http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52323
Bug #: 52323
Summary: i386: gcse runs amok with pic-addresses
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52323
--- Comment #1 from Jan Seiffert kaffeemonster at googlemail dot com
2012-02-21 08:15:19 UTC ---
Created attachment 26709
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26709
Testcase exposing gcse hyperactivity with pic on i386
the testcase
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52320
Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52323
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52316
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52318
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
09:24:47 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Feb 21 09:24:42 2012
New Revision: 184428
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184428
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52283
--- Comment #15 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
09:30:11 UTC ---
Created attachment 26710
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26710
patch reverting PR26632
I am testing this. It reverts PR26632 fix and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51782
--- Comment #22 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
09:56:08 UTC ---
btw, what's the right component for the PR? tree-optimization? middle-end?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52297
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
10:13:57 UTC ---
That's (essentially) independent of the target, as it's a pure testsuite issue.
Tests that require linking with -litm should go in libitm/testsuite
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52324
Bug #: 52324
Summary: [4.7 Regression] Store motion no longer performed
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52324
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52325
Bug #: 52325
Summary: unclear error: Unclassifiable statement
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51782
Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |middle-end
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51782
--- Comment #24 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
10:37:40 UTC ---
Unfortunately, with the patch I got following new LTO link failures on
x86_64-linux:
gcc.dg/lto/trans-mem-1 c_lto_trans-mem-1_0.o-c_lto_trans-mem-1_1.o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52320
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52318
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52320
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2012-02-21 10:53:59 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Agreed. It seems that the fix did not solve some array-related corner cases
like this one.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
--- Comment #9 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-02-21 10:56:00 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Feb 21 10:55:54 2012
New Revision: 184430
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184430
Log:
2012-02-21 Paolo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
--- Comment #10 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-02-21 10:56:40 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Feb 21 10:56:34 2012
New Revision: 184431
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184431
Log:
2012-02-21
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52325
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52321
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51782
--- Comment #25 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2012-02-21 11:16:25 UTC ---
Unfortunately, with the patch I got following new LTO link failures on
x86_64-linux:
gcc.dg/lto/trans-mem-1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50043
--- Comment #1 from Michel Morin mimomorin at gmail dot com 2012-02-21
11:51:14 UTC ---
Created attachment 26711
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26711
A testcase for N3204
Attached a testcase for N3204 ;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51782
--- Comment #26 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
11:54:36 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Tue Feb 21 11:54:27 2012
New Revision: 184434
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184434
Log:
PR middle-end/51782
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52080
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48124
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18141
--- Comment #2 from Dinar Temirbulatov dtemirbulatov at gmail dot com
2012-02-21 11:58:23 UTC ---
proposed fix for this issue posted here
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-09/msg01693.html and the GNU copyright
assignment form available upon
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50043
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
12:05:40 UTC ---
We don't want front-end testcases that rely on iostream and need to check
what gets printed. A better test would use static_assert, but would also test
cases
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52314
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52324
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
12:37:37 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Feb 21 12:37:33 2012
New Revision: 184435
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184435
Log:
2012-02-21 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52324
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52326
Bug #: 52326
Summary: float result incorrect with -O1 and calling external
function.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51782
Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52326
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52326
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
13:27:23 UTC ---
Reduced single-file testcase, fails at -O1:
float fabsf(float x);
void abort (void);
static float minf(float a, float b)
{
return (a b) ? a: b;
}
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50981
--- Comment #38 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
13:32:38 UTC ---
Pending trunk patches (approved, but not committed; 4.8?):
- http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2012-02/msg00061.html
-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52270
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
13:36:30 UTC ---
Submitted patch, pending review:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2012-02/msg00085.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52196
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52218
Matthias Klose doko at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52314
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
14:10:43 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Feb 21 14:10:31 2012
New Revision: 184436
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184436
Log:
2012-02-21 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52314
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52137
--- Comment #1 from Quentin Neill qneill at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
15:15:48 UTC ---
Author: qneill
Date: Tue Feb 21 15:15:42 2012
New Revision: 184440
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184440
Log:
2012-02-21 Quentin Neill
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51967
John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52321
--- Comment #2 from Ivan Godard igodard at pacbell dot net 2012-02-21
15:30:42 UTC ---
Somewhere there's an attept to coerce a to b that sees the source is a class
and the target is a class and tries to see if the source is derived from
target.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52294
--- Comment #8 from Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
15:38:40 UTC ---
Author: rearnsha
Date: Tue Feb 21 15:38:35 2012
New Revision: 184442
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184442
Log:
PR target/52294
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52321
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
15:53:10 UTC ---
Yep, it's build_static_cast_1 in typeck.c
But currently that has no way to store or pass back a message (just a boolean
indicating success or failure and the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52325
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
15:58:23 UTC ---
Submitted patch (pending review):
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2012-02/msg00089.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52327
Bug #: 52327
Summary: Virtual inheritance and template copy construction
doesn't call the correct copy constructors
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52328
Bug #: 52328
Summary: Wrong line in warning
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52328
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Keller Keller at hlrs dot de 2012-02-21 16:54:39
UTC ---
Created attachment 26715
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26715
test-case showing the wrong location of nonconformant tab-character.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52327
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
16:54:45 UTC ---
Virtual bases are constructed by the most-derived class, which is
InitializerTop in your templated copy case, and the ctor-initializer-list
for InitializerTop
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52327
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52321
--- Comment #4 from Ivan Godard igodard at pacbell dot net 2012-02-21
17:38:30 UTC ---
Define an enum of reasons with success first, flop the sense of the test so
that false means coercion was OK (grep to find all calls and put a ! in front
of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52283
--- Comment #16 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com 2012-02-21 17:40:36 UTC ---
On Tue, 21 Feb 2012, manu at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Created attachment 26710
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52329
Bug #: 52329
Summary: Invalid MEM_REF encountered in
set_mem_attributes_minus_bitpos
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52283
--- Comment #17 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
17:52:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #16)
I think the full set of testcases from the patch originally proposed on
gcc-patches should be added, but don't see any
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52329
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
17:51:10 UTC ---
Created attachment 26717
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26717
Delta reduced testcase
This as far as I managed to reduce the testcase
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52283
--- Comment #18 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com 2012-02-21 17:56:32 UTC ---
On Tue, 21 Feb 2012, manu at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52283
--- Comment #17 from Manuel
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52329
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
18:24:37 UTC ---
Slightly more reduced testcase for -O2 -g:
template typename
class A;
template class
struct B;
template typename T, typename = B T, typename = A T
class C;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52218
--- Comment #5 from Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com 2012-02-21 18:33:14
UTC ---
If ARM GNU/Linux does not support getcontext/setcontext, then this particular
configure test is not particularly relevant, since the library isn't going to
work
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52329
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
18:41:01 UTC ---
Richard, so what exactly is not kosher?
We have:
# DEBUG D#7 = s.c.D.2422
...
MEM[(struct J *)s].D.2422._vptr.G = MEM[(void *)_ZTV1JI1BIwES0_IS1_E1AIS1_EE
+
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52328
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50349
Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52330
Bug #: 52330
Summary: pr50305.c: valgrind problem on invalid asm
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52331
Bug #: 52331
Summary: 20011127-1.c: valgrind problem on invalid asm
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
Alfred Minarik alfred.minarik.1 at aon dot at changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52326
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
--- Comment #13 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-02-21
20:23:47 UTC ---
Nope (and note that we don't have that anywhere else).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52283
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #26710|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52283
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||37985
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52283
--- Comment #21 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
20:35:31 UTC ---
BTW, why warn_if_unused_value is in stmt.c?
The comment at the top says: /* Expands front end tree to back end RTL for GCC
*/
And warn_if_unused_value is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
--- Comment #14 from Alfred Minarik alfred.minarik.1 at aon dot at 2012-02-21
20:48:38 UTC ---
ok, only that I see that nearly everywhere else,
just nearby in
/trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/profile/iterator_tracker.h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52224
--- Comment #5 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2012-02-21 21:17:41 UTC ---
I just found this closed CWG issue:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_closed.html#487
It seems that the compiler behaviour is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50211
--- Comment #3 from Zdenek Sojka zsojka at seznam dot cz 2012-02-21 21:25:56
UTC ---
Created attachment 26719
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26719
even shorter testcase
$ gcc -O -funroll-all-loops
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
--- Comment #15 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-02-21 21:30:31 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Feb 21 21:30:26 2012
New Revision: 184448
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184448
Log:
2012-02-21
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
--- Comment #17 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-02-21
21:31:27 UTC ---
Ah, Ok, should be fixed now.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52317
--- Comment #16 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-02-21 21:30:54 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Feb 21 21:30:44 2012
New Revision: 184449
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184449
Log:
2012-02-21
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52224
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52332
Bug #: 52332
Summary: Internal compiler error in in gfc_get_symbol_decl
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52332
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52294
--- Comment #9 from Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
23:46:10 UTC ---
Author: rearnsha
Date: Tue Feb 21 23:46:05 2012
New Revision: 184452
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184452
Log:
PR target/52294
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50349
--- Comment #5 from Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
23:46:55 UTC ---
Author: bkoz
Date: Tue Feb 21 23:46:49 2012
New Revision: 184453
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184453
Log:
2012-02-17 Benjamin Kosnik
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50349
Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52294
--- Comment #10 from Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-21
23:51:21 UTC ---
Author: rearnsha
Date: Tue Feb 21 23:51:16 2012
New Revision: 184454
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184454
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52323
--- Comment #3 from Jan Seiffert kaffeemonster at googlemail dot com
2012-02-22 00:03:53 UTC ---
My use case are not large floating point math funcs.
While intrinsics are nice (the new Tile ports rock! Every spec. instruction as
intrinsic from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52294
Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52261
--- Comment #5 from Stefan Reichardt fbi.sr at gmx dot de 2012-02-22 01:38:52
UTC ---
Its no problem to compile and link it that way but i dont have that device so
cant test it.
I would make a patch myself and post it here and on binutils, if i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50043
--- Comment #3 from Michel Morin mimomorin at gmail dot com 2012-02-22
02:43:30 UTC ---
Created attachment 26721
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26721
A updated testcase
OK, here is a take two!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52333
Bug #: 52333
Summary: Explicit etime interface should work
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52333
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52333
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-22 03:29:28 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Please define fails. What is the error message
you get? All procedure included in gfortran's
runtime library are treated as intrinsic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52333
--- Comment #3 from pablomme pablomme at googlemail dot com 2012-02-22
03:32:14 UTC ---
Please define fails. What is the error message you get?
Namely:
$ gfortran -o t test_etime_iface.f90
/scratch/pl275/ccyZ7sWC.o: In function `MAIN__':
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52333
--- Comment #4 from pablomme pablomme at googlemail dot com 2012-02-22
03:40:12 UTC ---
Adding EXTERNAL etime to the program gives:
--
$ gfortran -o t test_etime_iface.f90
test_etime_iface.f90:9.15:
EXTERNAL etime
1
Error:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52333
--- Comment #5 from Steve Kargl sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
2012-02-22 03:49:15 UTC ---
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 03:32:14AM +, pablomme at googlemail dot com wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52333
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52333
--- Comment #6 from Steve Kargl sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
2012-02-22 04:16:21 UTC ---
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 03:40:12AM +, pablomme at googlemail dot com wrote:
So ifort seems to agree with gfortran in its error messages
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52301
--- Comment #2 from rickyrockrat gpib at rickyrockrat dot net 2012-02-22
04:27:01 UTC ---
Created attachment 26722
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26722
Intermediate file
Intermediate file, as requested. Changed name to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52301
--- Comment #3 from rickyrockrat gpib at rickyrockrat dot net 2012-02-22
04:29:21 UTC ---
Created attachment 26723
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26723
Script to compile bug52301.c
Script to run avr-gcc on the subject file.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52301
--- Comment #4 from rickyrockrat gpib at rickyrockrat dot net 2012-02-22
04:31:11 UTC ---
Created attachment 26724
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26724
Assembly generated using script and original source
Resulting assembly
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52301
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
