[Bug middle-end/48689] [4.7 Regression] ICE in fold-const.c:13798 with fold checking

2011-09-18 Thread jye2 at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48689 --- Comment #4 from jye2 at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-19 06:17:54 UTC --- Author: jye2 Date: Mon Sep 19 06:17:45 2011 New Revision: 178953 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178953 Log: 2011-09-19 chengbin Backport r174035

[Bug target/43872] VLAs are not aligned correctly on ARM

2011-09-18 Thread jye2 at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43872 --- Comment #7 from jye2 at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-19 06:17:57 UTC --- Author: jye2 Date: Mon Sep 19 06:17:45 2011 New Revision: 178953 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178953 Log: 2011-09-19 chengbin Backport r174035

[Bug target/48250] ICE in reload_cse_simplify_operands, at postreload.c:403

2011-09-18 Thread jye2 at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48250 --- Comment #6 from jye2 at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-19 06:17:55 UTC --- Author: jye2 Date: Mon Sep 19 06:17:45 2011 New Revision: 178953 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178953 Log: 2011-09-19 chengbin Backport r174035

[Bug target/43920] Choosing conditional execution over conditional branches for code size in some cases.

2011-09-18 Thread jye2 at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43920 --- Comment #15 from jye2 at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-19 06:17:54 UTC --- Author: jye2 Date: Mon Sep 19 06:17:45 2011 New Revision: 178953 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178953 Log: 2011-09-19 chengbin Backport r17403

[Bug target/46934] gcc ICE: error: unrecognizable insn: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2109

2011-09-18 Thread jye2 at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46934 --- Comment #7 from jye2 at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-19 06:17:58 UTC --- Author: jye2 Date: Mon Sep 19 06:17:45 2011 New Revision: 178953 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178953 Log: 2011-09-19 chengbin Backport r174035

[Bug middle-end/49886] [4.6/4.7 Regression] pass_split_functions cannot deal with function type attributes

2011-09-18 Thread terry.guo at arm dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49886 Terry Guo changed: What|Removed |Added CC||terry.guo at arm dot com --- Comment #8 from

[Bug bootstrap/48120] libpwl test must use g++

2011-09-18 Thread jye2 at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48120 --- Comment #5 from jye2 at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-19 05:39:11 UTC --- Author: jye2 Date: Mon Sep 19 05:39:05 2011 New Revision: 178951 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178951 Log: 2011-09-19 Joey Ye Backport r171

[Bug tree-optimization/50452] [4.7 Regression] Internal compiler error: verify_flow_info failed

2011-09-18 Thread d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50452 --- Comment #3 from Dmitry Gorbachev 2011-09-19 00:59:13 UTC --- Created attachment 25315 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25315 Another backtrace

[Bug tree-optimization/50452] [4.7 Regression] Internal compiler error: verify_flow_info failed

2011-09-18 Thread d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50452 --- Comment #2 from Dmitry Gorbachev 2011-09-19 00:58:39 UTC --- Created attachment 25314 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25314 Another testcase (compile with -O2)

[Bug tree-optimization/50452] [4.7 Regression] Internal compiler error: verify_flow_info failed

2011-09-18 Thread d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50452 --- Comment #1 from Dmitry Gorbachev 2011-09-19 00:57:57 UTC --- Created attachment 25313 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25313 Backtrace in GDB

[Bug tree-optimization/50452] New: [4.7 Regression] Internal compiler error: verify_flow_info failed

2011-09-18 Thread d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50452 Bug #: 50452 Summary: [4.7 Regression] Internal compiler error: verify_flow_info failed Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug lto/50432] lto1.exe: internal compiler error: in cgraph_mark_functions_to_output, at cgraphunit.c:1173 when build Qt4.7.4 rcc

2011-09-18 Thread xunxun1982 at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50432 --- Comment #2 from xunxun 2011-09-19 00:46:03 UTC --- It's strange that after I update to gcc4.6.2.20110916, the issue is gone. I review my earlier build process, and I found that the issue only came out if you built your gcc with "-flto".

[Bug tree-optimization/35261] GCC4.3 internal compiler error: verify_flow_info failed

2011-09-18 Thread d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35261 --- Comment #4 from Dmitry Gorbachev 2011-09-18 23:54:58 UTC --- 4.3 is not maintained -- should this bug be closed?

[Bug fortran/50410] [4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE in record_reference

2011-09-18 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50410 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug lto/50394] [meta-bug] Issues with building libreoffice with LTO

2011-09-18 Thread hubicka at ucw dot cz
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50394 --- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka 2011-09-18 22:32:35 UTC --- > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50394 > > --- Comment #13 from Markus Trippelsdorf > 2011-09-17 21:42:57 UTC --- > (In reply to comment #12) > > (In reply to comment #1

[Bug target/50091] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] -fstack-check generates wrong assembly

2011-09-18 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50091 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug target/50091] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] -fstack-check generates wrong assembly

2011-09-18 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50091 --- Comment #18 from Eric Botcazou 2011-09-18 22:02:31 UTC --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Sun Sep 18 22:02:27 2011 New Revision: 178946 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178946 Log: PR target/50091 * config/rs6000/rs6000

[Bug target/50091] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] -fstack-check generates wrong assembly

2011-09-18 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50091 --- Comment #17 from Eric Botcazou 2011-09-18 22:02:01 UTC --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Sun Sep 18 22:01:56 2011 New Revision: 178945 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178945 Log: PR target/50091 * config/rs6000/rs6000

[Bug target/50091] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] -fstack-check generates wrong assembly

2011-09-18 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50091 --- Comment #16 from Eric Botcazou 2011-09-18 22:00:57 UTC --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Sun Sep 18 22:00:52 2011 New Revision: 178944 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178944 Log: PR target/50091 * config/rs6000/rs6000

[Bug fortran/50410] [4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE in record_reference

2011-09-18 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50410 --- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-18 18:20:57 UTC --- The problem for the code in comment #2 seems different: it gives a segmentation fault with 4.6.1 and trunk and an ICE with 4.4.6 and 4.5.3: f951: internal compiler error: in fo

[Bug fortran/50410] [4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE in record_reference

2011-09-18 Thread zeccav at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50410 --- Comment #2 from Vittorio Zecca 2011-09-18 17:38:10 UTC --- The following produces a Segmentation fault in gfc_conv_structure (r178925) type t integer g end type type(t) :: u=t(1) data u%g /2/ end

[Bug middle-end/50451] [4.7 regression] internal compiler error at tree-vect-loop.c:3557

2011-09-18 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50451 --- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-18 16:53:07 UTC --- This is not a duplicate of pr50343 since this pr is present at revision 178942.

[Bug middle-end/50451] [4.7 regression] internal compiler error at tree-vect-loop.c:3557

2011-09-18 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50451 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenther at suse dot de --- Comme

[Bug middle-end/50451] [4.7 regression] internal compiler error at tree-vect-loop.c:3557

2011-09-18 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50451 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/50450] /usr/include/c++/4.6/bits/stl_set.h ifdef __GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX0X__

2011-09-18 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50450 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/50451] New: [4.7 regression] internal compiler error at tree-vect-loop.c:3557

2011-09-18 Thread jojelino at gmail dot com
ges=c,c++,lto --with-win32-nlsapi=unicode --enable-tls --disable-bootstrap --enable-shared --disable-sjlj-exceptions --enable-gomp --enable-cloog-backend=isl Thread model: win32 gcc version 4.7.0 20110918 (experimental) (GCC) COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-D' 'HAVE_MKSTEMP' '-D

[Bug c++/50450] New: /usr/include/c++/4.6/bits/stl_set.h ifdef __GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX0X__

2011-09-18 Thread luc.castermans at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50450 Bug #: 50450 Summary: /usr/include/c++/4.6/bits/stl_set.h ifdef __GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX0X__ Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCON

[Bug target/50449] [avr] Loading some 32 constants not optimal

2011-09-18 Thread gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50449 Georg-Johann Lay changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/50449] New: [avr] Loading some 32 constants not optimal

2011-09-18 Thread gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50449 Bug #: 50449 Summary: [avr] Loading some 32 constants not optimal Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization

[Bug target/50448] [avr] Missed optimization accessing struct component with known, absolute address.

2011-09-18 Thread gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50448 Georg-Johann Lay changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/50448] New: [avr] Missed optimization accessing struct component with known, absolute address.

2011-09-18 Thread gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50448 Bug #: 50448 Summary: [avr] Missed optimization accessing struct component with known, absolute address. Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1 Stat

[Bug testsuite/50435] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-25.c (-flto)? scan-tree-dump-times slp "basic block vectorized using SLP" 1

2011-09-18 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50435 --- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-18 13:11:59 UTC --- > Thanks, I'll commit it. Thanks for the quick fix. I'ld like to leave this pr open until someone figure out what's wrong with darwin and __restrict. Note that I have replac

[Bug target/50447] [avr] Better support of AND, OR, XOR and PLUS with constant integers for 16- and 32-bit values

2011-09-18 Thread gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50447 Georg-Johann Lay changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Keywords|

[Bug target/50447] New: [avr] Better support of AND, OR, XOR and PLUS with constant integers for 16- and 32-bit values

2011-09-18 Thread gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50447 Bug #: 50447 Summary: [avr] Better support of AND, OR, XOR and PLUS with constant integers for 16- and 32-bit values Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1

[Bug target/50446] [avr] Implement rotate patterns with offset 1

2011-09-18 Thread gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50446 --- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-09-18 12:36:59 UTC --- Created attachment 25310 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25310 rotate.c Some test cases

[Bug target/50446] [avr] Implement rotate patterns with offset 1

2011-09-18 Thread gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50446 Georg-Johann Lay changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/50446] New: [avr] Implement rotate patterns with offset 1

2011-09-18 Thread gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50446 Bug #: 50446 Summary: [avr] Implement rotate patterns with offset 1 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization

[Bug target/33049] [avr] bit extraction non optimal, inversing logic solves problem

2011-09-18 Thread gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33049 --- Comment #20 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-09-18 12:22:58 UTC --- See also http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/avr-gcc-list/2008-12/msg9.html

[Bug tree-optimization/50414] [4.7 Regression] gfortran -Ofast SIGSEGV in store_constructor

2011-09-18 Thread irar at il dot ibm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50414 Ira Rosen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug testsuite/50435] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-25.c (-flto)? scan-tree-dump-times slp "basic block vectorized using SLP" 1

2011-09-18 Thread irar at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50435 --- Comment #11 from irar at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-18 11:41:48 UTC --- Author: irar Date: Sun Sep 18 11:41:43 2011 New Revision: 178942 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178942 Log: PR testsuite/50435 * gcc.dg/vect/b

[Bug tree-optimization/50414] [4.7 Regression] gfortran -Ofast SIGSEGV in store_constructor

2011-09-18 Thread irar at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50414 --- Comment #5 from irar at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-18 11:36:22 UTC --- Author: irar Date: Sun Sep 18 11:36:15 2011 New Revision: 178941 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178941 Log: PR tree-optimization/50414

[Bug testsuite/50435] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-25.c (-flto)? scan-tree-dump-times slp "basic block vectorized using SLP" 1

2011-09-18 Thread irar at il dot ibm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50435 --- Comment #10 from Ira Rosen 2011-09-18 10:55:19 UTC --- Thanks, I'll commit it.

[Bug testsuite/50435] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-25.c (-flto)? scan-tree-dump-times slp "basic block vectorized using SLP" 1

2011-09-18 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50435 --- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-18 10:54:14 UTC --- > Looks like there is a difference ;) > I guess it succeeds with the patch to avoid loop vectorization and the fix of > restrict together? Here is the patched test that gives

[Bug testsuite/50435] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-25.c (-flto)? scan-tree-dump-times slp "basic block vectorized using SLP" 1

2011-09-18 Thread irar at il dot ibm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50435 --- Comment #8 from Ira Rosen 2011-09-18 10:48:43 UTC --- Looks like there is a difference ;) I guess it succeeds with the patch to avoid loop vectorization and the fix of restrict together?

[Bug testsuite/50435] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-25.c (-flto)? scan-tree-dump-times slp "basic block vectorized using SLP" 1

2011-09-18 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50435 --- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-18 10:45:08 UTC --- Note that the test succeeds if I replace '* __restrict' with '*__restrict__'

[Bug testsuite/50435] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-25.c (-flto)? scan-tree-dump-times slp "basic block vectorized using SLP" 1

2011-09-18 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50435 --- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-18 10:41:09 UTC --- > Does darwin have a known problem with restrict? None I am aware of. BTW what is the difference between '*__restrict__' and '* __restrict' (or '* __restrict__')?

[Bug tree-optimization/50413] [4.6/4.7 Regression] Incorrect instruction is used to shift value of 128 bit xmm0 registrer

2011-09-18 Thread irar at il dot ibm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50413 --- Comment #7 from Ira Rosen 2011-09-18 10:17:12 UTC --- Right. The data-refs analysis fails for the bit assignment, and SLP marks this statement as not vectorizable and continues with the vectorization of other statements, which is incorrect be

[Bug tree-optimization/50412] gfortran -Ofast ICE in vect_do_peeling_for_loop_bound

2011-09-18 Thread irar at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50412 --- Comment #3 from irar at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-18 08:59:58 UTC --- Author: irar Date: Sun Sep 18 08:59:52 2011 New Revision: 178940 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178940 Log: PR tree-optimization/50412

[Bug testsuite/50435] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-25.c (-flto)? scan-tree-dump-times slp "basic block vectorized using SLP" 1

2011-09-18 Thread irar at il dot ibm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50435 --- Comment #5 from Ira Rosen 2011-09-18 08:52:56 UTC --- Thanks. Data dependence analysis can't determine dependence between src and dst although they have _restrict_, and it works fine on x86_64-suse-linux for example... Does darwin have a kno

[Bug libstdc++/50441] [C++0x] is missing GNU extension types

2011-09-18 Thread marc.glisse at normalesup dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50441 --- Comment #14 from Marc Glisse 2011-09-18 06:28:32 UTC --- (In reply to comment #10) > I'd like to have some help about the best way to figure out whether the target > supports __int128_t and __uint128_t: is __CHAR_BIT__ * __SIZEOF_LONG__ >= 64