--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-04
15:05 ---
*** Bug 21381 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at redhat dot com 2005-05-02 15:29
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range building 176.gcc with -O2
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 07:57:43PM -, ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot
de wrote:
Unfortunately, even with the patch
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-29
14:11 ---
This breaks BLAS (optimzation = -O2), the major Fortran library. The whole
fortran front-end is useless in this state.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-29
14:16 ---
Working on it today. Kazu, I hope you don't mind if I take it?
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-04-29 14:35
---
Diego, no, I don't mind.
But I have a patch whose bootstrap is almost over and
regression testing is about to start.
This patch does not break g++dg/tree-ssa/pr18178.C unlike my previous patch.
Let me
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-04-29 14:55
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] ICE in
set_value_range building 176.gcc with -O2
Hi Diego,
Kazu, did you mail your patch before attaching it to bugzilla? I
haven't received it. The same thing happened
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at redhat dot com 2005-04-29 14:59
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range building 176.gcc with -O2
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 02:55:58PM -, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote:
I have not sent my current patch to gcc-patches@
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-04-29 16:25
---
Just checked in a patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21030
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-04-29 16:27
---
Just checked in a patch.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-29
16:29 ---
Subject: Bug 21030
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-29 16:23:20
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog tree-vrp.c
--- Additional Comments From ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot de
2005-04-29 19:57 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range building 176.gcc with -O2
Unfortunately, even with the patch applied, the Ada bootstrap failure on
i386-pc-solaris2.10 remains unchanged, a
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at redhat dot com 2005-04-29 21:11
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range building 176.gcc with -O2
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 07:57:43PM -, ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot
de wrote:
--- Additional Comments From ro
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at redhat dot com 2005-04-29 21:39
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range building 176.gcc with -O2
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 09:11:12PM -, dnovillo at redhat dot com wrote:
Huh. Odd. I just finished a bootstrap with
$
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-04-28 19:33
---
Diego,
I think it's OK to have contradictory information from an ASSERT_EXPR and
SCEV.
Let's say we have a loop counting from i = 0 upward.
It's possible that we if (i 0) in the loop and see something
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-04-24 14:02
---
I just went through the regression testing. I get
FAIL: g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr18178.C scan-tree-dump-times if 1
It may be a good idea to check in this patch with the above testcase
XFAILed.
--
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-22 19:36
---
Another testcase for something which looks like the same bug, this time in
Fortran (reduced from LAPACK by Steve Kargl):
SUBROUTINE CHER2K(N, BETA, C, LDC)
INTEGER I, J, N, LDC
REAL BETA
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-22 22:34
---
This is a shorter version of the Fortran code. The bug is now
critical to gfortran because almost all Fortran codes contain
nested do loops.
SUBROUTINE CHER2K(N, C, LDC)
INTEGER I, J, N, LDC
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-22 23:03
---
Kazu, I just tried the patch, pr21030-vrp-ice.patch.
It seems to fix the problems with gfortran and -O2.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21030
--- Additional Comments From toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
2005-04-23 10:58 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
Kazu, I just tried the patch, pr21030-vrp-ice.patch.
It seems to fix the problems with gfortran and -O2.
Kazu, could you propose your patch on gcc-patches or ping it
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-23
13:18 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
A comment in the patch says Tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu, but
it just means that it will have been tested by the time I post this patch. :-)
Patch looks fine. OK to install if
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-04-23 14:13
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] ICE in
set_value_range building 176.gcc with -O2
Hi Toon,
Kazu, I just tried the patch, pr21030-vrp-ice.patch.
It seems to fix the problems with gfortran and -O2.
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-23 15:11
---
(In reply to comment #13)
I would like to, but currently my patch causes a regression in one of
the VRP testcases.
Not to sound like an idiot, but how likely is this one VRP
testcase to show up in real
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-23
15:15 ---
(In reply to comment #14)
I haven't checked 4.0.0 against my Fortran
testsuite; hopefully, this problem isn't present in
gfortran's first exposure to the world.
It cannot be in 4.0.0 as the VRP code was
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at redhat dot com 2005-04-23 15:46
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] ICE in set_value_range building 176.gcc with -O2
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 03:11:52PM -, kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc
--- Additional Comments From ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-20 16:42
---
I observe the same ICE when bootstrapping with Ada on i386-pc-solaris2.10:
stage1/xgcc -Bstage1/ -B/vol/gcc/share/i386-pc-solaris2.10/bin/ -c -g -O2
-gnatpg -gnata -I- -I. -Iada
--- Additional Comments From wanderer at rsu dot ru 2005-04-19 20:08
---
Proposed patch (in #4) work fine at FreeBSD 5.1
And fix my tescase variant:
__inline void f(int a)
{
int i;
if (a 0) {
for (i = 0, a = ~a; a; i++) {
if ((a 1) != 0) {
f(i);
}
}
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-14
20:44 ---
Confirmed, also happens on i686-pc-linux-gnu.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-04-14 22:14
---
Reduced down to:
void
foo (int unit)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; unit; i++, unit--)
{
if (i = 0)
{
int j = i;
while (j)
j--;
}
}
}
--
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-04-14 23:01
---
Created an attachment (id=8638)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8638action=view)
patch
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-04-14 23:02
---
A comment in the patch says Tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu, but
it just means that it will have been tested by the time I post this patch. :-)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21030
30 matches
Mail list logo
