--- Comment #6 from irar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 07:25 ---
Subject: Bug 40475
Author: irar
Date: Sun Jun 21 07:25:21 2009
New Revision: 148758
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=148758
Log:
PR testsuite/40475
*
--- Comment #7 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2009-06-21 07:32 ---
Fixed.
--
irar at il dot ibm dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 10:43 ---
Your inline assembly misses required constraints for the hardregister uses.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-06-21 10:51 ---
Confirmed on i686-apple-darwin9 revision 148750: replacing 1000 by 100,
the memory usage increases by ~1.5Gb. This is a regression: I don't see the
memory increase on 4.4.0, 4.4.1 r147906 (i.e., before the
--- Comment #16 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-06-21 11:08
---
This is interesting and indeed, I'm not at all sure it's a C++ bug, but I seem
to remember an open PR about SFINAE vs defaults, we should check. As regards
the library side, anyway, I'm against putting in
When building dillo 2.1 on Mandriva Cooker i586 with gcc 4.4.0, g++ segfaults.
No specific CXXFLAGS are required to reproduce this.
$ g++ fltkui.ii
fltkui.cc: In member function 'void
dw::fltk::ui::FltkSelectionResourceI::addItem(const char*, bool, bool) [with
I =
--- Comment #1 from fhimpe at telenet dot be 2009-06-21 11:43 ---
Created an attachment (id=18039)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18039action=view)
pre-processed source fltkui.ii
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40510
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 12:23 ---
Works for me (Debian sid g++-4.4.0).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40510
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 12:58
---
I see no memory issues or memory growth on x85-64-linux-gnu with -m64 or -m32.
This appears to be target specific. Checked with 4.4.1 and latest trunk.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40508
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 13:15 ---
Reproduced with 4.4.0, fixed on the branch.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
daney at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #6 from p dot j dot bakker at brainspark dot nl 2009-06-21
14:19 ---
Subject: Re: -fprofile-arcs changes behaviour
Ok. That is great (That there is not a bug in gcc :)).
But I'm at a loss which extra constraints are needed.
COuld you point me in the right direction?
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 15:40 ---
Well, for a start your asm code shows that you really shouldn't use inline
asm ;) But ...
asm( movl %%ebx, %0 : =m (t));
you miss an input constraint for %%ebx. But really - what are you trying to
gmake[4]: Entering directory
`/usr/home/mckelvey/software/gcc-obj/alphaev56-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/src'
/bin/sh ../libtool --tag CXX --mode=compile
/home/mckelvey/software/gcc-obj/./gcc/xgcc -shared-libgcc
-B/home/mckelvey/software/gcc-obj/./gcc -nostdinc++
--- Comment #8 from vda dot linux at googlemail dot com 2009-06-21 16:11
---
(In reply to comment #7)
It seems to make sense to bump cost of idiv a bit, given the fact that there
are register pressure implications.
I would like to however understand what code sequences we produce
--- Comment #9 from vda dot linux at googlemail dot com 2009-06-21 16:12
---
Created an attachment (id=18040)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18040action=view)
Comparison of generated code with 4.4.svn.20090528 on x86_64
--
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 16:25
---
Do we have correct size estimates on idiv with a constant argument at all?
I don't see length attributes on it ...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30354
--- Comment #11 from vda dot linux at googlemail dot com 2009-06-21 16:47
---
In 32-bit code, there are indeed a few cases of code growth.
Here is a full list (id_XXX are signed divides, ud_XXX are unsigned ones):
- 000f T id_x_4
+ 0012 T id_x_4
-
--- Comment #12 from vda dot linux at googlemail dot com 2009-06-21 16:48
---
Created an attachment (id=18041)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18041action=view)
Comparison of generated code with 4.4.svn.20090528 on i86
--
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 17:12 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
I see no memory issues or memory growth on x85-64-linux-gnu with -m64 or
-m32.
This appears to be target specific. Checked with 4.4.1 and latest trunk.
I think there is a leak. After
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 17:34
---
I don't doubt there is a problem. Not found with valgrind either on x86-64
linux.
It's hard to debug when you can't see the problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40508
--- Comment #1 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 18:32 ---
Changing to middle-end as it is responsible for determining which
calls are added to the list of pending assemble externals.
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 18:50
---
Confirmed. Problem narrowed down to format hashing not getting freed by Richi
on IRC. I had the problem bypassed on my trunk by another patch.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 19:05 ---
Subject: Bug 39850
Author: janus
Date: Sun Jun 21 19:05:35 2009
New Revision: 148767
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=148767
Log:
2009-06-21 Janus Weil ja...@gcc.gnu.org
PR
--- Comment #6 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-06-21
19:13 ---
Subject: Re: hppa: ICE: in expand_expr_addr_expr_1,
at expr.c:6830
Untested patch attached for comment.
Dave
--- Comment #7 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-06-21
19:13
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 19:16 ---
Fixed with r148767. Closing.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 19:25 ---
Subject: Bug 37577
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Jun 21 19:24:55 2009
New Revision: 148769
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=148769
Log:
2009-06-21 Thomas Koenig tkoe...@gcc.gnu.org
PR
compile the attached code with the -std=c++0x flag.
Environment:
System: Linux x 2.6.26-2-686 #1 SMP Thu Mar 26 01:08:11 UTC 2009 i686 GNU/Linux
host: i686-pc-linux-gnu
build: i686-pc-linux-gnu
target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
configured with: ./configure --prefix=/home/x/gcc-4.4-20090616
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 22:09 ---
Confirmed. We ICE mangling trying to mangle decltype(T()*o[0])
#1 0x082ec4c0 in write_expression (expr=0xb7fdeed4)
at /home/richard/src/trunk/gcc/cp/mangle.c:2415
2415 write_expression
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 22:45
---
*** Bug 40485 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 22:45 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 32455 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 22:48 ---
I think this is a dup of bug 28050.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40507
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 23:18 ---
*** Bug 40507 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 23:18 ---
Yes it is a duplicate of bug 28050.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 28050 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 23:23 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 23:33 ---
Reduced testcase:
typedef long int int64_t;
int64_t swap64(int64_t n)
{
return ( ((n (((int64_t) 0xff) )) 56) |
((n (((int64_t) 0xff) 8)) 40) |
((n (((int64_t) 0xff) 16)) 24) |
((n (((int64_t)
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 23:42 ---
Confirmed, reduced testcase:
void f(int, int);
int g(int);
extern char errortext[300];
void ParseMatrix (void)
{
char items[1000];
extern int item;
int range;
int i, j, type, cnt;
for (i=0; iitem; i+=cnt)
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-21 23:51 ---
PR 39959 is the PR about the ICE on the trunk.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 00:12 ---
tree_unroll_loop is causing it ...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40496
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 00:20 ---
This has been fixed for a while now.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 00:25 ---
Both of these have been fixed for a while now.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 00:43 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from xenofears at gmail dot com 2009-06-22 01:11 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
(In reply to comment #9)
Patch sent. See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-03/msg00914.html
(I am new as an official team member of Mingw-w64, and am making a project of
my own based
This bug affects 4.4.0, 4.4.1, and 4.5.0. I have not tried earlier versions.
The bug's result is a very simple:
$ ./gcc /home/Peter/test.c -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-w64-mingw32
Configured with: ../configure --host=x86_64-w64-mingw32
--target=x86_64-w64-ming
w32
This bug affects 4.5.0. I can not say for certain about earlier versions. Due
to the inevitable Stage 2 -O2 failure in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40513, the lines are blurred a bit
looking backwards.
Very similar to http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40513 I have just
--- Comment #13 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 01:42
---
*** Bug 40513 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 01:42 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 39356 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 01:42 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 39356 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 01:42
---
*** Bug 40514 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39356
For SH cpu, m2a valiants has been supported since r85286.
But, at least sh2a, sh2a-single, sh2a-single-only, and sh2a-nofpu found in
gcc/config/sh/sh.opt are not documented in gcc/doc/invoke.texi .
--
Summary: SH: m2a* options not docmented.
Product: gcc
results in:
(all from config.log)
configure:5144: checking for version 0.10 of PPL
configure:5166: gcc -c -I/usr/system64/include -L/usr/system64/lib
-L/usr/system64/lib64 -Iyes/include-I/usr/system64/include
-L/usr/system64/lib -L/usr/system64/lib64 conftest.c 5
configure:5172: $? = 0
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 02:18 ---
Reduced testcase:
struct XalanCProcessor
{
typedef enum {eInvalid, eXalanSourceTree, eXercesDOM} ParseOptionType;
ParseOptionType getParseOption(void);
};
typedef XalanCProcessor::ParseOptionType
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 04:39 ---
Subject: Bug 40472
Author: pault
Date: Mon Jun 22 04:39:40 2009
New Revision: 148775
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=148775
Log:
2009-06-22 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 04:41 ---
Subject: Bug 40443
Author: pault
Date: Mon Jun 22 04:41:10 2009
New Revision: 148776
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=148776
Log:
2009-06-22 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 04:42 ---
Subject: Bug 40443
Author: pault
Date: Mon Jun 22 04:41:53 2009
New Revision: 148777
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=148777
Log:
2009-06-22 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 04:48 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Paul, what's your point of view on replacing the linear list by the splay-tree
('con_by_offset' in gfc_expr)?
I do not know enough about splay trees to comment; however, is the problem
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 05:33 ---
This is because __artificial__ is not being treated as it should be.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 05:34 ---
as witness from:
In function char* strncpy(char*, const char*, size_t),
inlined from void pat_read_waveheader(FILE*, WaveHeader*, int) at
t.cc:7132:40:
t.cc:1965:94: warning: call to char*
--- Comment #1 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 05:49 ---
Documentation patch welcome.
--
kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 05:43 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
60 matches
Mail list logo
