http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59046
Bug ID: 59046
Summary: [4.8.x REGRESSION] corei7: L1 + L2 cache size not
correct
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58955
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 8 08:44:02 2013
New Revision: 204561
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204561root=gccview=rev
Log:
2013-11-08 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59038
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 8 08:44:02 2013
New Revision: 204561
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204561root=gccview=rev
Log:
2013-11-08 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59038
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #15)
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #14)
This is good to hear. What is each field? I assume that
the first 3 fields are frame
--with-gmp=/usr/local/gcc-trunk
--with-mpfr=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --with-mpc=/usr/local/gcc-trunk
--with-cloog=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.9.0 20131108 (experimental) [trunk revision 204560] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -O2 small.c; a.out
1
$ gcc-4.8.2 -O3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59044
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59047
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #17 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #16)
I couldn't find anything in GCC manual.
See tm.texi / md.texi.
This is the only thing I found:
-- Macro: DONT_USE_BUILTIN_SETJMP
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59046
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59046
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Marc Burkhardt from comment #0)
According to a comment in #57657 this should have been fixed in May 15th,
The comment says it was INTRODUCED on May 15.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59047
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48110
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Indeed, not sure why we even support 3 or s, but fast would certainly
alias with -fast ;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59038
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||su at cs dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59043
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59045
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #18 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I couldn't find anything in GCC manual.
There are a few documented hooks, but this looks quite light indeed, so the
sources are probably the best references, i.e. builtins.c and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57258
mrs at gcc dot gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mrs at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44641
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59048
Bug ID: 59048
Summary: std::string operator== between std::string and const
char* creates unecessary temporary object
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.7
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59019
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Always considering trap-if as ending a BB appears to be a bit of a rathole.
Every time I squash one issue, another raises its head.
A little unexpected I'd say, what kind of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59048
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59048
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Luca Stoppa from comment #0)
Template functions
bool operator==( const char*, const std::string ) and
bool operator==( const std::string, const char* )
creates
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59048
--- Comment #3 from Luca Stoppa luca.stoppa at bbh dot com ---
Created attachment 31181
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31181action=edit
testcase
g++ -O3 mapping.cpp
time ./a.out 1000 f
time ./a.out 1000 g
time ./a.out
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59048
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
Indeed, I had a look to f and the correct operator== and compare are called, no
temporaries. By the way, type_traitschar uses memcmp not strcmp.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59048
--- Comment #5 from Luca Stoppa luca.stoppa at bbh dot com ---
Thanks a lot,
so if memcmp() is called, how can the difference in performance be explained?
In short:
std::string s=something;
if (s == something) { ... }
and
if (0 ==
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59048
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
An important detail is that the compare functions aren't inline, and are
exported for basic_stringchar. Thus, for a fair comparison, the strcmp should
be in an attribute
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59048
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The only major difference I see is that in the operator== case you make a call
to a PIC function in libstdc++.so, whereas strcmp can be inlined.
There's no temporary created though.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59048
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
Right, it's also PIC.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58934
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I have re-submitted my patch in which this bug is fixed, you can find
it at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg00598.html
I have verified the patch bootstraps on
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59047
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 8 12:49:10 2013
New Revision: 204566
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204566root=gccview=rev
Log:
2013-11-08 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59047
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58653
Bug 58653 depends on bug 59047, which changed state.
Bug 59047 Summary: [4.9 Regression] wrong code for bitfields at -O3 on
x86_64-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59047
What|Removed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57258
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59049
Bug ID: 59049
Summary: Two VOIDmode constant in comparison passed to
cstoresi4
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59050
Bug ID: 59050
Summary: [4.9 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected
integer_cst, have nop_expr in tree_int_cst_lt, at
tree.c:7083
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59051
Bug ID: 59051
Summary: DW_tag_restrict_type not used
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59050
octoploid at yandex dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||congh at google dot com
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59048
--- Comment #9 from Luca Stoppa luca.stoppa at bbh dot com ---
Created attachment 31182
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31182action=edit
not inlined memcmp used.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57680
Jean-Pierre Flori jpflori at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jpflori at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59048
--- Comment #10 from Luca Stoppa luca.stoppa at bbh dot com ---
Hi,
honestly I don't know what PIC means, but I did like you suggested. I have
added a wrapper to memcmp() that is not inlined.
__attribute__((noinline)) int memcmp_not_inlined
(const
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59050
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58423
--- Comment #4 from clyon at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: clyon
Date: Fri Nov 8 14:22:10 2013
New Revision: 204570
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204570root=gccview=rev
Log:
gcc/
2013-11-05 Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.c...@linaro.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46507
Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59044
--- Comment #2 from Tom De Caluwé decaluwe.t at gmail dot com ---
As far as I can verify partial specializations are only allowed at namespace
scope so you're right. However gcc never used to complain about such
constructs.
In any case, an
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59049
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Frame 12 shows that at the tree level, one of the comparison operands is an
initialized variable.
(gdb) frame 12
#12 0x083bd9fa in expand_expr_real_1 (exp=ne_expr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59044
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
Yes. It's all about prioritizing, an ICE on invalid isn't the same as an ICE on
valid, even if it's a regression.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59044
--- Comment #4 from Tom De Caluwé decaluwe.t at gmail dot com ---
However the following code seems to be valid but results in the same ICE:
/* bug.cpp --- */
namespace N {
template class T
class C {
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59044
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
Frankly, I'm not sure either, current clang rejects it the same way, for
example. In any case, in Bugzilla we have got at least 2/3 on valid Bugs
triggering that gcc_assert,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59049
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58994
--- Comment #4 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu ---
Current llvm trunk is broken at the moment on darwin, but using a build from
Oct 29th, I have no issues with the failing test case under clang...
% /sw/opt/llvm-3.4/bin/clang
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58994
--- Comment #5 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu ---
(In reply to Jack Howarth from comment #4)
This was a test of recent clang's -fsanitize=address on x86_64-apple-darwin12.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #19 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #18)
I couldn't find anything in GCC manual.
There are a few documented hooks, but this looks quite light indeed, so the
sources are probably
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59049
--- Comment #3 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Making emit_store_flag return 0 in the case of const-const comparison
gives simpler rtl generation:
(insn 14 13 15 (set (reg:QI 175)
(const_int 1 [0x1]))
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59052
Bug ID: 59052
Summary: Partial specialization of template with dependent
non-type template argument not correctly resolved
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59044
--- Comment #6 from Tom De Caluwé decaluwe.t at gmail dot com ---
I reported a related bug with valid code which does not trigger this ICE (see
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59052).
Also LLVM bug 16519
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59053
Bug ID: 59053
Summary: cilkplus branch compiler loops
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #20 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Would it be OK to submit it a patch to document
__builtin_longjmp/__builtin_setjmp based on their
sources?
I think that we would need to issue an error if both are in the same
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59053
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58508
--- Comment #8 from congh at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: congh
Date: Fri Nov 8 18:44:46 2013
New Revision: 204590
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204590root=gccview=rev
Log:
2013-11-08 Cong Hou co...@google.com
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58963
--- Comment #1 from Cong Hou congh at google dot com ---
Any comment on this topic?
thanks,
Cong
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #21 from Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org ---
It's only an error if they use the same jmpbuf.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59048
--- Comment #11 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org ---
memcmp is pure and gcc manages to pull it out of the loop (see the file created
by -fdump-tree-optimized). It is funny that -fno-builtin-strcmp makes the code
more than 2 times faster
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56717
Cong Hou congh at google dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||congh at google dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57680
--- Comment #4 from gee jojelino at gmail dot com ---
I think gcc backend for x86 that doesn't support weak attribute needed to
supress weak attribute on variables as long as gas/16011 is not fixed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59054
Bug ID: 59054
Summary: Powerpc -O0 -mcpu=power7 generates sub-optimal code to
load 0
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #22 from bviyer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: bviyer
Date: Fri Nov 8 19:52:27 2013
New Revision: 204592
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204592root=gccview=rev
Log:
+2013-11-08 Balaji V. Iyer balaji.v.i...@intel.com
+
+
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59054
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 31185
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31185action=edit
Sample file to show the problem.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59054
Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58982
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #2)
I think at least something like this for this specific bug, but the whole
file needs auditing:
Not only that file, but stl_algobase.h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58982
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
And this, which is more obviously wrong:
std::atomicint a[1];
std::atomicint b[1];
std::copy(a,a+1, b);
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58982
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
At some point we replaced a weak (not using front-end intrinsics) version of
is_pod with __is_trivial, in algos uninitialized. At that time was safe,
ins't anymore in 4.9. In
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59055
Bug ID: 59055
Summary: gcc.texinfo warnings
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: objc
Assignee:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58982
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yes, it's not too hard to fix properly, so I'm working on that.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59039
--- Comment #23 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 31186
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31186action=edit
A patch to document __builtin_setjmp/__builtin_longjmp
Does it look OK?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58982
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
Thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59053
--- Comment #2 from John Forrest john.forrest at fastercoin dot com ---
Thanks for your very fast response. Glad it was easy to reproduce.
John Forrest
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59055
--- Comment #1 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Nov 8 22:16:59 2013
New Revision: 204604
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204604root=gccview=rev
Log:
Move Cilk Plus Builtins node before Other
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59056
Bug ID: 59056
Summary: enable_if turns a non-ambiguous template into an
ambiguous one
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59056
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
Needs an analysis, but I doubt this is a bug, all the up to date compilers I
have handy (eg, clang, icc) reject it the same way.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58998
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59019
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steven at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56717
--- Comment #2 from Cong Hou congh at google dot com ---
I examined the GCC generated code, and found the main problem is that the load
of 'scale' (rhs operand of ) to an xmm register is in the loop body, which
could be moved outside.
This
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59057
Bug ID: 59057
Summary: bootstrap comparison failure with
-frecord-gcc-switches
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
/local/gcc-trunk
--with-mpfr=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --with-mpc=/usr/local/gcc-trunk
--with-cloog=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.9.0 20131108 (experimental) [trunk revision 204593] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -O2 small.c; a.out
-1
$ gcc-trunk -O3 small.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58640
--- Comment #12 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com ---
Oleg, I just worked through an independent problem that I saw locally that
probably explains your SH issue as well. I expect to have a fix in the trunk
shortly. I'll let you know so
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59059
Bug ID: 59059
Summary: [4.9 Regression] internal compiler error: tree check:
expected integer_cst, have nop_expr in
tree_int_cst_lt, at tree.c:6931
Product: gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59060
Bug ID: 59060
Summary: Accepts invalid ? Missing component data value for
component D1 of TYPE(T2)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59060
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
89 matches
Mail list logo
