[Bug c++/40099] 64bit constants

2009-05-10 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-11 06:08 --- Why is that a problem? C and C++ are different languages. Compiling with g++ means you are compiling the C code as C++ (see documentation). -- jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug c/40097] inconsistent printf handling

2009-05-10 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-11 04:38 --- (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > Actually this code is undefined. Using %s with a NULL pointer is undefined > > so > > GCC's behavior is correct. > > > > You are wrong, the GCC behavior is

[Bug c++/40099] 64bit constants

2009-05-10 Thread Andrey dot Martchovsky at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from Andrey dot Martchovsky at gmail dot com 2009-05-11 02:07 --- *** Bug 40098 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40099

[Bug c++/40098] 64bit constants

2009-05-10 Thread Andrey dot Martchovsky at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from Andrey dot Martchovsky at gmail dot com 2009-05-11 02:07 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 40099 *** -- Andrey dot Martchovsky at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug c++/40099] New: 64bit constants

2009-05-10 Thread Andrey dot Martchovsky at gmail dot com
The following code produces and...@tiny:~/Documents/Thesis/TIA/pll$ gcc tst.c tst.c:2: warning: integer constant is too large for ‘long’ type and...@tiny:~/Documents/Thesis/TIA/pll$ g++ tst.c tst.c:2: error: integer constant is too large for ‘long’ type 1:#include 2:long long int tst

[Bug c++/40098] New: 64bit constants

2009-05-10 Thread Andrey dot Martchovsky at gmail dot com
-- Summary: 64bit constants Product: gcc Version: 4.3.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: Andrey dot Martchovsky at

[Bug c/40097] inconsistent printf handling

2009-05-10 Thread Andrey dot Martchovsky at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from Andrey dot Martchovsky at gmail dot com 2009-05-11 01:26 --- (In reply to comment #1) > Actually this code is undefined. Using %s with a NULL pointer is undefined so > GCC's behavior is correct. > You are wrong, the GCC behavior is incorrect. Please compile code a

[Bug c/40097] inconsistent printf handling

2009-05-10 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-11 01:15 --- Actually this code is undefined. Using %s with a NULL pointer is undefined so GCC's behavior is correct. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug c/40097] New: inconsistent printf handling

2009-05-10 Thread Andrey dot Martchovsky at gmail dot com
The following code results in a segmentation fault at Line 7. 1:#include 2:int main(){ 3: const char *tmp = NULL; 4: printf("%s \n",NULL); 5: printf("%s\n",NULL); 6: printf("%s \n",tmp); 7: printf("%s\n",tmp); 8: return 1; 9:} I've traced the bug to the code optimiz

[Bug c/40096] incremental pointer logic that used to work in older gcc versions

2009-05-10 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 22:38 --- This code is undefined because are there are two stores to test2 without a sequence point. test2+=readvlnum(&test2); Can be evaluated like: tmp1 = test2; tmp2 = readvlnum(&test2); test2 = tmp1 + tmp2; Or: tmp

[Bug c/40096] incremental pointer logic that used to work in older gcc versions

2009-05-10 Thread stian at nixia dot no
--- Comment #1 from stian at nixia dot no 2009-05-10 22:21 --- Created an attachment (id=17849) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17849&action=view) test.c test-case -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40096

[Bug c/40096] New: incremental pointer logic that used to work in older gcc versions

2009-05-10 Thread stian at nixia dot no
Hi I'm going to attach a small test case that used to work until my gentoo system upgraded gcc to 4.3.2. It is not a vanilla build, but I'm not able to easy test this on a vanilla system. For my failing system, the output from the test case is: 0x81 0x82 0x03 => 0x4103 0x81 0x82 0x03 => 0x00

[Bug middle-end/40095] [4.5 Regression] Revision 147342/147343 caused extra failures

2009-05-10 Thread hp at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 22:07 --- cris-elf too... -- hp at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug target/37179] gcc emits bad opcode 'ffreep'

2009-05-10 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #13 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-05-10 22:00 --- Created an attachment (id=17848) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17848&action=view) Patch This patch looks at processor name to detect AMD geode CPU. As far as gcc is concerned, "-march=geode" means A

[Bug target/37179] gcc emits bad opcode 'ffreep'

2009-05-10 Thread sascha-web-gcc dot gnu dot org at silbe dot org
--- Comment #12 from sascha-web-gcc dot gnu dot org at silbe dot org 2009-05-10 21:21 --- "Geode by NSC" seems to be the "original" Geode series developed by National Semiconductor. According to Wikipedia [1], AMD bought the Geode "business", released the original design as "GX series"

[Bug target/37179] gcc emits bad opcode 'ffreep'

2009-05-10 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #11 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-05-10 20:55 --- (In reply to comment #10) > COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS= > "/usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.3.3/cc1" "-quiet" "hello.c" "-march=athlon" > "--param" "l1-cache-size=64" "--param" "l1-cache-line-size=32" "-mtune=athlon" > "-quiet" "

[Bug middle-end/40095] [4.5 Regression] Revision 147342/147343 caused extra failures

2009-05-10 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 20:39 --- -Wunreachable is completely bogus anyway, I suggest to XFAIL the testcase. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40095

[Bug fortran/39971] kinds.h fails at building libgfortran

2009-05-10 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #16 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-05-10 20:27 --- You may want to have a look at pr29867. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39971

[Bug libstdc++/40094] FAIL: ext/throw_allocator/deallocate_global.cc execution test

2009-05-10 Thread paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-05-10 20:17 --- This is seen only on hpux and frankly I have no idea how the recent changes to throw_allocator (which was completely broken before) could have caused it: I would suggest taking the testcase out of the testsuite

[Bug fortran/39971] kinds.h fails at building libgfortran

2009-05-10 Thread gustcr at yahoo dot com dot ar
--- Comment #15 from gustcr at yahoo dot com dot ar 2009-05-10 19:52 --- I tried the first suggested option, on building gcc-4.4.0. It seems to work but now it fails later with the message: /usr/include/stdlib.h:305: multiple definition of `atof' .libs/backtrace.o:/usr/include/stdlib.h

[Bug middle-end/40095] [4.5 Regression] Revision 147342/147343 caused extra failures

2009-05-10 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 19:51 --- This is latent problem in -Wunreachable. We now unroll the loop: void bar (void) { int i; for (i = 0; i < 2; i++) if (! foo (a[i])) return; baz (); /* { dg-bogus "will never be executed" } */

[Bug rtl-optimization/40086] [4.5 Regression]: cris-elf gfortran.dg/forall_1.f90 -O1 execution

2009-05-10 Thread hp at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 19:26 --- (In reply to comment #2) > Well, if only -O1 fails now, it is almost definitely my patch. It definitely is, there are no other authors in that revision range! :) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40086

[Bug middle-end/40095] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 147342/147343 caused extra failures

2009-05-10 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
Revision 147342/147343 caused: FAIL: gcc.dg/Wunreachable-2.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/flatten-2.c scan-assembler-not indirect[12][: \t\n] on Linux/ia32 and Linux/x86-64. -- Summary: [4.5 Regression] Revision 147342/147343 caused extra failur

[Bug libstdc++/40094] New: FAIL: ext/throw_allocator/deallocate_global.cc execution test

2009-05-10 Thread danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org
Executing on host: /test/gnu/gcc/objdir/./gcc/g++ -shared-libgcc -B/test/gnu/gcc /objdir/./gcc -nostdinc++ -L/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v 3/src -L/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/src/.libs -B/opt/g nu64/gcc/gcc-4.5.0/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/bin/ -B/opt/gnu64

[Bug target/40031] [4.5 Regression] ARM broken with addresses in PHIs with -fPIC

2009-05-10 Thread matz at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 18:41 --- Now I have, hence fixed. -- matz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Stat

[Bug target/40031] [4.5 Regression] ARM broken with addresses in PHIs with -fPIC

2009-05-10 Thread matz at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 18:40 --- Subject: Bug 40031 Author: matz Date: Sun May 10 18:40:16 2009 New Revision: 147350 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=147350 Log: PR target/40031 * config/arm/arm.c (require_pic_reg

[Bug middle-end/39954] [4.5 Regression] Revision 146817 caused unaligned access in gcc.dg/torture/pr26565.c

2009-05-10 Thread danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #24 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 18:40 --- I see this on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11. -- danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/40031] [4.5 Regression] ARM broken with addresses in PHIs with -fPIC

2009-05-10 Thread laurent at guerby dot net
--- Comment #7 from laurent at guerby dot net 2009-05-10 18:23 --- I confirm I didn't apply your patch on the build that failed libmudflap. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40031

[Bug middle-end/40093] Optimization by functios reordering.

2009-05-10 Thread vvv at ru dot ru
--- Comment #5 from vvv at ru dot ru 2009-05-10 18:20 --- (In reply to comment #4) > Well you need whole program to get the behavior which you want. Yes. Of course, it's no problem for small single-programmer project, but it's problem for big projects like Linux Kernel. -- http://g

[Bug target/40031] [4.5 Regression] ARM broken with addresses in PHIs with -fPIC

2009-05-10 Thread matz at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 18:17 --- I haven't yet committed the patch that Ramana tested. Have you applied it manually? Otherwise the breakage is expected. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40031

[Bug middle-end/40093] Optimization by functios reordering.

2009-05-10 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 18:10 --- Well you need whole program to get the behavior which you want. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40093

[Bug middle-end/40093] Optimization by functios reordering.

2009-05-10 Thread vvv at ru dot ru
--- Comment #3 from vvv at ru dot ru 2009-05-10 18:08 --- (In reply to comment #2) > This should have been done already with cgraph order. Unfortunately, I can see inverse order only in separate source file. Inverse but not optimized. Example: // file order1.c #include main(int argc,

[Bug target/37179] gcc emits bad opcode 'ffreep'

2009-05-10 Thread sascha-web-gcc dot gnu dot org at silbe dot org
--- Comment #10 from sascha-web-gcc dot gnu dot org at silbe dot org 2009-05-10 18:05 --- Here you go: o...@debxo:~$ gcc -march=native -### hello.c Using built-in specs. Target: i486-linux-gnu Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Debian 4.3.3-3' --with-bugurl=file://

[Bug target/37179] gcc emits bad opcode 'ffreep'

2009-05-10 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #9 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-05-10 17:51 --- (In reply to comment #8) > > Can you send the output of "gcc -march=native -v"? It looks that the driver > > doesn't detect correctly the type of your CPU. Uh, I mean "gcc -march=native -### hello.c" It should return so

[Bug middle-end/40091] [4.5 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/opt/thunk3.C (test for excess errors)

2009-05-10 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 17:26 --- I also see these on x86_64 and i?86. My bet is on honza, as usual ;) -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug rtl-optimization/40086] [4.5 Regression]: cris-elf gfortran.dg/forall_1.f90 -O1 execution

2009-05-10 Thread bonzini at gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-05-10 17:22 --- Well, if only -O1 fails now, it is almost definitely my patch. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40086

[Bug middle-end/40090] [4.5 Regression] Revision 147330 caused libstdc++ failures

2009-05-10 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 17:17 --- Fixed. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug target/37179] gcc emits bad opcode 'ffreep'

2009-05-10 Thread sascha-web-gcc dot gnu dot org at silbe dot org
--- Comment #8 from sascha-web-gcc dot gnu dot org at silbe dot org 2009-05-10 17:12 --- > Can you send the output of "gcc -march=native -v"? It looks that the driver > doesn't detect correctly the type of your CPU. === Begin === Using built-in specs. Target: i486-linux-gnu Configured

[Bug bootstrap/40082] [4.5 Regression] Power bootstrap is broken in building libstdc++

2009-05-10 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 17:06 --- Fixed. -- hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug middle-end/40084] [4.5 Regression] Revision 147294 failed 483.xalancbmk in SPEC CPU 2006 at -O3

2009-05-10 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-05-10 16:55 --- Fixed. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug middle-end/40093] Optimization by functios reordering.

2009-05-10 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 16:49 --- This should have been done already with cgraph order. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug c/40093] Optimization by functios reordering.

2009-05-10 Thread vvv at ru dot ru
--- Comment #1 from vvv at ru dot ru 2009-05-10 16:43 --- Created an attachment (id=17847) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17847&action=view) Example direct/inverse calls Simple example. RDTSC ticks for direct and inverse sequence of calls. -- http://gcc.gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/40081] verify_stmts failed with -O2

2009-05-10 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 16:41 --- Subject: Bug 40081 Author: rguenth Date: Sun May 10 16:40:55 2009 New Revision: 147349 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=147349 Log: 2009-05-10 Richard Guenther PR tree-optimization/

[Bug c/40093] New: Optimization by functios reordering.

2009-05-10 Thread vvv at ru dot ru
Because memory controller prefetch memory blocks, execution time of functions calls sequence depend on order this functions in memory. For example: 4 calls: call func1 call func2 call func3 call func4 faster in case of direct functions order in memmory: .p2align 4 func1: ret .p2align 4 func

[Bug c++/40092] -std=gnu++0x expansion pattern fails with error about derived template instead of actual template

2009-05-10 Thread cppljevans at suddenlink dot net
--- Comment #1 from cppljevans at suddenlink dot net 2009-05-10 16:22 --- Created an attachment (id=17844) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17844&action=view) The .ii file -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40092

[Bug c++/40092] -std=gnu++0x expansion pattern fails with error about derived template instead of actual template

2009-05-10 Thread cppljevans at suddenlink dot net
--- Comment #2 from cppljevans at suddenlink dot net 2009-05-10 16:22 --- Created an attachment (id=17845) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17845&action=view) compilation output -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40092

[Bug c++/40092] -std=gnu++0x expansion pattern fails with error about derived template instead of actual template

2009-05-10 Thread cppljevans at suddenlink dot net
--- Comment #3 from cppljevans at suddenlink dot net 2009-05-10 16:24 --- Created an attachment (id=17846) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17846&action=view) system type -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40092

[Bug c++/40092] New: -std=gnu++0x expansion pattern fails with error about derived template instead of actual template

2009-05-10 Thread cppljevans at suddenlink dot net
When compile trysto expand: : seq < integral_c < Integral , Vals >... the error diagnostic prints integral_c instead of integral_c. The integral_constant template is derived from integral_c and does have T and val args: struct integral_constant:public mpl::integral_c < T, val >

[Bug fortran/40018] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE in output_constructor

2009-05-10 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 16:15 --- Fixed on trunk and 4.4 Thanks for the report Paul -- pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/40018] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE in output_constructor

2009-05-10 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 16:14 --- Subject: Bug 40018 Author: pault Date: Sun May 10 16:14:37 2009 New Revision: 147347 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=147347 Log: 2009-05-10 Paul Thomas PR fortran/40018 * tra

[Bug tree-optimization/40074] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE in vect_get_vec_def_for_operand, at tree-vect-stmts.c:944

2009-05-10 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #15 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-05-10 16:11 --- (In reply to comment #14) > I am testing: > > Index: tree-vect-data-refs.c > === > --- tree-vect-data-refs.c (revision 147329) > +++ tree-vect-

[Bug fortran/39879] [4.3/4.4 Regression] double free or corruption abort with gfortran

2009-05-10 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #15 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 16:09 --- Fixed on 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5 - thanks for the report. Paul -- pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug fortran/39879] [4.3/4.4 Regression] double free or corruption abort with gfortran

2009-05-10 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #14 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 16:09 --- Subject: Bug 39879 Author: pault Date: Sun May 10 16:09:02 2009 New Revision: 147346 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=147346 Log: 2009-05-10 Paul Thomas PR fortran/39879 * tr

[Bug target/40072] Nonoptimal code - CMOVxx %eax,%edi; mov %edi,%eax; retq

2009-05-10 Thread vvv at ru dot ru
--- Comment #3 from vvv at ru dot ru 2009-05-10 16:09 --- > Not really, the move insn is moved to the beginning of the function: > 0060 : > 60: 89 f8 mov%edi,%eax > 62: 83 ff 08cmp$0x8,%edi > 65: ba 00 00 00 00 mo

[Bug fortran/38863] WHERE with multiple elemental defined assignments gives wrong answer

2009-05-10 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #19 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 15:35 --- Subject: Bug 38863 Author: pault Date: Sun May 10 15:34:55 2009 New Revision: 147345 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=147345 Log: 2009-05-10 Paul Thomas PR fortran/38863 * tr

[Bug middle-end/40091] New: [4.5 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/opt/thunk3.C (test for excess errors)

2009-05-10 Thread danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org
Executing on host: /test/gnu/gcc/objdir/gcc/testsuite/g++/../../g++ -B/test/gnu/ gcc/objdir/gcc/testsuite/g++/../../ /test/gnu/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/t hunk3.C -nostdinc++ -I/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/inc lude/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11 -I/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa64-h

[Bug middle-end/40090] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 147330 caused libstdc++ failures

2009-05-10 Thread hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
Revision 147330 http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-05/msg00304.html caused: FAIL: 26_numerics/slice_array/array_assignment.cc (test for excess errors) FAIL: 26_numerics/slice_array/requirements/explicit_instantiation.cc (test for excess errors) FAIL: 26_numerics/valarray/27867.cc (test for exces

[Bug tree-optimization/39604] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] tree-ssa-sink breaks stack layout

2009-05-10 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #18 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-05-10 14:32 --- Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] tree-ssa-sink breaks stack layout On Sun, 10 May 2009, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > --- Comment #17 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 14:22 > --- >

[Bug target/37179] gcc emits bad opcode 'ffreep'

2009-05-10 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-05-10 14:28 --- (In reply to comment #6) > > /* X86_TUNE_USE_FFREEP */ > > m_AMD_MULTIPLE, > Without having dug into the source, I'd guess that this is the exact location > of the bug. > > > #define m_AMD_MULTIPLE (m_K8 | m_ATHLON | m

[Bug tree-optimization/39604] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] tree-ssa-sink breaks stack layout

2009-05-10 Thread steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #17 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 14:22 --- How will dropping the MEM_EXPRs solve the wrong coalescing in cfgexpand? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39604

[Bug tree-optimization/39604] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] tree-ssa-sink breaks stack layout

2009-05-10 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #16 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-05-10 14:14 --- Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] tree-ssa-sink breaks stack layout On Sun, 10 May 2009, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > --- Comment #15 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 13:51 > --- >

[Bug tree-optimization/39604] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] tree-ssa-sink breaks stack layout

2009-05-10 Thread steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #15 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 13:51 --- The late stack slot allocation idea will just cause other problems, like missing CSE of addresses. GCC should just get the conflicts right somehow... -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39604

[Bug tree-optimization/40087] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Number of iterations analysis wrong

2009-05-10 Thread rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org

[Bug libstdc++/40088] Creating a std::ostringstream object locks a global mutex

2009-05-10 Thread paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comment #8 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-05-10 12:34 --- :) In any case, before attempting anything here, I recommend also re-analyzing libstdc++/12658. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40088

[Bug libstdc++/40088] Creating a std::ostringstream object locks a global mutex

2009-05-10 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 12:21 --- I should scroll down - ignore my comments. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40088

[Bug libstdc++/40088] Creating a std::ostringstream object locks a global mutex

2009-05-10 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 12:14 --- Thus, I was meaning to say that Index: src/locale_init.cc === --- src/locale_init.cc (revision 147329) +++ src/locale_init.cc (working copy) @@ -208,

[Bug libstdc++/40088] Creating a std::ostringstream object locks a global mutex

2009-05-10 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 12:12 --- Btw, from a quick look the global mutex could be easily replaced with atomic updates of the reference counts (it seems they already are atomic) and atomic exchanges of the locale pointer. Atomically fetching the cur

[Bug libstdc++/40088] Creating a std::ostringstream object locks a global mutex

2009-05-10 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 11:52 --- Hm. I wonder how the "global" locale is supposed to interact with multiple threads anyway (in the face of C++ not knowing about threads). Would it be a conforming implementation to put the global locale into thread

[Bug middle-end/40084] [4.5 Regression] Revision 147294 failed 483.xalancbmk in SPEC CPU 2006 at -O3

2009-05-10 Thread hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 11:36 --- Subject: Bug 40084 Author: hubicka Date: Sun May 10 11:36:11 2009 New Revision: 147337 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=147337 Log: PR middle-end/40084 * cgraph.c (cgraph_update

[Bug target/40068] GCC fails to apply dllexport attribute to typeinfo.

2009-05-10 Thread dave dot korn dot cygwin at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 from dave dot korn dot cygwin at gmail dot com 2009-05-10 11:17 --- (In reply to comment #4) > Hello Dave, Hi Danny! > Rather than use DLL linkage (and so force client to resort to auto-import > magic) > why not just always emit the RTTI with one-only comdat linkage.

[Bug tree-optimization/40074] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE in vect_get_vec_def_for_operand, at tree-vect-stmts.c:944

2009-05-10 Thread irar at il dot ibm dot com
--- Comment #14 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2009-05-10 11:00 --- I am testing: Index: tree-vect-data-refs.c === --- tree-vect-data-refs.c (revision 147329) +++ tree-vect-data-refs.c (working copy) @@ -1424,7

[Bug fortran/39879] [4.3/4.4 Regression] double free or corruption abort with gfortran

2009-05-10 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #13 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 10:44 --- Subject: Bug 39879 Author: pault Date: Sun May 10 10:44:22 2009 New Revision: 147336 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=147336 Log: 2009-05-10 Paul Thomas PR fortran/39879 * tr

[Bug libstdc++/40088] Creating a std::ostringstream object locks a global mutex

2009-05-10 Thread paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-05-10 10:42 --- David, are you aware of implementations not affected by this problem while providing thread-safe locale::locale() and locale::global, thus much smarter in the way ios_base deals with locale or you have a feelin

[Bug tree-optimization/40081] verify_stmts failed with -O2

2009-05-10 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 10:29 --- New SRA handles this fine by not scalarizing anything that has volatile fields in it. There is already a fortran testcase with a union with a volatile field that made me aware of this. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugz

[Bug fortran/40018] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE in output_constructor

2009-05-10 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 10:22 --- Subject: Bug 40018 Author: pault Date: Sun May 10 10:22:37 2009 New Revision: 147332 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=147332 Log: 2009-05-10 Paul Thomas PR fortran/40018 * tra

[Bug fortran/40018] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE in output_constructor

2009-05-10 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 10:21 --- Subject: Bug 40018 Author: pault Date: Sun May 10 10:21:08 2009 New Revision: 147331 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=147331 Log: 2009-05-10 Paul Thomas PR fortran/40018 * tra

[Bug tree-optimization/40081] verify_stmts failed with -O2

2009-05-10 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 10:16 --- Subject: Bug 40081 Author: rguenth Date: Sun May 10 10:16:01 2009 New Revision: 147330 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=147330 Log: 2009-05-10 Richard Guenther PR tree-optimization/

[Bug libstdc++/40088] Creating a std::ostringstream object locks a global mutex

2009-05-10 Thread paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-05-10 10:14 --- It's the default contructor of std::locale. -- paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug target/37179] gcc emits bad opcode 'ffreep'

2009-05-10 Thread sascha-web-gcc dot gnu dot org at silbe dot org
--- Comment #6 from sascha-web-gcc dot gnu dot org at silbe dot org 2009-05-10 10:07 --- > /* X86_TUNE_USE_FFREEP */ > m_AMD_MULTIPLE, Without having dug into the source, I'd guess that this is the exact location of the bug. > #define m_AMD_MULTIPLE (m_K8 | m_ATHLON | m_AMDFAM10) I

[Bug tree-optimization/39604] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] tree-ssa-sink breaks stack layout

2009-05-10 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #14 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 10:00 --- Another possible solution that was mentioned is to delay stack slot allocation until after scheduling (or possibly later code motion optimizations). Before that stack slots could be represented by their own pseudo

[Bug tree-optimization/40087] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Number of iterations analysis wrong

2009-05-10 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 09:52 --- It is number of iteration analysis that gets it wrong (I suppose it might get confused by the two exits of the loop?). Disabling loop header copying makes the code easier to analyze. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot

[Bug tree-optimization/40087] Bad assembly for -O2

2009-05-10 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 09:42 --- Testcase that fails at -O1 (the key is that reverse needs to be inlined): extern void abort (void); static void __attribute__((always_inline)) reverse(int *first, int *last) { if (first == last--) return;

[Bug libstdc++/40088] Creating a std::ostringstream object locks a global mutex

2009-05-10 Thread paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-05-10 09:40 --- System type? More generally, please provide all the informations detailed in: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html Thanks. -- paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed

[Bug fortran/40089] New: Public type with public component which has a private type

2009-05-10 Thread janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
Please consider the following code: module m implicit none private public :: public_t public :: public_sub !public :: private_t (*) type :: private_t integer :: i end type type :: public_t type(private_t), pointer :: public_comp_with_private_type !(#1) procedur

[Bug target/40031] [4.5 Regression] ARM broken with addresses in PHIs with -fPIC

2009-05-10 Thread laurent at guerby dot net
--- Comment #5 from laurent at guerby dot net 2009-05-10 09:28 --- For the record at rev 147290 even with c++ disabled the bootstrap failed on libmudflap: libtool: compile: /home/guerby/build/./gcc/xgcc -B/home/guerby/build/./gcc/ -B/n/50/guerby/install-trunk-147290/armv5tel-unknown-l

[Bug tree-optimization/40074] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE in vect_get_vec_def_for_operand, at tree-vect-stmts.c:944

2009-05-10 Thread irar at il dot ibm dot com
--- Comment #13 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2009-05-10 09:20 --- (In reply to comment #12) > Well, that revision only enabled vectorization support for more things... > (which is probably what makes this a regression in the first place). Right, I think it is something in the strided

[Bug tree-optimization/40074] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE in vect_get_vec_def_for_operand, at tree-vect-stmts.c:944

2009-05-10 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 09:14 --- Well, that revision only enabled vectorization support for more things... (which is probably what makes this a regression in the first place). -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Rem

[Bug fortran/38863] WHERE with multiple elemental defined assignments gives wrong answer

2009-05-10 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #18 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 08:56 --- Problem in comment #1 is fixed on trunk. Cheers Paul -- pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug fortran/38863] WHERE with multiple elemental defined assignments gives wrong answer

2009-05-10 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #17 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-10 07:23 --- Subject: Bug 38863 Author: pault Date: Sun May 10 07:23:30 2009 New Revision: 147329 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=147329 Log: 2009-05-10 Paul Thomas PR fortran/38863 * tr