Some test cases in the guality testsuite change between UNSUPPORTED and
PASS/FAIL depending on system load. I have observed this today on gcc16.
Dave Korn has posted an analysis here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-04/msg00742.html
I concur that we should test for gdb being unable to understand
--with-build-config=bootstrap-lto ... ; make -j8 fails here in the second stage
with several configure errors in multiple subdirs (zlib, lto-plugin)
--
Summary: --with-build-config=bootstrap-lto fails
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #1 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-07-10 08:15 ---
Error happens even without -j8, so no race
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44899
--- Comment #2 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-07-10 08:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=21171)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21171action=view)
zlib config.log
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44899
I'm using gcc-4.5.0-1 of MinGW with Intel x86.
When I execute the following test code with '-O -msse' compiler options, it
outputs the wrong value.
I'm expecting that v2.e[3] will be 7.0f.
And, when I exclude LINE_A, LINE_B, LINE_C or LINE_D as a comment, the program
outputs the expected value.
--- Comment #3 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-07-10 08:30 ---
What happens during the config stage is:
configure:2978: checking for C compiler default output file name
configure:3000: /home/andi/gcc/git/obj/./prev-gcc/xgcc
-B/home/andi/gcc/git/obj/./prev-gcc/
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 08:32 ---
Please specify what ... is.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 08:35 ---
Closing as fixed.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 08:38 ---
Closing as fixed.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 08:40 ---
Subject: Bug 44889
Author: rguenth
Date: Sat Jul 10 08:39:46 2010
New Revision: 162032
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162032
Log:
2010-07-10 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
PR
--- Comment #5 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-07-10 08:40 ---
See comment #3
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44899
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 08:41 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #8 from bugtrack at roumenpetrov dot info 2010-07-10 08:56
---
Bug cannot be resolved with updates in libjava/Makefile. You could see my
comments in issue #40868 (clone of #30591)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40868
--- Comment #9 from bugtrack at roumenpetrov dot info 2010-07-10 08:57
---
*** Bug 42311 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
bugtrack at roumenpetrov dot info changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from bugtrack at roumenpetrov dot info 2010-07-10 08:57
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 40868 ***
--
bugtrack at roumenpetrov dot info changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 09:38 ---
The patch in comment #4 regresses on select_type_4.f90 in the test suite.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44869
--- Comment #54 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 09:40
---
Subject: Bug 44832
Author: amylaar
Date: Sat Jul 10 09:40:36 2010
New Revision: 162035
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162035
Log:
2010-07-10 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
--- Comment #2 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-07-10 10:06 ---
This test now also fails with 4.5 branch on powerpc64. It's a recent
regression, introduced somewhere between 20100701 and 20100708.
The -fdump-tree-vect-details file shows:
fgrep vectorized vect-109.c.110t.vect
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 10:08 ---
Created an attachment (id=21172)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21172action=view)
somewhat reduced testcase
Two files, but still way too large (reduced at topflatform level 0 to not mess
up
--- Comment #3 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-07-10 10:30 ---
It now also fails with 4.5 branch on sparc64-linux, with identical
-fdump-tree-vect-details as for powerpc64. With 4.6 it fails on ARM with
identical reason since 20100529.
I'm thinking this hunk in the PR44284 fix is
--- Comment #7 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 10:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=21173)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21173action=view)
improve robustness of runtime option choices.
This should resolve the case where -fnext-runtime would be
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 10:40 ---
We fail to merge
type_decl 0x75a000b8 nsINode
type record_type 0x759f6a80 nsINode addressable needs-constructing BLK
size integer_cst 0x75b0cde8 constant 512
unit size integer_cst
We currently have a bootstrap-lean failure on tree-predcom.c .
The preprocessed file shows a compare-debug failure for
gcc (GCC) 4.6.0 20100708 (experimental), but not for
gcc (GCC) 4.6.0 20100705 (experimental), gcc (GCC) 4.6.0 20100630
(experimental)
or gcc (GCC) 4.4.4 20100630 (Red Hat
--- Comment #1 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 10:53 ---
Created an attachment (id=21174)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21174action=view)
test case - compressed with xz
$ ./bld-20100708/gcc/xgcc -B./bld-20100708/gcc -c -fpreprocessed -g -O2
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 11:00 ---
Field types not compatible.
field 0x75754d10 mNextSibling
field 0x75974428 mNextSibling
Field types not compatible.
field 0x75754da8 mPreviousSibling
field 0x759744c0 mPreviousSibling
Field types not
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 11:21 ---
Somewhere down in type
0x757497e0 struct nsRefreshDriver
0x75964348 struct nsRefreshDriver
(gdb) call debug_type_differences (0x757497e0, 0x75964348)
Hashes differ.
Field types not compatible.
type
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 11:26 ---
gcc 4.5+ requires gdb 7.0+, so I'd say this is a user error.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44898
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 12:10 ---
On the unreduced testcase:
struct PLHashTable
Hashes differ.
Field names do not compare equal.
field 0x75651da8 allocPool
field 0x753beed8 allocPriv
both PLHashTables declared at
gcc 4.6.0 20100709 trunk + newlib 1.18 HEAD (as cygnus build) configured as:
configure --target=arm-unknown-eabi
--prefix=/home/joty/projects/gccsdk/riscos7/cross
--with-gmp=/home/joty/projects/gccsdk/gccsdk_svn7/gcc4/builddir/installed-libs-for-cross-gcc
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.6 Regression] -fcompare- |[4.6 Regression] -fcompare-
|debug failure for C++
--- Comment #17 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 14:57 ---
Subject: Bug 44773
Author: pault
Date: Sat Jul 10 14:57:25 2010
New Revision: 162038
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162038
Log:
2010-07-10 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR
--- Comment #1 from yottui at yahoo dot co dot jp 2010-07-10 15:12 ---
Also, I reproduced it on gcc45 of MacPorts 1.9.1 with '-O -m32 -msse' compiler
options.
At that time, I modified errno of the test code.
--- test.old.cpp2010-07-10 23:27:22.0 +0900
+++ test.new.cpp
Wrong code is generated causing bus error in test(gdb):
(gdb) r
Program received signal SIGBUS, Bus error.
0x2b48 in bar ()
(gdb) disass
Dump of assembler code for function bar:
0x2b40 +0: addil L%-800,dp,r1
0x2b44 +4: ldo 780(r1),r1
= 0x2b48 +8: ldw 1(r1),ret0
These seems to be last kind of warnings I can not debug in Mozilla. Might be
bogus but I don't see how.
Honza
j...@evans:/abuild/jh/mozilla-central/build10/layout/style
/abuild/jh/trunk-install/bin/g++ -O2 -flto -r -nostdlib tc/*.ii
../../../layout/style/nsCSSStyleRule.cpp: In
--- Comment #1 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 15:24 ---
Created an attachment (id=21175)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21175action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44904
--- Comment #6 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 15:35 ---
Subject: Bug 44659
Author: hjl
Date: Sat Jul 10 15:35:04 2010
New Revision: 162040
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162040
Log:
Fix combine to match QI cmp patterns with upper 8bit register.
gcc/
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-07-10 15:37 ---
It is caused by revision 161862:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-07/msg00216.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
With the proposed fix for building gcc trunk with --enable-build-with-cxx on
darwin applied...
2009-10-02 Jack Howarth howa...@bromo.med.uc.edu
PR target/44862
* Makefile.tpl (POSTSTAGE1_CXX_EXPORT):
Provide -B option to allow for link spec %s substitutions for
amita...@whileliesent-lm:~/data/prog/c++/template_ptr$g++ -v -o template
template.cpp
Using built-in specs.
Target: i486-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Ubuntu 4.4.3-4ubuntu5'
--with-bugurl=file:///usr/share/doc/gcc-4.4/README.Bugs
--- Comment #1 from raychaudhuri_amitava at yahoo dot com 2010-07-10 15:44
---
Created an attachment (id=21176)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21176action=view)
Code which is failing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44906
--- Comment #2 from raychaudhuri_amitava at yahoo dot com 2010-07-10 15:44
---
Created an attachment (id=21177)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21177action=view)
.s file generated by -save-temps
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44906
--- Comment #3 from raychaudhuri_amitava at yahoo dot com 2010-07-10 15:45
---
Created an attachment (id=21178)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21178action=view)
.ii file generated by -save-temps
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44906
--- Comment #2 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 16:43 ---
is this still current?
I can't reproduce any compile problems on arm-unknown-eabi or
armel-unknown-gnueabi (as cross-tools hosted under i686-apple-darwin).
--
iains at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 16:46 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
Note that I did not apply the patch to 4.4 as I said that I would. What do
you
think?
4.4 is sufficiently different from 4.5/6 that I am closing this as fixed.
Paul
--
pault at
--- Comment #20 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 17:09 ---
Subject: Bug 44582
Author: pault
Date: Sat Jul 10 17:08:48 2010
New Revision: 162041
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162041
Log:
2010-07-10 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR
--- Comment #18 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 17:09 ---
Subject: Bug 44773
Author: pault
Date: Sat Jul 10 17:08:48 2010
New Revision: 162041
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162041
Log:
2010-07-10 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 17:46 ---
The error message is not clear. The issue is that you are not using a constant
expression for a template arugment. Template arguments are either constant
expressions or types.
--
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 18:20 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
is this still current?
I can't reproduce any compile problems on arm-unknown-eabi or
armel-unknown-gnueabi (as cross-tools hosted under i686-apple-darwin).
You might have fixed them when
--- Comment #12 from sandra at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 18:43 ---
Subject: Bug 42505
Author: sandra
Date: Sat Jul 10 18:43:29 2010
New Revision: 162043
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162043
Log:
2010-07-10 Sandra Loosemore san...@codesourcery.com
--- Comment #5 from raychaudhuri_amitava at yahoo dot com 2010-07-10 18:45
---
(In reply to comment #4)
The error message is not clear. The issue is that you are not using a
constant
expression for a template arugment. Template arguments are either constant
expressions or types.
--- Comment #4 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-07-10 18:49 ---
The issue is still very much there with 4.[456] on arm-linux-gnueabi, see e.g.
the test results I post. In my 4.4 production compiler I apply Ramana's fix,
and it eliminates all objc test failures for me. Haven't
--- Comment #5 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 19:40 ---
I do not see the fails shown in:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-07/msg00563.html
with my current tree [162035] - but I'm using simulator combined tree build -
with glibc from a Debian distribution (I
--- Comment #1 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 19:46 ---
Introduced in revision 161655.
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #24 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 19:48 ---
AFAIK this has been cleared for some time now.
--
iains at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
OK, this time is for real. I have almost ready a library-only is_convertible
which purely uses SFINAE and noticed that apparently we have a remaining issue
with ambiguous bases, not fixed by your recent patch. The testcase goes like
this, I already checked that ICC likes it:
// #include
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-07-10 20:20
---
ARM maintainers, could you please help me triaging this? Thanks.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from sandra at codesourcery dot com 2010-07-10 21:07
---
I just checked to see if this is still a problem. As of r162042, the example
in comment #1 produces the same (bad) output as GCC 4.4.1. However, the example
in comment #4 looks fixed to me, with this output:
--- Comment #4 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2010-07-10 21:10 ---
This is fixed on trunk since r161797. However, this is now a 4.5 regression.
A patch to backport the fix to 4.5 has been posted:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-07/msg00877.html
--
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 21:29 ---
I get for all memory accesses an alignment of 8 at expansion time which looks
correct (on i?86). Please debug this a bit, set_mem_attributes_minus_bitpos
looks conservative enough.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 21:38 ---
Subject: Bug 44325
Author: rguenth
Date: Sat Jul 10 21:38:32 2010
New Revision: 162044
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162044
Log:
2010-07-10 Mikael Pettersson mi...@it.uu.se
PR
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 21:39 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-07-10
21:44 ---
This still looks broken. Under a normal bootstrap, on x86_64-apple-darwin10,
these new testcases are silently executed against the system compiler rather
than the newly built compiler...
Executing on
This is another case where we have a compile-time errors (Ok with ICC). Note,
with swapped From and To types compiles.
struct A { };
struct E
: virtual A { };
templatebool, typename T = void struct enable_if { typedef T type; };
templatetypename T struct enable_iffalse, T { };
templatetypename
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-07-10 22:19
---
Honestly, nothing similar will happen any time soon, it means changing
completely the semantics of templates. Maybe we can produce a better
diagnostics, let's add Manuel in CC to hear his opinion...
--
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2010-07-10
23:34 ---
Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/pr35258.c
execution test
On Sat, 10 Jul 2010, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
I get for all memory accesses an alignment of 8 at expansion time
--- Comment #13 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 00:25 ---
this is still present, AFAICT, for *-*-darwin* at r162047.
Honza, since it was your patch that triggered this, any ideas on what we could
do to debug/solve this one?
in particular this; error: Inline clone with
--- Comment #8 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 01:01 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
Created an attachment (id=21173)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21173action=view) [edit]
...
let me know if it solve that aspect of the problem for you.
Yes, it does.
--- Comment #13 from sandra at codesourcery dot com 2010-07-11 01:22
---
Some further analysis:
The part of my PR42505 patch that made the difference was the change to
estimate_register_pressure_cost in cfgloopanal.c, to make it exclude the
call-clobbered registers. This part was
--- Comment #7 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 01:58 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
This still looks broken. Under a normal bootstrap, on x86_64-apple-darwin10,
these new testcases are silently executed against the system compiler rather
than the newly built compiler...
--- Comment #8 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-07-11
02:36 ---
Perhaps we just need something like...
Index: gcc/Makefile.in
===
--- gcc/Makefile.in (revision 162051)
+++ gcc/Makefile.in
--- Comment #9 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 04:22 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
Perhaps we just need something like...
No, COMPILER uses CC, too.
The issue is the the toplevel Makefile check-gcc rule
forces CC in the gcc/Makefile via EXTRA_HOST_FLAGS
In the native
--- Comment #14 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-07-11 04:58 ---
*** Bug 44590 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-07-11 04:58 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 44121 ***
--
dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
73 matches
Mail list logo
