--- Comment #24 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-02 17:43 ---
This is great, but an additional test case for dynamic method invocation is
needed.
We need to be able to continue if a class T that contains a method that refers
to a missing class M is initialized. At that time
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-01 15:31 ---
It's caused by only one multilib being installed. The 64-bit one is there, not
the 32-bit one.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25207
--- Comment #4 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-25 16:18 ---
Subject: Bug 25016
Author: aph
Date: Fri Nov 25 16:18:17 2005
New Revision: 107509
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=107509
Log:
2005-11-25 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR libgcj/25016
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-25 16:31 ---
Subject: Bug 25016
Author: aph
Date: Fri Nov 25 16:31:09 2005
New Revision: 107510
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=107510
Log:
2005-11-25 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR libgcj/25016
--- Comment #6 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-25 17:20 ---
Subject: Bug 25016
Author: aph
Date: Fri Nov 25 17:20:09 2005
New Revision: 107511
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=107511
Log:
2005-11-25 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR libgcj/25016
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25016
--- Comment #1 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-24 11:48 ---
Consider this program:
public class TimedWait
{
public static void main (String[] argv)
throws InterruptedException
{
Object o = new Object();
synchronized (o)
{
o.wait(Long.MAX_VALUE
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-24 11:48 ---
Patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2005-q4/msg00222.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25016
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |critical
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #23 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-17 13:46 ---
mm, I was wrong about static fields.
The problem is that a JV_CONSTANT_Fieldref constant pool entry points to a
JV_CONSTANT_Class, and at the present time we attempt to resolve that
JV_CONSTANT_Class reference at link
--- Comment #21 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-16 17:20 ---
Accesses to static fields should be fixed already when compiling BC.
We generate a call to _Jv_ResolvePoolEntry(Class, int) for every static field
reference, which resolves the target class and returns a pointer
--- Comment #18 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-09 15:28 ---
It's probably not the best idea to solve everything in this bug in a single
patch.
Better make several patches, for the different issues.
Also, if there are some verifier changes needed, let's get those committed
--- Comment #6 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-09 18:22 ---
Two things:
Does this work for fds that aren't associated with sockets?
It doesn't quite avoid the need for locking, since we still need to make sure
that we only close an fd once.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #8 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-07 10:40 ---
It's not possibe from this description to tell when this problem occurs, nor
which kind of error it is. What does crash mean? When does it occur?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24616
--- Comment #11 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-07 14:52 ---
You're not describing this clearly. :-)
We need to point the execution vector at a piece of code that throws an
exception with the appropriate args. Now, how should we do that?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #6 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-06 16:15 ---
You can get the class by generating a special-purpose thunk using the libffi
invocation interface and pointing the vector at the thunk.
Virtual methods are easy to do by adding a suitable NoClassDefFoundError
method
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-01 20:41 ---
THis looks like a hang in the unwinder the very first time any exception is
thrown
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20495
--- Comment #6 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 10:58 ---
gcj doesn't support strcitfp. The reserved word is allowed but ignored.
The main casualty of this is x86, where we fail some tests because of excess
precision.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24454
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24442
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21517
--- Comment #8 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-13 09:07 ---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2004-q4/msg00230.html.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1373
--- Comment #9 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-13 09:10 ---
See also http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2004-q4/msg00241.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1373
--- Comment #10 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-13 09:11 ---
And http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2004-q4/msg00270.html.
Hans' threading seems to be broken.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1373
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30 14:24
---
.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30 16:11
---
.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--
Bug 24018 depends on bug 24147, which changed state.
Bug 24147 Summary: [gcc 4.0 only] Deadlock in java.net.URLClassLoader
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24147
What|Old Value |New Value
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-27 17:35
---
We also need http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/2005-09/msg00053.html.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19505
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-27 17:37
---
We also need http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/2005-09/msg00053.html.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24018
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-27 17:38
---
Forget that last comment. Wrong PR.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19505
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-08 14:09
---
I found the cause of this bug. A line of code was incorrectly removed from
pop_type_0() when the new verifier was added, a fairly long time ago. This
patch should fix it.
Index: expr.c
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-10 11:43
---
It's okay, your first testcase was adequately reduced.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23314
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-08 11:28
---
This bug seems to be moribund.
There exists code in gcc (gen_entry_point_die) to do this, but it is ifdef'd out
at the present time. We could uncomment it and call it; I don't imagine it
would be hard
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-08 15:23
---
I think we have deadlock here! It's easy enough to fix this once the changes
have been made to gdb but pretty pointless otherwise.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1427
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-08 19:37
---
I'm surprised this still fails with 4.0.1-6.
overholt, can you reproduce this?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20606
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-17 14:49
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21264 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-17 14:49
---
*** Bug 20088 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-17 14:49
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21624 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-17 14:49
---
*** Bug 18945 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-17 14:53
---
.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-17 14:53
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21624 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-17 14:53
---
*** Bug 20088 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21591
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21428
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-05 16:33
---
This may be a dup of 20606
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21362
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03 13:12
---
This bug is obsoleted by the fix for PR java/19285.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status
--
Bug 17574 depends on bug 18399, which changed state.
Bug 18399 Summary: [4.0/4.1 Regression] Class initialization optimization does
not work with the inliner
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18399
What|Old Value |New Value
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03 13:34
---
I'm tempted to change this to WONTFIX.
The patch for PR java/19285 party fixes this for indirect dispatch: in A.foo2(),
the field B.bar is initialized by a call to _Jv_ResolvePoolEntry, and this is
only
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03 16:10
---
See also PR 21362
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20606
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-28 10:59
---
Added to Tom Tromey's queue for 4.0 branch.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-28 11:00
---
Added to Tom Tromey's queue for 4.0 branch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21140
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-21 13:38
---
OK, so it isn't a libffi bug.
The odd thing here is that despite the fact that promotion of outgoing args is a
machine dependent issue, each language front end is required to do it.
This patch corresponds
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21115
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-20 14:38
---
This is indeed a libffi bug.
Whether a boolean is promoted to a full word or not is a part of the system ABI.
It's controlled in gcc by TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES, and is part of the gcc
back end.
What you
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-19 12:33
---
Should be fixed by
2005-04-18 Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* java-except.h (struct eh_range.handler): Remove unused field.
(handle_nested_ranges): Remove function declaration
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-19 13:26
---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-04/msg01068.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21022
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16 16:45
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 12911 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16 16:45
---
*** Bug 21044 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16 16:46
---
This is related to, but not the same as, 12911.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: java
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,java-prs at gcc dot
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-15 11:32
---
Created an attachment (id=8643)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8643action=view)
You must enter a description for the attachment.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21044
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-14 13:28
---
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=113145.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21020
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |tromey at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-14 18:47
---
Do you want me to post the patch, then?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21020
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-06 15:13
---
This only happens with -O2. -O is a reasonable workaround for the time being.
--
What|Removed |Added
: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org,gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot
org,pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
GCC build triplet: powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: powerpc-unknown-linux
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-05 08:54
---
Created an attachment (id=8535)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8535action=view)
A test case
If you run the appended code with g++ version 3.4.1, you get
$ g++ -m32 thing.cc -save-temps
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-23 18:46
---
.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|aph at gcc dot gnu dot org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu
||dot org
Status
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-23 14:06
---
Try it now.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-23 15:07
---
Created an attachment (id=8264)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8264action=view)
patch
Try this patch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18362
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18362
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|WAITING
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-23 15:32
---
Please put the jars and .so files somewhere I can see them.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||tromey at redhat dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20104
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-22 15:05
---
The failure is here:
package org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.impl;
public class CompilerOptions ...
{
void updateSeverity(long irritant, Object severityString) {
if (ERROR.equals
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-22 15:23
---
Ok, so the file was generated by ecj, but was ecj precompiled or interpreted?
What VM was ecj running on?
Does ecj generate this same bogus file for
org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.impl.CompilerOptions
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-22 16:04
---
Forget that, second arg is a long. My mistake.
The compiled code is OK.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20104
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-14 14:56
---
We need to make this change soon. I'd like to do something that Hans would
approve of, but I don't know exactly what that might be.
Andreas Jaeger says his patch works. Unless someone comes up with something
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-14 15:18
---
This seems to me like creeping featurism.
We need to distinguish between fixing this bug in a simple way and adding nice
new properties that would require a change to the garbage collector's API
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-12 13:29
---
The patch I submitted is inadequate. I know how to fix it, and I'll resubmit.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19907
Component: java
AssignedTo: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,java-prs at gcc dot gnu
dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19907
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-11 16:37
---
Created an attachment (id=8177)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8177action=view)
ManifestElement.class
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19907
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-10 10:58
---
It looks like the patch was applied to the wrong place in the file: it certainly
was my intention to apply it to all Linux. And indeed, my testing was not on
m68k, but on x86-64.
The obvious question
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-09 10:47
---
I changed the gc settings to enable USE_MMAP on Linux.
I had to do this because at least one Linux kernel didn't give exec permission
on the heap. That change did work at the time.
2004-01-20 Andrew Haley
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-08 19:25
---
I don't think this is a libffi problem. gcj allocates trampolines on the heap,
not the stack.
I think this is a multilib problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19823
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|aph at gcc dot gnu dot org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu
||dot org
Status|ASSIGNED
301 - 400 of 440 matches
Mail list logo
