[Bug inline-asm/37195] different variables get the same overlapping memory address in inline assembly

2010-04-30 Thread jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be
--- Comment #8 from jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be 2010-04-30 07:24 --- On first sight, it looks fixed in gcc 4.6.0 SVN. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37195

[Bug inline-asm/41294] New: =rm constraints give overlapping memory addresses

2009-09-07 Thread jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be
: inline-asm AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41294

[Bug inline-asm/41294] =rm constraints give overlapping memory addresses

2009-09-07 Thread jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be
--- Comment #1 from jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be 2009-09-07 10:49 --- Created an attachment (id=18528) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18528action=view) Testcase -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41294

[Bug inline-asm/41294] =rm constraints give overlapping memory addresses

2009-09-07 Thread jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be
--- Comment #3 from jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be 2009-09-07 19:30 --- (In reply to comment #2) I think you need to mark both alternatives early-clobber, not only the register one. Thus =rm at least according to the manual. That doesn't seem to change anything. It looks

[Bug c/41263] New: gcc uses all available memory

2009-09-04 Thread jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41263

[Bug c/41263] gcc uses all available memory

2009-09-04 Thread jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be
--- Comment #1 from jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be 2009-09-04 13:21 --- Created an attachment (id=18493) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18493action=view) Testcase -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41263

[Bug inline-asm/37195] different variables get the same overlapping memory address in inline assembly

2008-09-29 Thread jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be
--- Comment #5 from jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be 2008-09-29 19:22 --- Created an attachment (id=16428) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16428action=view) Unified testcase This testcase exhibits the problem on i386, x86_64, powerpc and powerpc64 using

[Bug c/37544] New: Conversion double - unsigned long long - unsigned - double gives wrong results

2008-09-16 Thread jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be
Version: 4.4.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu GCC host triplet

[Bug c/37544] Conversion double - unsigned long long - unsigned - double gives wrong results

2008-09-16 Thread jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be
--- Comment #1 from jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be 2008-09-16 16:40 --- Created an attachment (id=16339) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16339action=view) Testcase -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37544

[Bug c/37544] Conversion double - unsigned long long - unsigned - double gives wrong results

2008-09-16 Thread jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be
--- Comment #3 from jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be 2008-09-16 18:39 --- In fact, with -mno-sse the problem disappears for me too. I *do* get the problem with gcc -std=c99 -O1 -march=i386 -msse2 -mfpmath=387 -- jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be changed: What

[Bug inline-asm/37195] different variables get the same memory address in inline assembly

2008-09-03 Thread jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be
--- Comment #4 from jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be 2008-09-03 07:57 --- Created an attachment (id=16200) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16200action=view) Testcase for powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu Also fails on powerpc: $ gcc -O1 test37195-powerpc.i -save-temps -c

[Bug inline-asm/37195] unrelated variables get the same memory address in inline assembly

2008-09-02 Thread jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be
--- Comment #3 from jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be 2008-09-02 08:52 --- Created an attachment (id=16187) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16187action=view) Further testcase simplification The third testcase uses only rm and =rm constraints, which means

[Bug inline-asm/37195] unrelated variables get the same memory address in inline assembly

2008-09-01 Thread jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be
--- Comment #2 from jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be 2008-09-01 18:18 --- Created an attachment (id=16183) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16183action=view) Better and simpler test case The second test case, asmtest2.i exhibits the bug on even more versions of gcc

[Bug inline-asm/37195] unrelated variables get the same memory address in inline assembly

2008-09-01 Thread jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be
-- jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |major http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37195

[Bug inline-asm/37195] unrelated variables get the same memory address in inline assembly

2008-09-01 Thread jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be
-- jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jdemeyer at cage dot ugent

[Bug inline-asm/37195] New: unrelated variables get the same memory address in inline assembly

2008-08-21 Thread jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be
in inline assembly Product: gcc Version: 4.2.4 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: inline-asm AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: jdemeyer at cage dot ugent

[Bug inline-asm/37195] unrelated variables get the same memory address in inline assembly

2008-08-21 Thread jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be
--- Comment #1 from jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be 2008-08-21 21:16 --- Created an attachment (id=16123) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16123action=view) Source code which shows the problem -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37195