[Bug libfortran/34670] bounds checking for array intrinsics

2010-06-04 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #17 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 06:50 --- Subject: Bug 34670 Author: tkoenig Date: Fri Jun 4 06:50:11 2010 New Revision: 160253 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160253 Log: 2010-06-04 Thomas Koenig tkoe...@gcc.gnu.org PR

[Bug libfortran/34670] bounds checking for array intrinsics

2010-06-04 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #18 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 06:51 --- Fixed (finally). Closing. -- tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/44156] dot_product / matmul and signed zeros

2010-06-04 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 07:06 --- After the discussion, I think we can close this as WONTFIX. -- tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/40452] -fbounds-check: False positive due to ignoring storage association

2010-06-04 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 07:15 --- Can we close this? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40452

[Bug middle-end/42505] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] loop canonicalization causes a lot of unnecessary temporary variables

2010-06-04 Thread steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 07:45 --- AFAIU, you can't randomly change signed to unsigned, due to different overflow semantics, which is why IVOPTS doesn't make this change itself. Imagine you enter the loop with count = 0, and with a second counter

[Bug debug/41371] [4.5/4.6 Regression] var-tracking is slow and memory hungry

2010-06-04 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #30 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 09:02 --- Created an attachment (id=20833) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20833action=view) rh598310.i.bz2 Another testcase from wine, ./cc1 -m32 -fPIC -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 rh598310.i -quiet takes

[Bug middle-end/42505] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] loop canonicalization causes a lot of unnecessary temporary variables

2010-06-04 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 09:08 --- If the result of the conversion is only used in an exit equality test against a constant it can be dropped. This could also happen in a following forwprop run which is our single tree-combiner (though that

[Bug debug/41371] [4.5/4.6 Regression] var-tracking is slow and memory hungry

2010-06-04 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #31 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 09:24 --- Created an attachment (id=20834) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20834action=view) limit-depth.patch Quick patch that brings the time down to 1 minute 15 sec. From the callgrind dump on this

[Bug debug/41371] [4.5/4.6 Regression] var-tracking is slow and memory hungry

2010-06-04 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #32 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 09:30 --- Created an attachment (id=20835) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20835action=view) hack Hack that shows that the maximum depth is 3 even for the found == NULL cases. Alex tells me on IRC he has

[Bug debug/41371] [4.5/4.6 Regression] var-tracking is slow and memory hungry

2010-06-04 Thread aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #33 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 09:51 --- Mine -- aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned

[Bug bootstrap/43847] test for plugin is using wrong objdump for host != target

2010-06-04 Thread doko at ubuntu dot com
--- Comment #2 from doko at ubuntu dot com 2010-06-04 09:51 --- having an objdump which supports both the host and the target works around this issue. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43847

[Bug testsuite/43759] The tests gcc.dg/plugindir*.c should be restricted to builds configured with --enable-plugin

2010-06-04 Thread doko at ubuntu dot com
--- Comment #4 from doko at ubuntu dot com 2010-06-04 09:53 --- this is fixed on the trunk -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43759

[Bug debug/41371] [4.5/4.6 Regression] var-tracking is slow and memory hungry

2010-06-04 Thread aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #34 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 10:03 --- Created an attachment (id=20836) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20836action=view) Patch that fixes the bug and verifies recursion is bounded as expected This patch (except for comments and

[Bug lto/44408] FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/20100603-2 c_lto_20100603-2_0.o-c_lto_20100603-2_0.o

2010-06-04 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 11:00 --- Fixed. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug lto/41584] WHOPR doesn't grok empty units

2010-06-04 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 11:00 --- Subject: Bug 41584 Author: rguenth Date: Fri Jun 4 11:00:09 2010 New Revision: 160258 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160258 Log: 2010-06-04 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de PR

[Bug debug/41371] [4.5/4.6 Regression] var-tracking is slow and memory hungry

2010-06-04 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #35 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 11:03 --- Created an attachment (id=20837) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20837action=view) bnc611650 Another testcase from open-office this time, on i?86-linux only. $ time g++ -c -g -Os

[Bug debug/41371] [4.5/4.6 Regression] var-tracking is slow and memory hungry

2010-06-04 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #36 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 11:15 --- With Alex' patch with checking guarded with #ifdef ENABLE_CHECKING (currently bootstrapping/regtesting that) I see on x86_64 on the trunk: time ./cc1plus -m32 -quiet -g -Os -fomit-frame-pointer bug-611650_analysis.ii

[Bug c++/44412] [4.6 Regression] Another bogus set-but-not-used warning

2010-06-04 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:03 --- More complete testcase: // PR c++/44412 // { dg-do compile } // { dg-options -Wunused } struct S { static const int a = 3; static int b; int c; }; const int S::a; int S::b = 4; int f1 () { S s; return

[Bug libstdc++/44413] New: inefficient code for std::string::compare on x86-64

2010-06-04 Thread dgohman at gmail dot com
This code: #include string int foo(const std::string a, const std::string b) { return a.compare(b); } compiles to code like this on x86-64: [...] subq%rdx, %r8 movl$2147483647, %eax cmpq$2147483647, %r8 jg .L2 movl$-2147483648, %eax

[Bug fortran/40452] -fbounds-check: False positive due to ignoring storage association

2010-06-04 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:22 --- Yes, we can CLOSE the bug as FIXED. -- burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug other/44414] New: hashtab.h functions are undocumented

2010-06-04 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
When I recently needed to use htab_* functions from libiberty's hashtab.h, I found that they are completely undocumented: the comments in the header aren't enough to use them, so I had to look at both the implementation and other uses to figure things out. -- Summary: hashtab.h

[Bug other/44414] hashtab.h functions are undocumented

2010-06-04 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:32 --- libiberty has documentation in source libiberty/hashtab.c. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug libgcj/44415] New: [4.6 regression] gmp multilib support broke bootstrap with static libgmp

2010-06-04 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
The recent introduction of this patch 2010-05-29 Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net * configure.ac: Add multilib support for gmp. Proper -I and -L flags for gmp are added. broke bootstrap on i386-pc-solaris2.11 and almost certainly at least all Solaris 2 platforms with a static

[Bug rtl-optimization/42502] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] Bad register allocation in a very simple code

2010-06-04 Thread bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:44 --- Subject: Bug 42502 Author: bernds Date: Fri Jun 4 12:44:01 2010 New Revision: 160260 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160260 Log: PR rtl-optimization/39871 PR

[Bug rtl-optimization/42500] Unnecessary mov of sp to a register

2010-06-04 Thread bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:44 --- Subject: Bug 42500 Author: bernds Date: Fri Jun 4 12:44:01 2010 New Revision: 160260 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160260 Log: PR rtl-optimization/39871 PR

[Bug rtl-optimization/39871] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 regression] Code size increase on ARM due to poor register allocation

2010-06-04 Thread bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #24 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:44 --- Subject: Bug 39871 Author: bernds Date: Fri Jun 4 12:44:01 2010 New Revision: 160260 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160260 Log: PR rtl-optimization/39871 PR

[Bug rtl-optimization/40615] unnecessary CSE

2010-06-04 Thread bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:44 --- Subject: Bug 40615 Author: bernds Date: Fri Jun 4 12:44:01 2010 New Revision: 160260 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160260 Log: PR rtl-optimization/39871 PR

[Bug debug/41371] [4.5/4.6 Regression] var-tracking is slow and memory hungry

2010-06-04 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #37 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:45 --- Subject: Bug 41371 Author: rguenth Date: Fri Jun 4 12:44:41 2010 New Revision: 160261 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160261 Log: 2010-06-04 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de

[Bug libgcj/44415] [4.6 regression] gmp multilib support broke bootstrap with static libgmp

2010-06-04 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- 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=44415

[Bug testsuite/38946] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] gcc trunk 143562 - Testsuite - gfortran failing tests that worked previously

2010-06-04 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #16 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:53 --- Confirmed: fails for 32-bit and Solaris 10+, unsupported on Solaris 8 and 9. -- ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug other/44414] hashtab.h functions are undocumented

2010-06-04 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 12:58 --- This is not proper documentation: most part of libiberty use comments which can be extracted and put into the .texi files, while hashtab.c does not. -- ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug middle-end/44382] Slow integer multiply

2010-06-04 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 13:08 --- (In reply to comment #1) Because our tree reassoc doesn't re-associate them. The tree reassoc pass makes it slower: [...@gnu-6 44382]$ cat x.i extern int a, b, c, d, e, f; void foo () { a = (b * c) * (d * e);

[Bug c++/26256] ignores using declaration

2010-06-04 Thread fabien at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- fabien at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |fabien at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org

[Bug middle-end/44382] Slow integer multiply

2010-06-04 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 13:21 --- Yes, reassoc linearizes instead of building a tree (saves one (or was it two?) registers at best). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44382

[Bug middle-end/44416] New: [4.6 regression] Failed to build 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006

2010-06-04 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
On Linux/x86-64, revision 160243 failed to build 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006 at -O2 and -O3: g++ -c -o block_vector.o -DSPEC_CPU -DNDEBUG -Iinclude -DBOOST_DISABLE_THREADS -Ddeal_II_dimension=3 -O3 -ffast-math -funroll-loops -DSPEC_CPU_LP64 block_vector.cc In file included from

[Bug middle-end/44416] [4.6 regression] Failed to build 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006

2010-06-04 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
-- 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=44416

[Bug middle-end/44416] [4.6 regression] Failed to build 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006

2010-06-04 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 13:26 --- It may be caused by revision 160231: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-06/msg00144.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/44416] [4.6 regression] Failed to build 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006

2010-06-04 Thread paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-04 13:42 --- I do not have access to those benchmarks. Whoever has, should check that ptrdiff_t is used properly, either after including cstddef, then it can be used both qualified with std:: and unqualified together with

[Bug libstdc++/44417] New: make check-target-libstdc++-v3 fails due to undefined ptrdiff_t

2010-06-04 Thread singler at kit dot edu
make check-target-libstdc++-v3 fails because ptrdiff_t is undefined. std::ptrdiff_t works. Maybe this bug is related to the Linux system run on. I have openSuse 11.1 running. configure --enable-languages=c,c++ --program-suffix=-rep --prefix=$HOME/gcc/install_trunk_1 In file included from

[Bug libstdc++/44417] make check-target-libstdc++-v3 fails due to undefined ptrdiff_t

2010-06-04 Thread paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-04 13:49 --- I can't reproduce this. I booted and tested many times on various linux systems and HJ already reported many succesfull testresults since. Please remove everything from the build dir, gave everything fresh and

[Bug middle-end/44382] Slow integer multiply

2010-06-04 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 13:56 --- (In reply to comment #3) Yes, reassoc linearizes instead of building a tree (saves one (or was it two?) registers at best). Should we always build a tree? It may increase register pressure. --

[Bug c++/44412] [4.6 Regression] Another bogus set-but-not-used warning

2010-06-04 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 14:12 --- Created an attachment (id=20838) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20838action=view) gcc46-pr44412.patch Untested patch. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44412

[Bug libstdc++/44417] make check-target-libstdc++-v3 fails due to undefined ptrdiff_t

2010-06-04 Thread singler at kit dot edu
--- Comment #2 from singler at kit dot edu 2010-06-04 14:16 --- I had cleaned the builddir already. Adding #include cstddef solves the problem. The crucial file seems to be lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.6.0/include/stddef.h Only if it is (indirectly) included, ptrdiff_t is

[Bug middle-end/44416] [4.6 regression] Failed to build 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006

2010-06-04 Thread singler at kit dot edu
--- Comment #3 from singler at kit dot edu 2010-06-04 14:19 --- Bug 44417 is very likely to have the same cause, but here, we can reproduce it more easily, using the testsuite. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 44417 *** -- singler at kit dot edu changed:

[Bug libstdc++/44417] make check-target-libstdc++-v3 fails due to undefined ptrdiff_t

2010-06-04 Thread singler at kit dot edu
--- Comment #3 from singler at kit dot edu 2010-06-04 14:19 --- *** Bug 44416 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- singler at kit dot edu changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug libstdc++/44417] make check-target-libstdc++-v3 fails due to undefined ptrdiff_t

2010-06-04 Thread paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-04 14:23 --- To be clear: does a normal 'make check' (either from the root of the build dir or from inside the library build dir) work? Because it works here and fo everybody else on the testresult mailing list, also for

[Bug libstdc++/44417] make check-target-libstdc++-v3 fails due to undefined ptrdiff_t

2010-06-04 Thread paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-04 14:28 --- Hey, 44416 is *not* a duplicate! Please re-open it immediately. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44417

[Bug middle-end/44416] [4.6 regression] Failed to build 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006

2010-06-04 Thread paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-04 14:29 --- Not a duplicate, another issue. -- paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug lto/42776] LTO doesn't work on non-ELF platforms.

2010-06-04 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #49 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 14:33 --- Subject: Bug 42776 Author: ro Date: Fri Jun 4 14:32:19 2010 New Revision: 160269 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160269 Log: Backport from mainline: 2010-04-27 Dave Korn

[Bug middle-end/44382] Slow integer multiply

2010-06-04 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 14:40 --- tree-ssa-reassoc.c has 2. Left linearization of the expression trees, so that (A+B)+(C+D) becomes (((A+B)+C)+D), which is easier for us to rewrite later. During linearization, we place the operands of

[Bug libstdc++/44417] make check-target-libstdc++-v3 fails due to undefined ptrdiff_t

2010-06-04 Thread paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-04 14:52 --- Note that cxxabi.h already includes stddef.h and at that line 371 uses ptrdiff_t unqualified, thus everything is fine. I suspect you simply forgot to update your compiler, because the current library does not

[Bug libstdc++/44417] make check-target-libstdc++-v3 fails due to undefined ptrdiff_t

2010-06-04 Thread paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comment #7 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-04 14:55 --- Closing. -- paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug middle-end/44416] [4.6 regression] Failed to build 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006

2010-06-04 Thread jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 14:56 --- I don't have the SPEC benchmarks either, but probably deal.II uses ptrdiff_t unqualified, without explicitly including either cstddef or stddef.h

[Bug middle-end/44416] [4.6 regression] Failed to build 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006

2010-06-04 Thread jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com
--- Comment #6 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 15:00 --- certainly true for an older version http://ganymed.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de/~deal/5.2.0/doxygen/deal.II/block__vector_8h.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44416

[Bug c/25880] improve message of warning for discarding qualifiers

2010-06-04 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 15:16 --- Subject: Bug 25880 Author: manu Date: Fri Jun 4 15:15:38 2010 New Revision: 160274 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160274 Log: 2010-06-04 Manuel López-Ibáñez m...@gcc.gnu.org PR

[Bug lto/40702] lto-elf.c fails to compile on Solaris

2010-06-04 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE
--- Comment #12 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE 2010-06-04 15:21 --- Subject: Re: lto-elf.c fails to compile on Solaris --- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-03 13:47 --- The problem seems to have vanished, so eventually the fix can be

[Bug c/25880] improve message of warning for discarding qualifiers

2010-06-04 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 15:21 --- The infrastructure to enable this has been added in GCC 4.6 and some diagnostics are already making use of it, in particular the one reported here. So I consider this FIXED. If anyone finds particular diagnostics

[Bug c++/44244] Provide -f flags to turn on individual C++0x features

2010-06-04 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 15:50 --- I am going to close this as WONTFIX for the following reasons: * We do not want this because: a) We have too many options. b) These options would be of very limited and temporary use but we will have to support

[Bug middle-end/44307] warning: may be used uninitialized in this function often building gcc

2010-06-04 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 15:56 --- Hi Jay, -Wuninitialized is quite unreliable in old compilers and also we do not know what patches Apple applies to its copy of GCC. This is why -Werror is not used in the first stage of building GCC. We do not see

[Bug web/44269] Search for PR number in mailing lists fails

2010-06-04 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 15:59 --- Who is in charge of GCC infrastructure (wiki, mailing lists, bugzilla)? I am afraid there is no one, so this is not going to be fixed soon. Meanwhile use Google. -- manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

[Bug c++/44285] Need an option that will create symbols for all public c++ methods, not only for those which bodies are outside the class declaration

2010-06-04 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 16:03 --- As mentioned in the comments above, there is an easy way to achieve this already without needing to make the compiler more complex and slower. So I will close this as WONTFIX. -- manu at gcc dot gnu dot org

[Bug c++/44172] Compiling never ends

2010-06-04 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 16:11 --- Please fellow GCC maintainers, after checking that a bug is indeed a bug, please set the status to NEW. What more than 1000 unconfirmed reports! -- manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug middle-end/44307] warning: may be used uninitialized in this function often building gcc

2010-06-04 Thread jay dot krell at cornell dot edu
--- Comment #5 from jay dot krell at cornell dot edu 2010-06-04 16:20 --- Then don't use when I -disable-bootstrap.. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44307

[Bug middle-end/44307] warning: may be used uninitialized in this function often building gcc

2010-06-04 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 16:22 --- (In reply to comment #5) Then don't use when I -disable-bootstrap.. Do you mean that -Werror is used when you disable-bootstrap? If so, I think that is a bug. Or you mean to not use warnings? I think that would be

[Bug middle-end/44307] warning: may be used uninitialized in this function often building gcc

2010-06-04 Thread jay dot krell at cornell dot edu
--- Comment #7 from jay dot krell at cornell dot edu 2010-06-04 16:30 --- I mean -Wuninitialized. -Werror is already omitted. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44307

[Bug middle-end/44416] [4.6 regression] Failed to build 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006

2010-06-04 Thread bangerth at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 16:36 --- As the author of the benchmark I can confirm that we apparently forgot to include the proper header file. So you can call it a defect in 447.dealII. The question is how to deal with this, of course. W. -- bangerth

[Bug bootstrap/44307] do not enable warnings when building with the host compiler

2010-06-04 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 16:36 --- -Wuninitialized is enabled by -Wall (or perhaps -Wextra), not explicitly. I think we should not enable any warnings when building with the host compiler, unless the user requests them. It is probably faster and would

[Bug tree-optimization/44258] [4.5/4.6 Regression] possible SRA wrong-code generation.

2010-06-04 Thread maksim at kde dot org
--- Comment #7 from maksim at kde dot org 2010-06-04 16:38 --- Created an attachment (id=20839) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20839action=view) Preprocessed source Actually, never mind that --- got it on x86-64 from an another KDEer (credit to Alex Fiestas). --

[Bug middle-end/44416] [4.6 regression] Failed to build 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006

2010-06-04 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 16:40 --- (In reply to comment #7) As the author of the benchmark I can confirm that we apparently forgot to include the proper header file. So you can call it a defect in 447.dealII. The question is how to deal with this,

[Bug tree-optimization/44406] wrong code generation with -ftree-sra

2010-06-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 16:42 --- Thanks for a nice testcase. I've been looking at this briefly today and so far I am inclined to say that this is not SRA's fault. First, I have identified the function that is miscompiled

[Bug debug/41371] [4.5/4.6 Regression] var-tracking is slow and memory hungry

2010-06-04 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #38 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 16:42 --- Subject: Bug 41371 Author: jakub Date: Fri Jun 4 16:42:27 2010 New Revision: 160280 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160280 Log: PR debug/41371 * var-tracking.c

[Bug rtl-optimization/44013] VTA produces wrong code

2010-06-04 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 16:44 --- Subject: Bug 44013 Author: jakub Date: Fri Jun 4 16:43:42 2010 New Revision: 160281 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160281 Log: PR rtl-optimization/44013 * sched-deps.c

[Bug debug/41371] [4.5/4.6 Regression] var-tracking is slow and memory hungry

2010-06-04 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #39 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 16:48 --- Subject: Bug 41371 Author: jakub Date: Fri Jun 4 16:47:41 2010 New Revision: 160282 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160282 Log: PR debug/41371 * var-tracking.c

[Bug libstdc++/44413] inefficient code for std::string::compare on x86-64

2010-06-04 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 16:52 --- Seems like a reasonable suggestion for improvement. I don't know if anyone relies on the current behaviour, so it might not get changed. -- redi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug target/40419] __attribute__((mips16)) is broken on trunk.

2010-06-04 Thread zadeck at naturalbridge dot com
--- Comment #2 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2010-06-04 17:18 --- I would just like to say that i think that target_reinit should be removed. It is nothing but trouble. We tried to use it on our private port and it was very slow and most of the time ended up crashing.

[Bug target/44364] Wrong code with e500 double floating point

2010-06-04 Thread Kyle dot D dot Moffett at boeing dot com
--- Comment #17 from Kyle dot D dot Moffett at boeing dot com 2010-06-04 17:24 --- Created an attachment (id=20840) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20840action=view) Minimal test with -O1 I've managed to shrink this down to a 44-line testcase that fails with the

[Bug target/44364] Wrong code with e500 double floating point

2010-06-04 Thread Kyle dot D dot Moffett at boeing dot com
--- Comment #18 from Kyle dot D dot Moffett at boeing dot com 2010-06-04 17:24 --- Created an attachment (id=20841) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20841action=view) Minimal test objdump with -O1 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44364

[Bug testsuite/44418] New: FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/recip-[123].c on powerpc-apple-darwin9

2010-06-04 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
Since revision 160215 (see http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-06/msg00263.html ) one gets the following failures on powerpc-apple-darwin9: FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/recip-1.c scan-assembler-times frsqrte 2 FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/recip-1.c scan-assembler-times fmsub 2 FAIL:

[Bug libgcj/44415] [4.6 regression] gmp multilib support broke bootstrap with static libgmp

2010-06-04 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 17:48 --- First off this is not a regression; I ran into this issue back a couple of years ago with libjava requiring libgmp. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44415

[Bug libgcj/44415] [4.6 regression] gmp multilib support broke bootstrap with static libgmp

2010-06-04 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 17:49 --- See PR 39747. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|

[Bug testsuite/44418] FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/recip-[123].c on powerpc-apple-darwin9

2010-06-04 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #1 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-06-04 17:52 --- Created an attachment (id=20842) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20842action=view) assembly for recip-1.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44418

[Bug testsuite/44418] FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/recip-[123].c on powerpc-apple-darwin9

2010-06-04 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-06-04 17:52 --- Created an attachment (id=20843) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20843action=view) assembly for recip-2.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44418

[Bug testsuite/44418] FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/recip-[123].c on powerpc-apple-darwin9

2010-06-04 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #3 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-06-04 17:52 --- Created an attachment (id=20844) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20844action=view) assembly for recip-3.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44418

[Bug c++/44244] Provide -f flags to turn on individual C++0x features

2010-06-04 Thread jyasskin at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from jyasskin at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 17:56 --- Thanks for the prompt answers. I understand that you've picked the right direction for gcc as a whole, even though it'll inconvenience me temporarily. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44244

[Bug target/44132] [4.6 Regression] emutls is broken under a range of circumstances.

2010-06-04 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #39 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-06-04 18:25 --- I confirm that the failures for libjava reported in comment #33 were due to some misconfiguration. With the patches in http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20762 and

[Bug c++/44362] Bogus set-but-not-used warning

2010-06-04 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 18:43 --- Subject: Bug 44362 Author: jakub Date: Fri Jun 4 18:42:42 2010 New Revision: 160289 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160289 Log: PR c++/44362 * call.c (build_conditional_expr): If

[Bug target/44132] [4.6 Regression] emutls is broken under a range of circumstances.

2010-06-04 Thread iains at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #40 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 18:45 --- (In reply to comment #39) I confirm that the failures for libjava reported in comment #33 were due to some misconfiguration. With the patches in http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20762 and

[Bug c++/44412] [4.6 Regression] Another bogus set-but-not-used warning

2010-06-04 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 18:46 --- Subject: Bug 44412 Author: jakub Date: Fri Jun 4 18:45:07 2010 New Revision: 160290 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160290 Log: PR c++/44412 * typeck.c

[Bug libstdc++/44417] make check-target-libstdc++-v3 fails due to undefined ptrdiff_t

2010-06-04 Thread singler at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from singler at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 18:51 --- I can't help it, make check in the libstdc++-v3 directory still does not work for me, even after reconfiguring and recompiling everything from scratch, using vanilla rev 160275. Let's have a look at attached

[Bug libstdc++/44417] make check-target-libstdc++-v3 fails due to undefined ptrdiff_t

2010-06-04 Thread singler at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from singler at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 18:51 --- Created an attachment (id=20845) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20845action=view) Failing test case. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44417

[Bug libstdc++/44417] make check-target-libstdc++-v3 fails due to undefined ptrdiff_t

2010-06-04 Thread paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comment #10 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-04 18:55 --- Something is broken in your system, I also tested on an Open Suse 11.1, to be sure, and everything works fine. Remove everything, fetch again the entire gcc mainline and try again. -- paolo dot carlini at

[Bug rtl-optimization/43632] [4.5/4.6 Regression] -g option became very slow after r157834

2010-06-04 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 19:34 --- After the recent var-tracking.c PR41371 changes this is down to 67 seconds. -- jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug preprocessor/7263] __extension__ keyword doesn't suppress warning on LL or ULL constants

2010-06-04 Thread dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #25 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 19:36 --- Created an attachment (id=20846) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20846action=view) Fixes all regressions of C FE's testsuite This update fixes all the regressions I have noticed in the test suite

[Bug pch/14933] missing pre-compiled header depends with -MD

2010-06-04 Thread kristiaan dot lenaerts at gmail dot com
--- Comment #13 from kristiaan dot lenaerts at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 20:10 --- Created an attachment (id=20847) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20847action=view) Updated fix for improper PCH dependency tracking I got hit by this bug a few weeks ago when working

[Bug middle-end/44416] [4.6 regression] Failed to build 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006

2010-06-04 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-06-04 20:15 --- Created an attachment (id=20848) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20848action=view) The src.alt for 447.dealII This works for me. Can someone try it? --

[Bug preprocessor/7263] __extension__ keyword doesn't suppress warning on LL or ULL constants

2010-06-04 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #26 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 20:22 --- (In reply to comment #25) $ ./cc1 -quiet test.c While expanding macro OPERATE at test.c:2:8 While expanding macro SHIFTL at test.c:5:14 While expanding macro MULT2 at test.c:8:3 test.c: In function 'g':

[Bug c/44419] New: ICE when building for Freescale e500v2

2010-06-04 Thread edmar at freescale dot com
When building gcc for e500v2: --target=powerpc-unknown-linux-gnuspe --enable-e500_double The build stops with an ICE: /tmp/edmar/build_jobs/Xe500v2/obj_gccsys/./gcc/xgcc -B/tmp/edmar/build_jobs/Xe500v2/obj_gccsys/./gcc/

[Bug middle-end/44420] New: [feature request] Warn for certain integer overflows

2010-06-04 Thread fm3 at os dot inf dot tu-dresden dot de
This is a follow-up to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2010-06/msg5.html : Consider the following case: uint32_t foo, bar; ... foo = bar 20; Of course, this operation can overflow and warning about this probably does not make sense as the programmer should be aware of this case.

[Bug fortran/37131] inline matmul for small matrix sizes

2010-06-04 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 22:31 --- I have thought a little bit about this, and the problem is a bit daunting ;-) Of course, this is at least partly because my experience with the scalarizer is close to non-existant, but you have to learn sometime.

[Bug fortran/44235] array temporary with high upper bound

2010-06-04 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-04 22:39 --- The particular test case from comment #1 is now fixed. Here's one that still fails: subroutine foo(a, b) real :: a(40), b(40) a(1:20:3) = a(1:19:3) a(1:19:3) = a(1:19:3) end subroutine foo

  1   2   >