--- Comment #23 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 08:07
---
I should be posting a patch for this next week.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25500
--- Comment #17 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 08:10
---
(In reply to comment #16)
(In reply to comment #15)
The patch fails bootstrap in stage2 for ppc (only).
This bootstraps just fine for me on the mainline with powerpc-darwin.
And there were no regressions.
--
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 08:20 ---
I am going to try to fix this, it blocks my other work on getting altivec
builtins marked as const/pure.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 08:35 ---
The only thing left from __task_rq_lock is a label.
If we look at that inlined function, we see:
static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) struct rq *__task_rq_lock(struct
task_struct *p)
{
struct rq *rq;
The following code (extracted from the Linux kernel) fails to compile with
optimization enabled:
static void load_fs(unsigned short sel)
{
asm(mov %0, %%fs : : g(sel));
}
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
load_fs(0);
}
[EMAIL PROTECTED] arklinux]$ gcc test.c
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I get a segmentation fault with both stock gcc 4.1.1 and the 20061110 4.1.2
snapshot, when trying to build avifile-0.7.45. The error message is:
if i386-pc-linux-g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../include
-I/usr/lib/qt3/include -DQT_THREAD_SUPPORT -I/usr/X11R6/include -I../../libavqt
--- Comment #1 from chris_clayton at f1internet dot com 2006-11-12 09:35
---
Created an attachment (id=12596)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12596action=view)
Preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29809
--- Comment #19 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2006-11-12 09:52 ---
Janis,
Thanks a lot!
The range of the revisions is 110758 - 111615 (110758 passes bootstrap with
vectorization with the patch, 111615 fails with the error in comment #3).
I had to modify the patch and split it into
--- Comment #20 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2006-11-12 09:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=12597)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12597action=view)
The first part of the patch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28752
--- Comment #21 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2006-11-12 09:56 ---
Created an attachment (id=12598)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12598action=view)
The second part of the patch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28752
--- Comment #6 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-11-12 11:00 ---
mine, but please can you give me the correct output? i don't see the
regressions (comparing to a 4.1.2 compiler).
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from news at derived-software dot ltd dot uk 2006-11-12
11:04 ---
From Aleksey Gurtovoy (co-author Boost.MPL):
[wrt to this bug]
Actually, no, enums in the bug's subject and reduced test case are a
red herring. For example, this still fails for me on 4.1.1:
template
--- Comment #1 from segher at kernel dot crashing dot org 2006-11-12 11:10
---
Not a bug in GCC but in your code; g says immediate values
are allowed, while this asm insn only takes registers (or 16-bit
memory).
--
segher at kernel dot crashing dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #7 from jpr at csc dot fi 2006-11-12 13:24 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] -O2 gives wrong
results
In reply to comment #6)
mine, but please can you give me the correct output? i don't see the
regressions (comparing to a 4.1.2 compiler).
In the original testcase
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 13:26 ---
invalid
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 13:37 ---
With g++ 4.1.1-13 (g++ (GCC) 4.1.2 20061028 (prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-19)) I
see
timertable.cpp: In member function void TimerTableItem::setTable(int,
QDateTime, QTime, QString, QString, int, int, QString):
--- Comment #3 from bero at arklinux dot org 2006-11-12 13:40 ---
If the code is invalid, the fact that it compiles with -O0 is probably a bug...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29808
--- Comment #4 from segher at kernel dot crashing dot org 2006-11-12 14:01
---
If the code is invalid, the fact that it compiles with -O0 is probably a
bug...
No, GCC cannot in general detect whether your asm code is buggy.
The assembler however can detect many asm bugs, as it did
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 14:18 ---
Confirmed. Reduced testcase that fails with -O -finline-functions:
class QDate { };
class QTime {
public:
bool operator( const QTime d ) const { return ds d.ds; }
unsigned ds;
};
class QDateTime {
public:
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.1 RegressionSegmentation |[4.1 Regression]
|fault with 4.1.1 and 4.1-
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 14:46 ---
TREE_ADDRESSABLE is missing on D.1854 in
# start_dateD.1966_53 = V_MAY_DEF start_dateD.1966_31;
# SFT.44D.1986_54 = V_MAY_DEF SFT.44D.1986_12;
# SFT.45D.1987_55 = V_MAY_DEF SFT.45D.1987_13;
#
--- Comment #38 from timday at bottlenose dot demon dot co dot uk
2006-11-12 15:33 ---
Gah: just spent several hours trying to figure out why my malloced __v4sf
weren't 16 byte aligned before I stumbled on this thread. Would be nice if the
info gcc Using vector instructions through
This causes approximately 4400 failures in the gfortran testsuite. Here's
the first:
Executing on host: /mnt/gnu/gcc/objdir/gcc/testsuite/gfortran/../../gfortran
-B/
mnt/gnu/gcc/objdir/gcc/testsuite/gfortran/../../
/mnt/gnu/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/
gfortran.dg/PR19754_2.f90 -O0
--- Comment #1 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 16:11 ---
This symbol is in _mod_r16.o. I guess this points to:
2006-11-05 Francois-Xavier Coudert [EMAIL PROTECTED],org
Paul Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR fortran/24518
* trans-intrinsic.c
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 16:22 ---
Just curious. Do you file bug reports with HP about the
lack of C99 long double libm functions?
You need to add a fmodl function to c99_functions.c.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29810
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 16:36 ---
Here's an untested patch.
Index: configure.ac
===
--- configure.ac(revision 118613)
+++ configure.ac(working copy)
@@ -235,6 +249,7 @@
--- Comment #13 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 16:43
---
(In reply to comment #12)
From Aleksey Gurtovoy (co-author Boost.MPL):
[wrt to this bug]
Actually, no, enums in the bug's subject and reduced test case are a
red herring. For example, this still fails for me
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 17:07 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 28116 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 17:07
---
*** Bug 29809 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 17:12 ---
Subject: Bug 29805
Author: daney
Date: Sun Nov 12 17:12:13 2006
New Revision: 118724
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118724
Log:
PR java/29805
* typeck.c (build_java_array_type):
--- Comment #5 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 17:15 ---
Subject: Bug 29805
Author: daney
Date: Sun Nov 12 17:14:52 2006
New Revision: 118725
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118725
Log:
PR java/29805
* typeck.c (build_java_array_type):
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 17:15 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
If the code is invalid, the fact that it compiles with -O0 is probably a
bug...
No it is not really a bug that it compiles at -O0 either becuase g means
r+i so the register allocator in
--- Comment #6 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 17:19 ---
Fixed by the patch.
--
daney at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #36 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 17:33
---
(In reply to comment #19)
Created an attachment (id=12574)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12574action=view) [edit]
A patch
This reverts the patch which triggers the problem and adds a
--
daney at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29805
--- Comment #4 from sayle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 18:41 ---
Subject: Bug 13827
Author: sayle
Date: Sun Nov 12 18:41:31 2006
New Revision: 118727
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118727
Log:
PR tree-optimization/13827
* fold-const.c
--- Comment #4 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2006-11-12 18:44 ---
Fixed.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 18:51 ---
The difference between the 4.2 branch and the trunk is:
On the trunk:
# PARM_NOALIAS.12_38 = V_MAY_DEF PARM_NOALIAS.12_35;
(*D.1004_16)[0] = D.1010_27;
On the 4.2 branch:
# SMT.15_38 = V_MAY_DEF
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 18:53 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-11-12
19:38 ---
Subject: Re: ld: (Warning) Unsatisfied symbol fmodl in file
/mnt/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/./libgfortran/.l
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 16:22 ---
Just
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 19:58 ---
This patch should fix the problem:
Index: config/rs6000/rs6000.c
===
--- config/rs6000/rs6000.c (revision 118728)
+++ config/rs6000/rs6000.c
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29727
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29728
--- Comment #4 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 20:38
---
From [temp.mem]:
A local class shall not have member templates.
Therefore, this is indeed invalid.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29730
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29731
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29732
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29733
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29734
--- Comment #5 from acme at mandriva dot com 2006-11-12 20:39 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
The only thing left from __task_rq_lock is a label.
SNIP
task_cpu were inlined and we constant proped the value of rq the first of the
way through the function which we inlined this to.
OK,
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29735
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29736
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 21:33
---
This is a tricky case, since the underlying memory pointed to by the pointer is
non-volatile. In other words, the compiler knows that s is non volatile,
even though the pointer type is volatile int *.
The C99
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29788
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29797
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27895
$ g++ bug.cpp -Wall -c
bug.cpp: In function #8216;void foo()#8217;:
bug.cpp:18: error: #8216;foo()::A::less#8217; uses local type
#8216;foo()::A::less#8217;
bug.cpp:18: error: trying to instantiate #8216;templateclass _Key, class
_Compare, class _Alloc class std::set#8217;
bug.cpp:18: error:
--- Comment #1 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-11-12 21:49 ---
Created an attachment (id=12599)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12599action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29811
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 21:53 ---
A::less is a local type which makes this invalid code and the error message is
correct.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #48 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 22:06
---
Still broken. I should turn off HAVE_COMDAT_GROUP and see if that helps.
Does hppa-linux use non-standard text sections? Revised patch to be attached.
--
--- Comment #49 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-12 22:08
---
Created an attachment (id=12600)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12600action=view)
Revised linker fix.
Lightly tested on x86.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29639
--- Comment #12 from amacleod at redhat dot com 2006-11-12 23:59 ---
That would it explain why it suddenly showed up. As long as I'm not suppose to
see a CONST_DECL, I'll leave the out of ssa code as it is.
Andrew
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29788
--- Comment #18 from sayle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-13 00:42 ---
Subject: Bug 29797
Author: sayle
Date: Mon Nov 13 00:41:53 2006
New Revision: 118740
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118740
Log:
2006-11-12 Michael Matz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Roger
--- Comment #50 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-11-13
02:01 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 regression] ext/bitmap_allocator/check_allocate_max_size.cc
execution test
Still broken. I should turn off HAVE_COMDAT_GROUP and see if that helps.
Does hppa-linux use
--- Comment #14 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-13 02:18
---
Subject: Bug 29587
Author: dberlin
Date: Mon Nov 13 02:18:07 2006
New Revision: 118742
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118742
Log:
2006-11-12 Daniel Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fix PR
--- Comment #15 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-13 02:22
---
Subject: Bug 29587
Author: dberlin
Date: Mon Nov 13 02:21:52 2006
New Revision: 118743
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118743
Log:
2006-11-12 Daniel Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fix PR
--- Comment #16 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-13 02:22
---
Fixed
--
dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-13 02:25 ---
This problem was introduced by this change:
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Oct 10 08:27:02 2006
New Revision: 117598
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=117598
Log:
2006-10-10 Richard Guenther [EMAIL
--- Comment #17 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-11-13
02:31 ---
Subject: Re: jc1: out of memory allocating 4072 bytes after a total of
708630224 bytes
Fixed
Thanks for fixing this.
Dave
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29587
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-13 02:37 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
This problem was introduced by this change:
That makes less sense really, because this just changes how to deal with
TREE_NOTHROW. This sounds like a latent bug really.
--
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-11-13
02:40 ---
Subject: Re: ld: (Warning) Unsatisfied symbol fmodl in file
/mnt/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/./libgfortran/.lRO
Here's an untested patch.
+ return (x - floorl(x / y) * y;
Unfortunately, we
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-11-13
03:09 ---
Subject: Re: Shared libstdc++ fails to link
This problem was introduced by this change:
That makes less sense really, because this just changes how to deal with
TREE_NOTHROW. This sounds like a
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29573
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29584
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29599
--- Comment #11 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-13 03:38
---
I am going to put these DR 224 issues into WAITING. I don't think we really
know what the committee is going to do yet.
(Prior to that DR being put into the WP, I had a long discussion with John
Spicer. My
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29612
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29632
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29704
--- Comment #7 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-13 03:40
---
Waiting for ISO Committee to decide what to do about DR 224.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |mark at codesourcery dot com
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from jjcogliati-r1 at yahoo dot com 2006-11-13 04:35 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Use --disable-multilib as ppc-darwin is configured by default to also build
the
64bit libraries.
Why is this not a bug? --disable-multilib is not mentioned in
Hello,
While debugging the issue with the Subclipse not working under the GCJ
(look at the message
http://svn.haxx.se/subusers/archive-2006-07/0210.shtml for example) I
found the following problem. When native method is called, the
env-klass value is always NULL. It looks like that JNIEnv is
--- Comment #1 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2006-11-13 07:42
---
Isn't this going to be allowed in F2008? (Perhaps it already is in F2003 --
I'm too lazy to check.) We should print an error message if strict standard
conformance is requested, but since it is going to be valid
85 matches
Mail list logo
