--- Comment #2 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-06-08 14:41 ---
Created an attachment (id=20867)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20867action=view)
different testcase
This testcase fails with similiar message:
$ gcc -O1 -fipa-struct-reorg -fwhole-program pr44336-2.c
Target: armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabi
Configured with: ../gcc-4_5-branch/configure --prefix=/home/ssvb/gcc-test/bin
--target=armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabi --enable-languages=c --without-headers
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.5.1 20100607 (prerelease) (GCC)
$ armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabi -O2
--- Comment #1 from siarhei dot siamashka at gmail dot com 2010-06-08
14:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=20868)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20868action=view)
testcase.i
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44469
--- Comment #30 from siarhei dot siamashka at gmail dot com 2010-06-08
14:49 ---
(In reply to comment #29)
Please file a new PR for that, with preprocessed source and all other relevant
info for reproduction.
Thanks, filed PR44469
--
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-08 14:50 ---
I don't think you need flow-sensitivity.
Basically when you have only aggregate uses (as in this case) then you only
want to scalarize if the destination of the use is scalarized as well
(to be able to copyprop out
--
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=44469
--- Comment #3 from dgohman at gmail dot com 2010-06-08 14:54 ---
Callers of compare are already exposed to __builtin_memcmp result values (with
default traits) which vary depending on the target and compiler flags.
And since _S_compare is only used as a tie-breaker after the memcmp,
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Bogus access re-construction|[4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression]
|from offset
--- Comment #9 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-08 15:00 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
I don't think you need flow-sensitivity.
Basically when you have only aggregate uses (as in this case)
Vectors are considered scalars in GCC. That is why the solutions
described above
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-08 15:09
---
I'm not convinced. The code at issue is used when memcmp returns zero, thus one
string is a prefix of the other, a well defined situation. For *eons* we have
been returning a number which is much larger (in
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-08 15:11
---
(In reply to comment #9)
(In reply to comment #8)
I don't think you need flow-sensitivity.
Basically when you have only aggregate uses (as in this case)
Vectors are considered scalars in GCC. That is
--- Comment #35 from Kyle dot D dot Moffett at boeing dot com 2010-06-08
15:23 ---
Hrm, well PPL still seems to be failing the interval1 test, but I'm not sure
that one's related as the part that fails is test01float. More info to
come shortly.
--
--- Comment #10 from mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-08 15:24
---
Steven, I'm shamelessly stealing this PR from you.
There are two sides to this missed optimization:
1. Calculation of PIC address is not CSE'd; this is the same as PR42495 and
will be fixed there.
2. Constant
--
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=40615
--
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=42500
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-08 15:59
---
Let's do this change first in ext/vstring and let's see how people react. In
that case we also have the advantage that nothing is exported from the *.so,
thus old code linking to the new lib will not risk
--- Comment #21 from changpeng dot fang at amd dot com 2010-06-08 16:23
---
Just for the record, non-constant step prefetching improves 459.GemsFDTD
by 5.5% (under -O3 + prefetch) on amd-linux64 systems. And the gains are
from the following set of loops:
NFT.fppized.f90:1268
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-08 16:47 ---
It is caused by revision 145494:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-04/msg00115.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-08 17:33 ---
Whatever.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from slawomir at ezono dot com 2010-06-08 17:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=20869)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20869action=view)
simpler example
Preprocessed source of simpler program.
The only #include used was typeinfo which is needed in order
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-08 17:57
---
Excellent, thanks a lot.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-08 18:02
---
I also double checked that indeed the last null_type appears truncated.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43838
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-08 18:05
---
Ian, any idea what may be happening here?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43838
--- Comment #5 from sandra at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-08 18:16 ---
Subject: Bug 39874
Author: sandra
Date: Tue Jun 8 18:15:53 2010
New Revision: 160445
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160445
Log:
2010-06-08 Sandra Loosemore san...@codesourcery.com
--- Comment #16 from sandra at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-08 18:16 ---
Subject: Bug 28685
Author: sandra
Date: Tue Jun 8 18:15:53 2010
New Revision: 160445
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160445
Log:
2010-06-08 Sandra Loosemore san...@codesourcery.com
--- Comment #2 from ensonic at hora-obscura dot de 2010-06-08 19:16 ---
There are even patches flying around on the net for this, please!
http://www.mail-archive.com/pld-cvs-com...@lists.pld-linux.org/msg178946.html
--
ensonic at hora-obscura dot de changed:
What
--- Comment #22 from borntraeger at de dot ibm dot com 2010-06-08 19:42
---
I bootstrapped with patches 0002 and 0003.
The results are also good.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44297
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major |normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42275
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-08 19:55 ---
There is no specifications for plugins really. And really this is on purpose
as we don't want to freeze down the rest of the compiler just for plugins.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-08 20:10 ---
Why do we remove register LHS in DCE again?
Because it reduces the amount of garbage produced by expand :).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44462
--- Comment #36 from Kyle dot D dot Moffett at boeing dot com 2010-06-08
20:34 ---
Ok, I'm pretty sure this is unrelated to this bug, but I still get one
test-failure with PPL 0.10.2. The interval1 test fails due to the
test01float subtest, apparently due to very slightly excessive
--- Comment #6 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-08 20:34 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
There is no specifications for plugins really. And really this is on purpose
as we don't want to freeze down the rest of the compiler just for plugins.
There is a difference between
--- Comment #6 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-08 20:39
---
I'm currently looking at math builtins for __float128 support, so I'll check
that.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-08 20:52 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
A patch is here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-01/msg01200.html
This is an update of the patch to revision 160389:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-06/msg00822.html
--
Revision 160417 failed to compile libgcc:
[...@gnu-32 rrs]$ cat testcase.i
typedef int SItype __attribute__ ((mode (SI)));
typedef unsigned int USItype __attribute__ ((mode (SI)));
typedef int DItype __attribute__ ((mode (DI)));
struct DWstruct {SItype low, high;};
typedef union
{
struct
Reported by Jakub. gfortran -O2 -fwhole-file generates a variadic call to
bar_. (The decl of the procedure itself is OK.)
Expected:
a) With -fwhole-file, the actual declaration should be used.
b) As Fortran does not support variadic calls at all, there should be never
variatic calls be generated.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |steven at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |steven at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-08 22:00 ---
It may be broken by revision 160394:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-06/msg00307.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-08 22:50 ---
A patch is here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-06/msg00835.html
--
amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-08 23:15 ---
I think PR44362 no longer block adoption of --enable-build-with-cxx
in trunk, since the C++ part of the patch for that PR was checked in.
It might sense to keep it in the dependency list if we need this to
backport
--- Comment #7 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-08 23:21 ---
Subject: Bug 44459
Author: amylaar
Date: Tue Jun 8 23:21:48 2010
New Revision: 160448
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160448
Log:
PR plugins/44459:
* gcc-plugin.h: Encapsulate
--- Comment #9 from amodra at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-09 00:16 ---
Subject: Bug 44067
Author: amodra
Date: Wed Jun 9 00:15:46 2010
New Revision: 160449
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160449
Log:
PR target/44067
* config/rs6000/rs6000.md
--- Comment #10 from amodra at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-09 00:20 ---
Subject: Bug 44067
Author: amodra
Date: Wed Jun 9 00:20:27 2010
New Revision: 160454
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160454
Log:
PR target/44067
* config/rs6000/rs6000.md
--- Comment #11 from amodra at gmail dot com 2010-06-09 00:29 ---
Fixed
--
amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-09 00:52 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
It may be broken by revision 160394:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-06/msg00307.html
This change moved
(insn:TI 11 41 12 pr44470.i:15 (parallel [
(set (reg:SI 1 dx
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-09 00:59 ---
The old scheduler:
;; ==
;; -- basic block 2 from 37 to 42 -- after reload
;; ==
;;0--37
--- Comment #3 from eric dot weddington at atmel dot com 2010-06-09 02:13
---
Confirmed.
Testing fix...
--
eric dot weddington at atmel dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-trunk/configure --prefix=/home/jeff/gnu/TR
--program-suffix=TR --enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.6.0 20100608 (experimental) (GCC)
While running some tests against SSE4.2 instructions, I noticed
--- Comment #1 from jeff_wegher at yahoo dot com 2010-06-09 02:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=20870)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20870action=view)
Example program
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44472
--- Comment #5 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-09 03:14 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
updated patch for revision 160454:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-06/msg00846.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44034
If checking empty then attempting to push back the following errors are
reported:
main.s: Assembler messages:
main.s:2236: Error: symbol
`_ZNK9__gnu_cxx17__normal_iteratorIPDfSt6vectorIDfSaIDfEEE4baseEv' is already
defined
main.s:2542: Error: symbol
--- Comment #1 from rmlong at gmail dot com 2010-06-09 03:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=20871)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20871action=view)
Preprocessed file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44473
--- Comment #2 from rmlong at gmail dot com 2010-06-09 03:17 ---
Created an attachment (id=20872)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20872action=view)
Example code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44473
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-09 03:26 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
While running some tests against SSE4.2 instructions, I noticed that the
__builtin_ia32_pcmpestri128 method generates the correct pcmpestri call
followed immediately by an extraneous
Take the following test case:
int foo();
int test( int *b )
{
(*b)--;
if( *b == 0 )
return foo();
return 0;
}
On x86_64, with -fomit-frame-pointer -O3 -c, gcc 4.6 compiles this to:
0: 8b 07 moveax, [rdi]
2: 83 e8 01subeax,
--- Comment #12 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-09 04:54 ---
Fixed
--
aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #40 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-09 04:56 ---
Fixed
--
aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from jeff_wegher at yahoo dot com 2010-06-09 05:03 ---
Sure, non-optimized code generates a lot of instructions that aren't strictly
needed. This one seemed a little beyond that to me.
Just so I understand then... By design, __builtin*_pcmpestri and
101 - 160 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
