---
Subject: Re: genautomata: undeclared unit or reservation `cortex_a9_}ult'
Is this still an issue ? My armv5te box was bootstrapping without the issue
you
mention in cortex-a9.md and there is a test
--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 12:18 ---
Created an attachment (id=20627)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20627action=view)
gcc46-pr44071.patch
Updated patch that fixes the rest of the issues. The reason why testcase
without
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 12:48 ---
Created an attachment (id=20628)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20628action=view)
gcc46-pr44062-c++.patch
C++ change that fixes this.
It treats all (void) / static_cast void conversions and the
On Linux/ia32, revision 159262 gave:
FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/prefetch-7.c scan-tree-dump-times aprefetch nontemporal
store 2
Revision 159255 is OK. It may be caused by revisions 159256/159257:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-05/msg00307.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-05/msg00308.html
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44078
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.4, 4.5, 4.6 regression] |[4.4/4.5/4.6 regression]
|incorrect dwarf data
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43689
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43820
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44018
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44063
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43810
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 13:38 ---
Not sure what's the state here. Is 4.4 broken now?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43190
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43416
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38591
--- Comment #1 from borntraeger at de dot ibm dot com 2010-05-11 13:43
---
From a first look this looks like that the test case scans for
nontemporal store which is also emitted by the new debug messages:
-return false;
+{
+ if (dump_file (dump_flags TDF_DETAILS))
+
--- Comment #6 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 13:46 ---
I have rechecked 4.4 and 4.5 and the test is no longer failing.
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from uweigand at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 13:57
---
(In reply to comment #7)
Not sure what's the state here. Is 4.4 broken now?
Here's the status as far as I know. I had checked in a patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-08/msg00254.html
to fix the
--- Comment #2 from borntraeger at de dot ibm dot com 2010-05-11 13:57
---
Created an attachment (id=20629)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20629action=view)
Testfix for the prefetch-7.c testcase
There always was
fprintf (dump_file, Marked reference %p as a
Configure Script does not detect elf_getshdrstrndx
checking for elf_getshdrstrndx... no
But still tries to use it in stage 2 bootstrap and gives error,
../../trunk/gcc/lto/lto-elf.c: In function 'validate_file' :
../../trunk/gcc/lto/lto-elf.c:539:3:error: implicit declaration of
function
When gcc is called with -O3, it could add -O1 to the options it passes to the
linker, when it knows that it is GNU ld. For now this is only useful with
-shared, but I don't see any reason not to also pass it without -shared.
Reference:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-05/msg00193.html
--
zen% /opt/gcc-4.5.0/bin/gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/opt/gcc-4.5.0/bin/gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/opt/gcc-4.5.0/libexec/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.5.0/lto-wrapper
Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: /src/package/lang/other/gcc-4.5.0/configure
--prefix=/opt/gcc-4.5.0
After watchdog reset (for example, to enter reprogramming), the AVR core
restarts with watchdog enabled, contrary to a cold start after power on.
The C program is not given an opportunity to disable or reset the watchdog
before main ; and when the data and/or bss section is large enough, the
--- Comment #1 from hv at crypt dot org 2010-05-11 14:41 ---
Created an attachment (id=20630)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20630action=view)
C source code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44081
--- Comment #2 from hv at crypt dot org 2010-05-11 14:41 ---
Created an attachment (id=20631)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20631action=view)
Generated assembly code, with annotation
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44081
1 - 100 of 163 matches
Mail list logo
