[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils

2009-06-30 Thread hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #16 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-30 13:56 --- Subject: Bug 40493 Author: hjl Date: Tue Jun 30 13:55:43 2009 New Revision: 149097 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=149097 Log: 2009-06-30 H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com Backport from

[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils

2009-06-25 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #14 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-25 10:38 --- Subject: Bug 40493 Author: jamborm Date: Thu Jun 25 10:38:13 2009 New Revision: 148941 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=148941 Log: 2009-06-25 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz PR

[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils

2009-06-25 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #15 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-25 14:21 --- I have checked out trunk 148941, compiled binutils with it (configured with --disable-werror), ran the testsuite and there were no failures. Thus I consider this fixed. -- jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org

[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils

2009-06-24 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #13 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-24 16:38 --- Fix submitted to the mailing list, pending maintainer approval: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-06/msg01918.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40493

[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils

2009-06-23 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-23 13:21 --- The miscompiled file seems to be gas/tc-i386.o. Early SRA is enough to trigger the problem. Digging deeper... -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40493

[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils

2009-06-23 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #11 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-23 13:40 --- (In reply to comment #10) The miscompiled file seems to be gas/tc-i386.o. Early SRA is enough to trigger the problem. Digging deeper... tc-i386.c uses union with bit fields. See opcodes/i386-opc.h for

[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils

2009-06-23 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #12 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-23 16:45 --- Reduced testcase: extern void abort (void); typedef union i386_operand_type { struct { unsigned int reg8:1; unsigned int reg16:1; unsigned int reg32:1; unsigned int reg64:1;

[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils

2009-06-22 Thread d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com
--- Comment #8 from d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com 2009-06-22 10:05 --- This is probably the same bug: binutils 2.19.51.20090616 (build, host: i686-pc-linux-gnu, target: i686-pc-mingw32), compiled with GCC 4.5.0 20090618. GAS aborts when tries to assemble this instruction:

[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils

2009-06-22 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 18:57 --- Right, now I can reproduce the problem and it indeed is introduced by the new SRA commit. None of the fixes I have done so far deals with this one either. I am investigating this further (but don't hold your

[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils

2009-06-20 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-20 13:21 --- Created an attachment (id=18032) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18032action=view) A patch to avoid warning from -Wall You can apply this patch to binutils to avoid warning from -Wall in gcc

[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils

2009-06-19 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
-- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40493

[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils

2009-06-19 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-19 18:09 --- I will look into this next week. However, I have never compiled binutils before, so unless it is obvious, please describe how to reproduce the problem. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40493

[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils

2009-06-19 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-19 18:24 --- (In reply to comment #1) I will look into this next week. However, I have never compiled binutils before, so unless it is obvious, please describe how to reproduce the problem. Just download the current Linux

[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils

2009-06-19 Thread amodra at bigpond dot net dot au
--- Comment #3 from amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2009-06-19 23:38 --- With 148536 and current mainline cvs binutils I see no failures in the gas testsuite. I do see a bunch of failures in the ld testsuite, which are all because /usr/bin/ld is being run despite a -B option being

[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils

2009-06-19 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-20 01:11 --- (In reply to comment #3) With 148536 and current mainline cvs binutils I see no failures in the gas testsuite. I do see a bunch of failures in the ld testsuite, which are all because /usr/bin/ld is being run

[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils

2009-06-19 Thread amodra at bigpond dot net dot au
--- Comment #5 from amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2009-06-20 03:26 --- Oops, you're correct. I wan't using the compiler I thought I was. make CC=... wasn't passing $CC down to the bfd dir for some reason. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40493

[Bug middle-end/40493] [4.5 Regression] New SRA miscompiled binutils

2009-06-19 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-06-20 04:11 --- Revision 148512 failed to build binutils. You may need to remove -Werror from CFLAGS in Makefile by hand when building binutils. See PR 40500. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What