--- Comment #21 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 06:13
---
Hmm, in 32bits it does this:
Won't transform loop. Optimal transform is the identity transform
While in 64bits, it tries to transform it. It really does not matter which
order for the testcase in comment #18
There are three instances of reinterpret_casticonv_t(-1) in
libstdc++-v3/include/ext/codecvt_specializations.h, all of which are invalid if
iconv_t does not resolve to a pointer (on NetWare it is a plain int, but
obviously it could also be a compound type).
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 07:26 ---
Confirmed.
Tobias,
You should have received the fix.
Cheers
Paul
Index: gcc/fortran/trans-array.c
===
*** gcc/fortran/trans-array.c (révision
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 07:29 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
The failure from #2 is now PR 33727.
Tobi,
Why don't you fix them both at once? :-)
Cheers
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33254
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 08:11 ---
Subject: Bug 33726
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Oct 11 08:11:18 2007
New Revision: 129227
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=129227
Log:
2007-10-11 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 08:58 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 08:58 ---
Subject: Bug 33724
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Oct 11 08:58:28 2007
New Revision: 129228
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=129228
Log:
2007-10-11 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #5 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11 09:38 ---
After applying the patch and the one to PR33727 (thanks Paul!-), the first test
fails at runtime:
At line 6 of file pr32703_1.f90
Fortran runtime error: Different CHARACTER lengths (1/2) in array constructor
but
--- Comment #12 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 09:41 ---
The problem is that D.1556 (the var that hasn't been renamed or with the patch
can't be looked up) has been deleted.
*.phiprop has:
long unsigned intD.4 D.1556;
...
D.1554_11 = (long unsigned intD.4)
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-10-11 09:44 ---
Fixed.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-10-11 09:45 ---
Fixed.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 09:51 ---
Created an attachment (id=14338)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14338action=view)
testcase (unreduced)
Reducing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33735
--- Comment #31 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11 10:17 ---
Works as advertised without regression so far (PPC Darwin, 32 bit mode close to
complete), but for the codelets in #30.
I wonder if the code in #28 is valid: the line(s)
merge(transfer(string,x,len(string)),
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pcarlini at suse dot de
|dot org |
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 10:26 ---
It cannot be a coumpounded type because of the definition of iconv_open which
says it returns -1 for a falure.
Otherwise iconv_open() returns (iconv_t)-1 and sets errno to indicate the
error.
From
--- Comment #2 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-10-11 10:31 ---
Indeed, I'm just changing to cast notation per that document.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33734
On 11 Oct 2007 10:28:03 -, tbm at cyrius dot com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So it's just a coincidence that 4.1 and 4.3 bootstrap?
Yes. You should look at what instruction is being executed to be sure
but this is just the normal trying to boostrap using --with-cpu when
you really don't have
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2007-10-11 10:40 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2 regression] Illegal instruction with build/genmddeps with
PPC405 build on powerpc
On 11 Oct 2007 10:28:03 -, tbm at cyrius dot com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So it's just a coincidence that 4.1 and
--- Comment #13 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2007-10-11 10:43 ---
Maybe we can fix DCE not to eliminate such vars?
Or somehow fix split_constant_offset?
The following patch changes the base from
(int[0:D.1553] *) newcentroid.1_22 + (long unsigned int) dim_4(D) * 8
to (int[0:D.1553]
--- Comment #6 from Tobias dot Schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de
2007-10-11 10:45 ---
Subject: Re: Diagnose different string lengths in array
constructors at run time
dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr wrote:
program array_char
implicit none
character (len=2) :: x, y
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 10:50 ---
Subject: Bug 33734
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Oct 11 10:50:09 2007
New Revision: 129232
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=129232
Log:
2007-10-11 Paolo Carlini [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #4 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-10-11 10:52 ---
Fixed.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 10:53 ---
This fixes it.
Index: gcc/fortran/simplify.c
===
*** gcc/fortran/simplify.c (révision 129121)
--- gcc/fortran/simplify.c (copie de travail)
--- Comment #9 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-10-11 10:32 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
int bar (char *s)
{
return foo (strlen(s));
}
The testcase above fails with AREG spill failure. The testcase below fails with
DIREG spill failure:
int bar (int x, long l);
int foo (char
--- Comment #13 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 11:14
---
Revision 128957 causes this regression.
There is a suspect non-documented hunk in the commit:
* reload1.c (compute_use_by_pseudos): Change DF_RA_LIVE
usage to DF_LIVE usage.
---
--- Comment #14 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-10-11 11:43
---
Subject: Re: libgfortran bootstrap failure: selected_int_kind.f90:22:
Segmentation fault, wrong code with -fomit-frame-pointer
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #13 from ebotcazou at gcc
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 11:57 ---
The original issue seems to no longer trigger with the testcase, the missed
combining is fixed with a patch I have.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 11:40 ---
This was fixed by
2007-08-20 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR c++/22369
PR c++/22451
* call.c (build_new_method_call): Convert initializer to
the basetype.
* init.c
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 12:10 ---
Also
because in fold_binary where we handle this kind of stuff we have
if (!offset0 || !offset1
|| TREE_TYPE (offset0) == TREE_TYPE (offset1))
{
...
is no
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 12:19 ---
With
2007-06-21 Eric Botcazou [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR tree-optimization/25737
* misc.c (gnat_post_options): Do not force flag_tree_salias to 0.
this has to be no longer true. And indeed those
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 12:20 ---
With
2007-06-21 Eric Botcazou [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR tree-optimization/25737
* misc.c (gnat_post_options): Do not force flag_tree_salias to 0.
this has to be no longer true. Indeed, the test now
--- Comment #15 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 12:24
---
That is fine, there are no top sets anymore.
Thanks for the explanation, please fix the ChangeLog though.
the problem is the code that builds the reload insn chain. the new code
uses the cfg and does not
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #7 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11 12:34 ---
This is weird, and can't really be (well, in a hypothetical world where
only the bounds check goes wrong), as the whole array has only a single
string length, so I would expect it to either print two length one
--- Comment #14 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2007-10-11 12:34 ---
BTW, without this patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-07/msg02122.html
there is no ICE and the loop gets vectorized.
Ira
--
irar at il dot ibm dot com changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 12:50
---
Sorry for overlooking the PR... Do not hesitate to CC me for Ada related PRs.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #16 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-10-11 12:40
---
Subject: Re: libgfortran bootstrap failure: selected_int_kind.f90:22:
Segmentation fault, wrong code with -fomit-frame-pointer
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #15 from ebotcazou at gcc
Integer constants that don't fit into a long cause a pedwarn in GCC as of the
20070907 snapshot (this has been the behavior for a while). However this is
incorrect for C++0x which does (at least in the WG draft) allows for something
to be placed in a long long or unsigned long long if it doesn't
20071011 (experimental) [trunk revision
129228] (i586-suse-linux)
compiled by GNU C version 4.3.0 20071011 (experimental) [trunk revision
129228], GMP version 4.2.1, MPFR version 2.2.1.
GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=30 --param ggc-min-heapsize=4096
Compiler executable checksum
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 13:34 ---
Created an attachment (id=14339)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14339action=view)
testcase (unreduced)
Reducing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33737
--- Comment #2 from s__nakayama at infoseek dot jp 2007-10-11 13:50 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
This code is invalid, and we should reject both of them.
Why do you think that this is invalid?
Member with same name as class have restrictions(ISO/IEC 14882:2003 9.2
p13/13a).
But, I can
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11 13:53 ---
The patch fixes the tests but resurect an old ICE on (was pr18769):
program gfcbug21
implicit none
type t
integer :: i
end type t
type (t), parameter :: u = t (1)
integer, parameter :: idx_list(1) =
--- Comment #8 from Tobias dot Schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de
2007-10-11 14:04 ---
Subject: Re: Diagnose different string lengths in array
constructors at run time
dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr wrote:
--- Comment #7 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11
--- Comment #9 from Tobias dot Schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de
2007-10-11 14:09 ---
Subject: Re: Diagnose different string lengths in array
constructors at run time
Tobias dot Schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de wrote:
all printed strings should be length 10, no
--- Comment #10 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11 14:10 ---
... What I menat is the following: after the
data has been added to the array, the compiler should use the string
length of the array, ...
I agree, this is why I posted the second code with y(1:len(trim(x))),
--- Comment #3 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11 14:14 ---
I don't know if this the right fix, but
--- /opt/gcc/_gcc-clean/gcc/fortran/simplify.c 2007-10-07 09:37:46.0
+0200
+++ /opt/gcc/gcc-4.3-work/gcc/fortran/simplify.c2007-10-11
16:05:57.0 +0200
--- Comment #11 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 14:14 ---
I'm adding Paul to the CC list, as perhaps he immediately knows what's
happening (Paul, see comment #5). Otherwise I will investigate tomorrow
evening or Saturday.
--
tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 14:22 ---
Created an attachment (id=14340)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14340action=view)
reduced testcase
The testcase depends on the exact (or minimal) amount of branching, so I
suppose
this might be
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 14:23 ---
The reduced testcase also fails with x86_64, plain -O2.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 14:55 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Ah this bug was present before my patch for PR30746. I can see from my
notes that I was fixated on PR30746, whilst not altering the behaviour of
gfortran in any other way., whether
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 15:23 ---
Subject: Bug 33734
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Oct 11 15:23:11 2007
New Revision: 129235
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=129235
Log:
2007-10-11 Paolo Carlini [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #6 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-10-11 15:24 ---
Fixed for 4.2.3 too.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.3.0
--- Comment #17 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-10-11 16:21
---
Subject: Re: libgfortran bootstrap failure: selected_int_kind.f90:22:
Segmentation fault, wrong code with -fomit-frame-pointer
2007-10-11 Kenneth Zadeck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR middle-end/33676
*
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 16:27 ---
If cprop_jump changes a conditional jump into unconditional, then it forgets
to add a BARRIER after it. When not in cfglayout mode that's enough, but
in cfglayout mode it is uglier, though I haven't found a cfg hook
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 17:17 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Dominique,
Oui, c'est bon! Merci.
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33733
--- Comment #3 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11 17:30 ---
Works as expected: now gfortran agrees with xlf. Regtest almost finished in 32
bit mode.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33233
--- Comment #5 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-11 17:31 ---
Oui, c'est bon! Merci.
Question: is this the only omission?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33733
This was found on GCC 4.2.1. In this test case, VRP quietly folds a comparison
between an enum type and a constant value that the enum type can never take.
With -Wtype-limits, this should give the warning:
comparison always false due to limited range of data type
extern void link_error (void);
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 18:09 ---
Warnings from optimizers are semi a no-no. Yes we have them for strict
aliasing and overflow but I think those cases are a bit weird. This is
unspecified behavior no matter what and there is no flag to change the
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 18:52 ---
What do the edge flags look like after cprop changes the jump? EDGE_FALLTHRU
should be set.
Also, the unconditional JUMP_INSN should be removed. Unconditional jumps are
removed when going into cfglayout mode, and
--- Comment #6 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 18:53 ---
The patch from comment #4 is wrong and should not be applied.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33673
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 19:15 ---
This is not a testsuite error, this is a target issue with some stabs.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
From http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2007-10/msg00083.html:
On revision 129030 (built from scratch at revision 129024) I get the following
error on Darwin:
[karma] f90/bug% gfc -m64 -g
/opt/gcc/gcc-4.3-work/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/literal_character_constant_1_x.F
ld64 warning: BINCL
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 19:10 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Dominique,
Oui, c'est bon! Merci.
Paul
(In reply to comment #5)
Oui, c'est bon! Merci.
Question: is this the only omission?
I think so - most important is that EXPR_FUNCTION and
--- Comment #18 from belyshev at depni dot sinp dot msu dot ru 2007-10-11
19:52 ---
Subject: Re: libgfortran bootstrap failure: selected_int_kind.f90:22:
Segmentation fault, wrong code with -fomit-frame-pointer
Kenneth Zadeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
2007-10-11 Kenneth Zadeck
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 19:29 ---
It calls purge_dead_edges after changing the jump, so if it changed that into
an unconditional jump, purge_dead_edges will purge the EDGE_FALLTHRU
edge and keep the other edge.
If cfglayout mode is supposed to avoid
--- Comment #22 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 19:35 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] ICE with -O3 -ftree-loop-linear
There are several bugs that fail in the exact same place, because
we're not able to generate code for some induction variable containing
a phi
I would like to report a probable gcc compiler bug that is to present on AIX
5.3, but not on x86 linux. The problem is that Totalview and gdb fail to see a
static value 'stupify' when the program is compiled and linked using gcc 4.1.1.
If I cross link and compile (e.g. compile using gcc and link
--- Comment #8 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 19:55 ---
Updating the CFG as suggested in comment #7 is the appropriate thing to do.
How about using delete_insn_and_edges() on the jump insn, and setting
EDGE_FALLTHRU on the remaining edge?
--
Seeing a segfault trying to build 164.gzip from cpu2000. Noticed it with -O3,
but also occurs for -O2/-O1 -ftree-vectorize.
run/0001 cat junk.c
typedef unsigned short ush;
extern ush prev[];
void fill_window()
{
register unsigned n, m;
for (n = 0; n 32768; n++) {
m
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 21:14 ---
Can you try 4.1.2 or 4.2.x? 4.1.1 is getting a bit old.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from seppo at totalviewtech dot com 2007-10-11 21:37 ---
Hi Andrew,
Thanks for the quick reply.
We do not have more recent versions installed on AIX, but I have sent just now
an installation request. I'll keep you posted.
Thanks,
Seppo
--
--- Comment #7 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-10-11 21:50
---
kazumoto,
there was a set of miscommunications associated with the final patch for
pr33669.
hj had checked in an earlier version of the patch and that testcase and i asked
him to revert it because there were
--- Comment #19 from zadeck at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 22:32 ---
Subject: Bug 33676
Author: zadeck
Date: Thu Oct 11 22:31:55 2007
New Revision: 129244
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=129244
Log:
2007-10-11 Kenneth Zadeck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #20 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-10-11 22:35
---
Subject: Re: libgfortran bootstrap failure: selected_int_kind.f90:22:
Segmentation fault, wrong code with -fomit-frame-pointer
zadeck at naturalbridge dot com wrote:
--- Comment #17 from zadeck at
--- Comment #9 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 23:50 ---
Steve,
Does this bug also affect ia64-hpux?
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-12 00:11 ---
Mine
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at
gcc-4.1 with patch from PR26208 doesn't support
unwinding through signal frames.
$ uname -a
SunOS hermes 5.9 Generic_117171-07 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Blade-1500
$ ./u-sparc-sun-solaris2.9
boom!
10af4 signalHandler+0x1c
ff31f010 _setuid+0x68
alive!
$ ./u-sparc64-sun-solaris2.9
boom!
10dac
--- Comment #2 from pluto at agmk dot net 2007-10-12 00:26 ---
Created an attachment (id=14343)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14343action=view)
testcase.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33743
--- Comment #8 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-12 02:06 ---
You tested against version 129192 and i checked in the corrected patch as
129193.
Oh, my tester had fallen into that narrow pitfall :-)
I've confirmed that the errors go away with the current trunk.
Thanks both
--- Comment #3 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-12 03:03 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Confirmed. You need HWI of 32bits to trigger the problem. Maybe latent on
the trunk (I didn't check if it fails there, too).
The problem was fixed in mainline in this commit (I somehow
This compiled with 3.3:
template bool cond
struct A {
};
A bool (2 1) x;
It doesn't compile with at least some later versions, including 3.4 and 4.2.1,
with:
x.cpp:4: error: template argument 1 is invalid
x.cpp:4: error: invalid type in declaration before ';' token
Rejects-valid regression
--- Comment #21 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-12 04:07 ---
Kenny,
My build tonight's tree completed successfully. I think this
PR can be close, but you may want to hear from Gerald first.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33676
--
aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-12 04:49 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Better still is
if (source-expr_type == EXPR_FUNCTION)
return NULL;
since source is already tested to be a constant expression.
Paul
--
87 matches
Mail list logo
