On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 22:49:39 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
I'm not sure what you are folding the builtin to, but perhaps you could
retain a reference to the function.
I am folding the function call __function_size(foobar) to a new symbol
foobar@size. The reference to function foobar
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 02:07:17PM +1100, Matt Davis wrote:
Hello,
In my transformation of an input program, I need to clone functions
and the callee functions in each clone. To clone a function, or
create a duplicate, I use cgraph_function_versioning() This works
perfectly well for
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 10:21:45AM +, Paulo J. Matos wrote:
I'm not sure what you are folding the builtin to, but perhaps you could
retain a reference to the function.
I am folding the function call __function_size(foobar) to a new symbol
foobar@size. The reference to function
ping !!!. Any help on http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2011-09/msg00150.html
shafi
On 14 September 2011 15:07, Mohamed Shafi shafi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I am working on a 32bit private target which has the following restriction
1. store/load can happen only through a general purpose register
Hi Richard,
Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com skribis:
2012/3/19 Ludovic Courtès ludovic.cour...@inria.fr:
[...]
In the example of name mangling, I’d just have wrapped in ‘extern C’
all the headers listed in ‘PLUGIN_HEADERS’ in gcc/Makefile.in. The
rationale is that it
Hi Martin, thanks very much for the information!
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 9:29 PM, Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 02:07:17PM +1100, Matt Davis wrote:
Hello,
In my transformation of an input program, I need to clone functions
and the callee functions in each
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Ludovic Courtès
ludovic.cour...@inria.fr wrote:
Hi Richard,
Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com skribis:
2012/3/19 Ludovic Courtès ludovic.cour...@inria.fr:
[...]
In the example of name mangling, I’d just have wrapped in ‘extern C’
all the
Ian is certainly correct.
I think that the question is really bigger than finding the correct line
to fix. The problem is, that this code assumes that machines do not
have multiword moves or multiword shifts. My machine has both, and i
assume that the avr and the neon have at least
On 03/19/12 12:28, David Edelsohn wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Steven Bosscherstevenb@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
The rs6000 and cr16 backends and unwinding code have a define for the
DWARF frame register for pre-GCC3 compatibility
(PRE_GCC3_DWARF_FRAME_REGISTERS):
Kenneth Zadeck zad...@naturalbridge.com writes:
I think that the question is really bigger than finding the correct
line to fix. The problem is, that this code assumes that machines do
not have multiword moves or multiword shifts. My machine has both,
and i assume that the avr and the
i actually care about all registers, not just the hard ones.as it
turns out i had been wrong and lower-subregs splits pseudo to pseudo
moves, and hard reg to and from psuedo moves.
register_move_cost requires the regclasses.
anyway that is not the right thing to do for the shifts.
kenny
Kenneth Zadeck zad...@naturalbridge.com writes:
i actually care about all registers, not just the hard ones.as it
turns out i had been wrong and lower-subregs splits pseudo to pseudo
moves, and hard reg to and from psuedo moves.
register_move_cost requires the regclasses.
anyway that
09/03/2012 17:10, Bernd Schmidt:
On 03/09/2012 04:20 PM, Aurelien Buhrig wrote:
I'm not used to work at tree level for now and it is unclear for me what
part of the code should be tweaked. Can you tell me which part of the
code you are fixing/looking at, so that I can have a better
2012/3/20 chmodexplo...@sina.com:
Is it a bug or by design? Who can answer the question for me?
This list is for discussing the development of GCC not for help using
it, so this is the wrong mailing list for your question. It would be
more appropriate on the gcc-help mailing list, please take
Hi,
I'm trying to make some peephole2 optimizations working (gcc 4.6.1), but
it seems the REG_DEAD information is lost during or after reload.
In the following peephole2 definition, peep2_reg_dead_p returns false,
whereas REG_DEAD information is correctly set before reload for
operands[0]
i386-apple-darwin10.8.0
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/local/Cellar/gcc/4.6.3/bin/../libexec/gcc/i386-apple-darwin10.8.0/4.6.3/lto-wrapper
Target: i386-apple-darwin10.8.0
Configured with: ../gcc-4.6.3/configure
--prefix=/usr/local/Cellar/gcc46
Hello,
I am confused by following piece of code in sched-deps.c. My understanding
is the last_pending_memory_flush only holds jumps, calls and memory write. So I
think the two invocations of add_dependence should build true dependence, not
anti.
for (u =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52631
Bug #: 52631
Summary: VN does not use simplified expression for lookup
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52631
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52631
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20
06:57:51 UTC ---
Created attachment 26927
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26927
Patch which fixes the problem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52625
Nikolka tsoae at mail dot ru changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tsoae at mail dot ru
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37780
--- Comment #2 from amker.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com 2012-03-20
07:58:09 UTC ---
the special case could be easily detected when gimplifying.
but actually I am not sure whether it can be done even in middle end, since the
middle end should
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52606
Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jb at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52622
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #26922|application/octet-stream|text/plain
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52621
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51802
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20
08:42:11 UTC ---
That that changing this will break the ABI. Thus, it can only be done when we
have to break the ABI. That will happen for the new array descriptor.
(This bug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52625
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2012-03-20 08:41:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
If this is indeed related to the injected-class-name, this should have been
clarified by
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52632
Bug #: 52632
Summary: GCC compfail on O0
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52633
Bug #: 52633
Summary: Compiler ICE in vect_is_simple_use_1 (ARM)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52632
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20
09:09:14 UTC ---
Testcase?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52606
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52607
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52601
--- Comment #3 from birender.singh at hotmail dot com 2012-03-20 09:26:01 UTC
---
Thanks Eric Botcazou for the valuable suggestion.
I downloaded,findutils-4.4.0.tar from gnu website, compiled and installed on my
machine.
After the installation
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52627
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52563
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de
2012-03-20 09:51:00 UTC ---
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012, liujiangning at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52563
--- Comment #6 from Jiangning Liu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52632
--- Comment #2 from Vladimir Yakovlev vbyakovl23 at gmail dot com 2012-03-20
10:03:47 UTC ---
Created attachment 26929
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26929
Test case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52606
--- Comment #5 from Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20 10:27:33
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Indeed, one can construct examples which exceed the length: Namely module
procedures or module variables. The problem is that
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51802
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20 10:52:45
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
That that changing this will break the ABI. Thus, it can only be done when we
have to break the ABI. That will happen for the new
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52619
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52632
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2012-03-20
10:55:49 UTC ---
The test case, obviously based on the Linux kernel's BUILD_BUG_ON() macro,
behaves exactly as intended: since `offset' is not in fact a constant it causes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52606
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20
10:58:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
What was the motivation for this hashing scheme, BTW? Linkers already support
1) long symbol names (I read somewhere that
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52619
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-03-20
11:03:00 UTC ---
The crash happens in lvalue_kind: an INDIRECT_REF with no TREE_TYPE.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52596
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-03-20
11:06:40 UTC ---
No ICE anymore in mainline for the reduced testcase in Comment #1. Instead,
with -std=c++11 only we reject it with:
52596.C: In member function ‘T*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52632
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com 2012-03-20 11:09:43 UTC ---
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012, mikpe at it dot uu.se wrote:
either a compile-time error or a link-time error (the latter because gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52633
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52613
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52631
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20
11:13:57 UTC ---
Hmm, but then you'd pessimize the case where b_2 1 were available? Thus,
don't you need to do the lookup with the original expression anyway if the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52627
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20
11:19:01 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Mar 20 11:18:57 2012
New Revision: 185569
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=185569
Log:
2012-03-20 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52630
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.1
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52627
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51802
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20
11:22:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
I agree completely. However, once 4.7 is released, should we be excessively
pristine about ABI breakage in trunk? It is, after
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52614
--- Comment #2 from Greta Yorsh Greta.Yorsh at arm dot com 2012-03-20
11:24:41 UTC ---
The tests reported in PR52603 are still failing on arm (last tested on trunk
r185474).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52595
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49868
--- Comment #18 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20
11:32:59 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Tue Mar 20 11:32:54 2012
New Revision: 185570
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=185570
Log:
PR target/49868
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52601
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20
11:48:47 UTC ---
Is this correct or should i again compiled gcc-4.4.4 to get complete
successful compilation ?
If you still have the build tree around, do
rm -rf
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52618
--- Comment #2 from blobbyvolley at mailmetrash dot com 2012-03-20 11:53:29 UTC
---
If it can be of any help, I noticed that for partial specializations everything
works as intended (the compiler reports an error).
class B {
typedef double
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52634
Bug #: 52634
Summary: multiple definition error when using alias
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52604
--- Comment #3 from Laurent Aflonsi laurent.alfonsi at st dot com 2012-03-20
12:31:31 UTC ---
Well, in fact I am facing a runtime crash on another target (SH4). The crash is
fixed by the patch proposed previously.
On the other hand, I ve tried
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52596
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-03-20
12:33:16 UTC ---
Oops, sorry, mainline still ICEs, had checking disabled.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52604
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-03-20
12:48:20 UTC ---
In principle I have no problem with such zeroings, make sense, but it's been a
while since the last time I looked into this code and I fear races. In
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52634
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52635
Bug #: 52635
Summary: gcc fails to diagnose invalid type in unused sizeof()
when optimizing
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52632
--- Comment #5 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2012-03-20
13:18:00 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
I'm not aware of such a bug. Please file a separate bug report in
Bugzilla with a testcase for this erroneously omits the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52583
--- Comment #15 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-03-20 13:48:51 UTC ---
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-03-16 09:55:26 UTC ---
[...]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52604
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52487
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52623
David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52634
--- Comment #2 from Bin Tian tianbin at cernet dot edu.cn 2012-03-20 14:16:02
UTC ---
Created attachment 26931
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26931
patch for make-3.82
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52634
--- Comment #3 from Bin Tian tianbin at cernet dot edu.cn 2012-03-20 14:16:49
UTC ---
The bug is reproducable with -r -flto-partition=1to1, and not with -r
-flto-partition=none.
My project is hard to reduce because of complex dependencies. It
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52635
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52634
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52634
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20
14:55:42 UTC ---
2
t1.o 3
164 2f48a666878dc458 PREVAILING_DEF_IRONLY_EXP main
169 2f48a666878dc458 UNDEF baz
173 2f48a666878dc458 RESOLVED_IR cfliteValueCallBacks
t2.o 2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52636
Bug #: 52636
Summary: [4.8 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected
integer_cst, have string_cst in tree_to_double_int, at
tree.h:4324
Classification: Unclassified
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52635
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com 2012-03-20 15:13:13 UTC ---
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012, mikpe at it dot uu.se wrote:
cat bug.c
extern int bar;
void foo(void)
{
(void)sizeof(char[1 - 2 *
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52614
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52636
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52571
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52637
Bug #: 52637
Summary: ICE producing debug info for c++11 code using
templates/decltype/lambda
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52622
--- Comment #2 from Adrian Prantl adrian at llnl dot gov 2012-03-20 15:33:40
UTC ---
I'm getting the error with both gcc 4.6.2 and 4.6.3
Below is the stack trace.
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
resolve_symbol
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52571
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2012-03-20
15:55:23 UTC ---
Unfortunately, the patch caused many testsuite failures on both
sparc-sun-solaris
and powerpc-apple-darwin, as can be seen e.g. at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52636
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52571
--- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2012-03-20 15:56:55 UTC ---
PR52603. Could you test the patch?
Sorry, pr52614.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52614
--- Comment #4 from Greta Yorsh Greta.Yorsh at arm dot com 2012-03-20
16:01:02 UTC ---
These tests pass on arm-none-eabi with the option -fno-common.
Thank you,
Greta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52625
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51737
--- Comment #18 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20
16:19:55 UTC ---
Created attachment 26932
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26932
patch in testing
I am testing the attached patch. It basically delays
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51893
--- Comment #9 from Aurelien Buhrig aurelien.buhrig.gcc at gmail dot com
2012-03-20 16:22:52 UTC ---
Do you need additional information about this bug?
Any comment about the provided patch?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52607
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20
16:26:08 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 20 16:25:54 2012
New Revision: 185577
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=185577
Log:
PR target/52607
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51206
Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52614
--- Comment #5 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20 16:37:04 UTC
---
For the single testcase I've been using for the reghunt
(gcc.dg/vect/vect-109.c),
adding -fno-common fixes the failure. On SPARC, one probably also has to add
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51663
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20
16:49:44 UTC ---
OK, the funny inconsistency comes from the fact that we always eliminate COMDAT
variables, but we keep around static variables with -fno-toplevel-reorder.
-O0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52607
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20
16:51:50 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 20 16:51:41 2012
New Revision: 185579
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=185579
Log:
PR target/52607
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52634
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52614
--- Comment #6 from Pat Haugen pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20
17:21:21 UTC ---
Adding -fno-common fixes the failures on powerpc64 also.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52635
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2012-03-20
17:26:23 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Do you have an example not involving __builtin_constant_p?
Unfortunately no. The example is just a cleaned up and reduced version
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52638
Bug #: 52638
Summary: ice in build_vector_from_val
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52635
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-20
18:06:33 UTC ---
Not sure what kernel you are looking at, but in current kernel at least since
2009-09 BUILD_BUG_ON is BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO and only MAYBE_BUILD_BUG_ON macro is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52639
Bug #: 52639
Summary: ice in supportable_widening_operation
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52640
Bug #: 52640
Summary: performance bottleneck: gcc/tree.c;value_member
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52636
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2012-03-20
18:35:50 UTC ---
The patch in comment #2 fixes the PR without side effect on the polyhedron test
suite (AFAICT;-).
Currently bootstrapping r185584, regtesting scheduled
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52639
dcb dcb314 at hotmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |c++
--- Comment #1 from
1 - 100 of 211 matches
Mail list logo
