--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-29 14:20 ---
The only expected fails left should now be
FAIL: gcc.dg/pr34989-1.c (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gcc.dg/pr34989-1.c (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gcc.dg/pr34989-1.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL:
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-29 14:27
---
Three actually.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39958
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39959
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39960
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2009-04-28 21:10 ---
There error I get on cc.c-torture/execute/20050604-1.c and
gcc.dg/torture/pr21817-1.c with optimization level 1 or greater is:
x.c:6: error: invalid expression for min lvalue
D.2000_6 = BIT_FIELD_REF { 1.0e+9, 1.0e+9,
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-04-28 21:21 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] Revision 146831 caused
many test failures
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
(In reply to comment #3)
There error I get on cc.c-torture/execute/20050604-1.c and
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-28 21:18 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
There error I get on cc.c-torture/execute/20050604-1.c and
gcc.dg/torture/pr21817-1.c with optimization level 1 or greater is:
x.c:6: error: invalid expression for min lvalue
D.2000_6
--- Comment #6 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2009-04-28 21:25 ---
;; Function foo (foo)
foo ()
{
vector float D.2002;
vector float D.2001;
vector float D.2000;
vector float D.1999;
vector float D.1998;
vector float D.1997;
v4sf value.1;
v4sf value.0;
bb 2:
value.0_2
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-04-28 21:35 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] Revision 146831 caused
many test failures
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009, sje at cup dot hp dot com wrote:
--- Comment #6 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2009-04-28 21:25 ---
;; Function
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-28 21:42 ---
Ok, so one issue with the verifier is that it doesn't distinguish between
lvalues and rvalues when verifying verify_types_in_gimple_reference. I will
fix this.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39932
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-04-27 17:22 ---
Revision 146831:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-04/msg01473.html
is the cause.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-04-27 21:33 ---
On Linux/ia64, revision 146841 gave
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20050604-1.c compilation, -O1 (internal compiler
error)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20050604-1.c compilation, -O2 (internal compiler
error)
FAIL:
11 matches
Mail list logo
