[Bug tree-optimization/23816] New: ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2084

// test case, compile with "-O1 -fstrict-aliasing -ftree-vectorize" : void foo (float a[32], float b[2][32]) { int i; for (i = 0; i < 32; i++) a[i] = (b[0][i] > b[1][i]) ? b[0][i] : b[1][i]; } // compiler output: psy.i: In function 'foo': psy.i:6: error: unrecognizable insn: (insn 98 97 9

[Bug fortran/23815] New: Add -byteswapio flag

It is pretty typical that aero engineers involved in CFD (computational fluid dynamics) need to ship around large (50-1000 MB) binary files between various big-endian and little-endian machines without having to reformat them. Typically they generate files that are all big-endian using a compiler

[Bug fortran/23814] unformatted files from gfortran are incompatible with g77 unformatted files and solaris f95 unformatted files

--- Additional Comments From rrr6399 at futuretek dot com 2005-09-11 04:07 --- I just found this discussion: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-05/msg00431.html It doesn't look like from the docs that it was implemented in the main-line yet, is it available somehow else? It seems to me

[Bug fortran/23814] New: unformatted files from gfortran are incompatible with g77 unformatted files and solaris f95 unformatted files

I ran into a problem with unformatted files with gfortran. It appears that it is padding the delimitters to 8 byte boundaries (or the delimitters are 64 bit longs) rather than the normal 4 byte delimitter approach. For instance, I have a program that does this: write(1) 1 end g77

[Bug libgcj/13212] JNI/CNI AttachCurrentThread does not register thread with garbage collector

--- Additional Comments From billy dot biggs at gmail dot com 2005-09-11 03:02 --- The original bug report is dated 2003-11-27. greenrd -- are you sure this is the sasme bug? -- What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug libgcj/13212] JNI/CNI AttachCurrentThread does not register thread with garbage collector

--- Additional Comments From david at jpackage dot org 2005-09-11 02:59 --- I am experiencing something that looks similar to this with eclipse on x86_64. Here is the stack trace on amd64. #0 0x2bb7c710 in GC_local_gcj_malloc () from /usr/lib/../lib64/libgcj.so.6 #1 0x2aa

[Bug rtl-optimization/23813] New: redundant register assignments not eliminated

(CVS sources from ~6AM today US/Eastern, i.e., about 16 hours before submission) Compiling source below with -O9 -fomit-frame-pointer, there are cases where registers are assigned multiple times without any labels in between; a register assigned zero, used in an inclusive-or, then overwritten;

[Bug rtl-optimization/23812] New: swapping DImode halves produces poor x86 register allocation

(CVS sources, ~6AM this morning US/eastern) typedef unsigned long long uint64_t; uint64_t foo (uint64_t n) { return (n >> 32) | (n << 32); } compiled with -O9 -fomit-frame-pointer: foo: pushl %ebx movl12(%esp), %ebx movl8(%esp), %ecx movl%ebx, %eax

[Bug c++/20293] [3.4/4.0/4.1 regression] Wrong diagnostic for ambiguous access

-- Bug 20293 depends on bug 100, which changed state. Bug 100 Summary: confusing name lookup diagnostic http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100 What|Old Value |New Value

[Bug c++/12272] wrong error message using declaration shadows namespace

-- Bug 12272 depends on bug 100, which changed state. Bug 100 Summary: confusing name lookup diagnostic http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100 What|Old Value |New Value

[Bug c++/100] confusing name lookup diagnostic

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-09-11 01:50 --- This is good enough. The fact that the compiler says that a name is not declared when it is in fact ambiguous is treated in a number of other PRs. W. -- What|Removed |A

[Bug rtl-optimization/23811] New: returning 64-bit value turns off some 32-bit optimizations

The function below, compiled with -O9 -fomit-frame-pointer, fails to optimize the final 16-bit swap into an x86 "roll" instruction *if* the return type is uint64_t. If the return type is uint32_t, a roll instruction is generated, and the resulting code is 6 instructions (19 bytes) shorter. A

[Bug rtl-optimization/23810] New: missed 64-bit shift+mask optimizations on 32-bit arch

(Sources are from CVS as of about 6AM US/Eastern time today.) I'm testing out how well gcc optimizes some code for reversing bit strings. It appears that on x86 at least, double-word shifts followed by masks that zero out all the bits that crossed the word boundary are not optimized as well as

[Bug c/23809] Misleading documentation for -mmmx/msse/...

-- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-09-

[Bug c/23809] Misleading documentation for -mmmx/msse/...

--- Additional Comments From billy dot biggs at gmail dot com 2005-09-10 22:04 --- Created an attachment (id=9706) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9706&action=view) Patch -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23809

[Bug c/23809] New: Misleading documentation for -mmmx/msse/...

The compiler options for -mmmx, -msse, etc, serve two purposes: 1. They allow the programmer to use the compiler built-ins for easily writing MMX/SSE code. 2. They allow the compiler to use MMX/SSE instructions in generated code. However, the documentation does not explicitly state the s

[Bug fortran/22502] [4.0.1 Regression] ICE constructing arrays with "(/ /)"

--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 21:42 --- Now also fixed on the 4.0 branch. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug fortran/22502] [4.0.1 Regression] ICE constructing arrays with "(/ /)"

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 21:40 --- Subject: Bug 22502 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Branch: gcc-4_0-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-10 21:40:00 Modified files: gcc/fortran: Change

[Bug debug/23806] [4.0/4.1 Regression] -gstabs with VLAs does not work

--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 21:13 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug debug/23806] [4.0/4.1 Regression] -gstabs with VLAs does not work

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 21:11 --- Subject: Bug 23806 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Branch: gcc-4_0-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-10 21:11:30 Modified files: gcc: Change

[Bug debug/23806] [4.0/4.1 Regression] -gstabs with VLAs does not work

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 21:10 --- Subject: Bug 23806 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-10 21:10:43 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog dbxout.c Log message:

[Bug middle-end/23125] [4.0/4.1 Regression] OpenBSD's zic.c causes g++ but not gcc to segfault

--- Additional Comments From geoffk at geoffk dot org 2005-09-10 20:34 --- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 Regression] OpenBSD's zic.c causes g++ but not gcc to segfault On 09/09/2005, at 9:56 PM, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > So it is little harder to fix than I had previous though

[Bug c++/100] confusing name lookup diagnostic

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 19:26 --- *** Bug 12582 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/12582] unhelpful message with ambiguous typedef

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 19:25 --- This is a dup of bug 100. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 100 *** -- What|Removed |Added -

[Bug c++/12349] gcc accepts specialization of template in typedef

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 19:24 --- Fixed in 4.0.0: t.cc:3: error: template declaration of ‘typedef’ -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/18412] missed vectorization opportunity due to aliasing issue

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 18:16 --- This is really a three fold problem. First cobbler needs to be flow sensitive. Second Array references need to be allowed on pointers. Thrid, scanf needs to be marked as only touching the pointers pass

[Bug middle-end/16802] PowerPC - Unnecessary extsw

-- Bug 16802 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug tree-optimization/21258] Teach VRP to pick up a constant from case label.

-- Bug 21258 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug tree-optimization/14341] Missed comparison optimization (VRP)

-- Bug 14341 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug tree-optimization/17100] Missed opportunity for value range optimization

-- Bug 17100 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug tree-optimization/21368] VRP does not know that &s.a != NULL

-- Bug 21368 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug tree-optimization/20701] [tcb] VRP does not eliminate a redundant "if" statement.

-- Bug 20701 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug middle-end/21076] [4.1 Regression] ACATs ICE cxh1001 at tree-vrp.c:124 (fold bug)

-- Bug 21076 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug tree-optimization/21090] VRP does not notice nonzero-ness from a PHI node

-- Bug 21090 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug tree-optimization/21348] tree-vrp.c:has_assert_expr is useless.

-- Bug 21348 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug tree-optimization/21367] VRP does not fold "if (a == b)" in a certain situation

-- Bug 21367 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug tree-optimization/21086] VRP does not extract a value from a comparison expression.

-- Bug 21086 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug tree-optimization/21582] (optimisation) VRP pass could/should use non-null function attribute

-- Bug 21582 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug tree-optimization/21332] [4.1 Regression] -ftree-vrp makes a loop doesn't execute a body

-- Bug 21332 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug tree-optimization/14495] [tree-ssa] Propagate range info into a switch statement

-- Bug 14495 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug tree-optimization/21289] A numeric range is spoiled by a symblic one in VRP

-- Bug 21289 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug tree-optimization/8681] Generates unneeded test

-- Bug 8681 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value

[Bug tree-optimization/21029] [4.1 Regression] vrp miscompiles Ada front-end, drops loop exit test in well-defined wrap-around circumstances

-- Bug 21029 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug tree-optimization/18373] [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 18:09 --- This has been fixed for 4.1.0. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/21458] VRP does not remove a conditional in a loop

-- Bug 21458 depends on bug 18373, which changed state. Bug 18373 Summary: [meta-bug] VRP Value Range Propagation http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18373 What|Old Value |New Value ---

[Bug tree-optimization/17106] Opportunity to eliminate loads from TOC.

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 18:02 --- This should be helped or fixed by: http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Section%20Anchor%20Optimisations -- What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug tree-optimization/16797] Opportunity to remove unnecessary load instructions

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 17:59 --- Another testcase which effects all targets: int logic_func1(int b, int d) { if (d< b) return b+3; else return d+3; } int logic_func2(int b, int d) { int a; if (d< b) a = b; else a = d; return a+3; }

[Bug middle-end/22480] [4.1 Regression] ICE in convert_move, at expr.c:390 with -ftree-vectorize

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 16:32 --- This causes a build failure if you turn on -ftree-vectorize when building the target libraries. -- What|Removed |Added --

[Bug middle-end/22480] [4.1 Regression] ICE in convert_move, at expr.c:390 with -ftree-vectorize

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 16:31 --- *** Bug 23808 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/23808] ICE in convert-move, building libgfortran with tree-vectorize

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 16:31 --- This an obvious dup of bug 22480. The loop in question: for (n = 0; n < rank; n++) mstride[n] <<= 1; *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 22480 *** -- What|Removed

[Bug tree-optimization/23808] ICE in convert-move, building libgfortran with tree-vectorize

-- What|Removed |Added Component|c |tree-optimization Keywords||build, ice-on-valid-code http://gcc.gnu.org

[Bug c/23808] New: ICE in convert-move, building libgfortran with tree-vectorize

GNU C version 4.1.0 20050909 (experimental) (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) compiled by GNU C version 4.1.0 20050909 (experimental). GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=30 --param ggc-min-heapsize=4096 Compiler executable checksum: f9d7f64473108ed4ae233ca41e01773c GNU assembler version 2.14.9

[Bug libfortran/20179] cannot mix C and Fortran I/O

--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 16:16 --- I should add that the code concerned is in io/transfer.c, line 1174: /* Overwriting an existing sequential file ? it is always safe to truncate the file on the first write */ if (g.mode == WRITIN

[Bug libfortran/20179] cannot mix C and Fortran I/O

--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 16:06 --- Looking at that again, it is clear that there is a bug in the way libgfortran handles pre-connected units. In short, the fd-based I/O library behaves like it is the first program to access the file; this i

[Bug c++/23807] Mixed-type arithmetic error

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 15:42 --- unsigned int res = ~us; Is equivant to: unsigned int res = ~(int)us; -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug debug/23806] [4.0/4.1 Regression] -gstabs with VLAs does not work

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 15:29 --- Note this causes a build failure while building libiberty/cp-demangle.c on targets that default to stabs. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug debug/23806] [4.0/4.1 Regression] -gstabs with VLAs does not work

--- Additional Comments From dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 15:28 --- The same ICE causes a bootstrap failure on AIX when compiling libiberty/cp-demangle.c cp-demangle.c: In function 'is_ctor_or_dtor': cp-demangle.c:4127: internal compiler error: in make_decl_rtl, at varasm.c:890

[Bug fortran/18899] [gfortran] ubound wrongly calculated for passed array

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 14:56 --- If I replace the declaration of a in foo with, integer :: a(0:1) then the test does pass. So this seems to be a problem with assumed shape arrays. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi

[Bug c++/23807] Mixed-type arithmetic error

--- Additional Comments From igodard at pacbell dot net 2005-09-10 14:33 --- Simpler test case: #include int main () { unsigned short us = 0; unsigned int res = ~us; std::cerr << "res: 0x" << std::hex << res << ", us: 0x" << us << "\n"; return 0; } gets you:

[Bug c++/23807] New: Mixed-type arithmetic error

#include int main () { unsigned short us = ~0; unsigned int ui = 1; unsigned int res = ui + us; std::cerr << "res: " << res << ", ui: " << ui << ", us: 0x" << std::hex << us << "\n"; res = 1; res = res + us; std::cerr << "res: " << res << ", ui: " << ui << "

[Bug tree-optimization/22438] [4.1 Regression] ICE SEGV in is_gimple_variable at tree-gimple.c:239

--- Additional Comments From belyshev at depni dot sinp dot msu dot ru 2005-09-10 13:03 --- *** Bug 22516 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added --

[Bug tree-optimization/22516] [4.1 Regression] Segfault with ivopts at -O

--- Additional Comments From belyshev at depni dot sinp dot msu dot ru 2005-09-10 13:03 --- (In reply to comment #3) > A regression hunt on powerpc-linux shows that the test case starts failing > with this patch from rakdver: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2005-07/msg00181.html so

[Bug c++/23799] [4.1 regression] ICE: no-op convert from 8 to 4 bytes in initializer

--- Additional Comments From schwab at suse dot de 2005-09-10 10:19 --- Also fails on x86-64, according to . All 64-bit targets appear to be affected. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/19430] Missing uninitialized warning

--- Additional Comments From mike at codeweavers dot com 2005-09-10 08:07 --- Simplifying things a bit: void foo(int*); void bar(void) { int x; if(x) foo(&x); } gcc -c foo.c -Wall -O2 -Wuninitialized (More stunning silence.) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19430

[Bug fortran/22502] [4.0.1 Regression] ICE constructing arrays with "(/ /)"

--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 07:50 --- Taking care of the backport to the 4.0 branch. -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|un

[Bug debug/23806] [4.0/4.1 Regression] -gstabs with VLAs does not work

-- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org | Status|UNCONFIRMED