[Bug 2052929]
Fixed for 13.3 too. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2052929 Title: failed autopkgtests for evolver vs glibc 2.39 on amd64 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/2052929/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2052929]
From what I can see, glibc uses there the same thing as libquadmath does, so why is it ok on the glibc side and not on the libquadmath side? I mean https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=stdio-common/printf_fp.c;h=e75706f089bba3baabbcfb6bcf41514bad0a9dcb;hb=HEAD#l222 and https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=stdio-common/printf_fp.c;h=e75706f089bba3baabbcfb6bcf41514bad0a9dcb;hb=HEAD#l191 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2052929 Title: failed autopkgtests for evolver vs glibc 2.39 on amd64 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/2052929/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2052929]
I guess we should go with the above patch after fixing formatting, but it isn't enough, printf_fphex.c has similar code. Even in glibc which doesn't support printing _Float128 nor any other type which would require similar alignment, the hooks only register a function to fill in some mem and allows specification of size, but can't specify alignment. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2052929 Title: failed autopkgtests for evolver vs glibc 2.39 on amd64 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/2052929/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2052929]
Created attachment 57853 gcc14-pr114533.patch Untested fix. Unfortunately, we don't have any testsuite for libquadmath, hope it will be tested during libgfortran testing. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2052929 Title: failed autopkgtests for evolver vs glibc 2.39 on amd64 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/2052929/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1831385]
GCC 12.1 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 12.2. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1831385 Title: `std::cosf`, `std::sinf`, `std::sqrtf` are not declared in `` To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1831385/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1791425]
The GCC 8 branch is being closed, fixed in GCC 9.1. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1791425 Title: Compiler error: constexpr with bitfields. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-defaults/+bug/1791425/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1823296]
The GCC 8 branch is being closed, fixed in GCC 9.1. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1823296 Title: g++ 7.3 and g++ 8.2 report segmentation fault To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1823296/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1856682]
Assuming fixed. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1856682 Title: [UBUNTU 20.04] GCC Miscompilation in vectorized code To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1856682/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1823296]
GCC 8.4.0 has been released, adjusting target milestone. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1823296 Title: g++ 7.3 and g++ 8.2 report segmentation fault To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1823296/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1862053]
The fixes have been reverted for 9.3/8.4. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1862053 Title: Compiler gets stuck (or extremely slow) on ppc64el To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1862053/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1862053]
GCC 9.3.0 has been released, adjusting target milestone. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1862053 Title: Compiler gets stuck (or extremely slow) on ppc64el To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1862053/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1862053]
Caused PR93974. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1862053 Title: Compiler gets stuck (or extremely slow) on ppc64el To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1862053/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1791425]
GCC 8.4.0 has been released, adjusting target milestone. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1791425 Title: Compiler error: constexpr with bitfields. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-defaults/+bug/1791425/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1862053]
On the #c7 testcase, this started with r8-6072-ga3a821c903c9fa2288712d31da2038d0297babcb (so I wonder why this isn't a 8/9/10 Regression). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1862053 Title: Compiler gets stuck (or extremely slow) on ppc64el To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1862053/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1791425]
Author: jakub Date: Tue Apr 16 19:06:41 2019 New Revision: 270396 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270396=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/86953 * g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-86953.C: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-86953.C Modified: trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1791425 Title: Compiler error: constexpr with bitfields. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-defaults/+bug/1791425/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1811798]
What we could do there is remove the first of those two splitters, remove the && !dead_or_set_p (insn, operands[1]) test from the second, and add peephole2 that would transform (set (access part 1) (subreg:SI (match_dup 1) low)) (set (match_dup 1) (rotate:DI (match_dup 1) (const_int 32))) (set (access part 2) (subreg:SI (match_dup 1) low)) with a lshiftrt instead of rotate if reg 1 is dead after the third insn (assuming rotate is more expensive as right shift, if it is the same expensive/same size, then having the two splitters makes no sense). The last rotate should have been removed by DCE already if it was truly dead (though, of course, if it for some reason isn't yet, you could have another peephole2 for that too). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1811798 Title: gcc 8 miscompiles scipy/optimize/minpack/qrsolv.f To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1811798/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1811798]
That said, the regression is fixed now. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1811798 Title: gcc 8 miscompiles scipy/optimize/minpack/qrsolv.f To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1811798/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1811798]
(In reply to Andreas Krebbel from comment #16) > I'll commit a patch which just removes the splitter for now. I'll try to > come up with a nicer testcase. All 3 s390 splitters that do this? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1811798 Title: gcc 8 miscompiles scipy/optimize/minpack/qrsolv.f To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1811798/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1811798]
I admit I have just a vague recollection of this, but I thought since df has been added, usually if a pass wants REG_DEAD notes, it needs to df_note_add_problem () and df_analyze should rebuild the REG_DEAD/REG_UNUSED notes. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1811798 Title: gcc 8 miscompiles scipy/optimize/minpack/qrsolv.f To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1811798/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1811798]
So, to me this looks like a backend bug, using dead_or_set_p in a splitter when the split passes don't really compute the note problem. Seems s390 is the only backend that does this, other backends use dead_or_set_p either only in peephole2s (which is fine, peephole2 pass starts with df_set_flags (DF_LR_RUN_DCE); df_note_add_problem (); df_analyze (); and even when many targets don't use df_or_set_p, they do use peep2_dead*), or (cris) in delayed branch scheduling (I believe that doesn't guarantee that either). Can't what you are doing in the splitters be done in define_peephole2 instead? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1811798 Title: gcc 8 miscompiles scipy/optimize/minpack/qrsolv.f To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1811798/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1811798]
Segher on IRC says that removing REG_DEAD notes that aren't valid is the right thing, so paging others what they think. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1811798 Title: gcc 8 miscompiles scipy/optimize/minpack/qrsolv.f To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1811798/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1811798]
(In reply to Andreas Krebbel from comment #14) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11) > > ... Can't what you are doing in the splitters be done in > > define_peephole2 instead? > > Not that easy unfortunately. peephole2 will run after reload. So the FP > constant ok 0.0 will already be reloaded into a register first or pushed > into literal pool. The point of doing the transformation is to avoid this. But it is still invalid. If those splitters are essentially to you and worth slowing the compiler on s390*, then you could e.g. add a custom target pass right before split1, where you'd just df_note_addr_problem (); df_analyze (); and thus ensured that during the splitting you could use the REG_DEAD/REG_UNUSED notes safely. In the splitters you'd likely need to use current_pass to verify you are in the pass for which you've done this. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1811798 Title: gcc 8 miscompiles scipy/optimize/minpack/qrsolv.f To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1811798/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1811798]
Yeah, like that problematic source, all gfortran options used to compile that, any needed modules too + stubbed whatever it calls and whatever is needed in MAIN__ or main to reproduce, ideally with minimal dependencies. If you know the exact problematic routine, see in the debugger how many times it is called and in which invocation of the routine it misbehaves and try to capture on which arguments it is called. If you don't know the exact problematic routine, one can e.g. play with assembly bisection between -funroll-loops and no -funroll-loops, rename .L* labels in one of them so that it can be merged by hand more easily. I think gfortran doesn't have optimize (0) attribute yet. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1811798 Title: gcc 8 miscompiles scipy/optimize/minpack/qrsolv.f To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1811798/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1295738]
GCC 4.8.4 has been released. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1295738 Title: [4.8 Regression] unable to find a register to spill in class 'LO_REGS' To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1295738/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1352417]
GCC 4.8.4 has been released. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1352417 Title: [4.8/4.9 Regression] cc1plus doesn't terminate when called with -g on arm-linux-gnueabihf To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1352417/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1112499]
GCC 4.8.4 has been released. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1112499 Title: WiFi.cpp doesn't compile with default flags To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1112499/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1295653]
Fixed on the trunk, but not on the 4.8 branch yet. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1295653 Title: [4.8/4.9 Regression] Error: value of 256 too large for field of 1 bytes at 68242 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1295653/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1286343]
Fixed on the trunk so far. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1286343 Title: mrpt triggers ICE on armf, powerpc, ppc64el at -O2 or higher To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1286343/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1286343]
FYI, since r208573 the reduced ppc64 testcase no longer reproduces, but the #c0 still does. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1286343 Title: mrpt triggers ICE on armf, powerpc, ppc64el at -O2 or higher To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1286343/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1286343]
Slightly more reduced testcase:
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ipa/pr60419.C 2014-03-19 15:57:57.735114622 +0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ipa/pr60419.C 2014-03-20 10:20:56.245365852 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+// PR middle-end/60419
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options -O2 }
+
+struct J
+{
+ J ();
+ virtual void foo (int , int);
+};
+
+struct D
+{
+ virtual void foo (J ) const;
+ void bar ()
+ {
+J p;
+foo (p);
+ }
+};
+
+struct K : J, public D
+{
+};
+
+struct F
+{
+ K *operator-();
+};
+
+struct N : public K
+{
+ void foo (int , int);
+ void foo (J ) const {}
+};
+
+struct L
+{
+ F l;
+};
+
+struct M
+{
+ L *operator-();
+};
+
+struct G
+{
+ G ();
+};
+
+M h;
+
+G::G ()
+try
+{
+ N f;
+ f.bar ();
+ throw;
+}
+catch (int)
+{
+}
+
+void
+baz ()
+{
+ h-l-bar ();
+}
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1286343
Title:
mrpt triggers ICE on armf, powerpc, ppc64el at -O2 or higher
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1286343/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1286343]
I have:
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ipa/pr60419.C 2014-03-19 15:57:57.735114622 +0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ipa/pr60419.C 2014-03-20 11:13:58.933256068 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,80 @@
+// PR middle-end/60419
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options -O2 }
+
+struct C
+{
+};
+
+struct I : C
+{
+ I ();
+};
+
+struct J
+{
+ void foo ();
+ J ();
+ virtual void foo (int , int);
+};
+
+template class
+struct D
+{
+ virtual void foo (I ) const;
+ void bar ()
+ {
+I p;
+foo (p);
+ }
+};
+
+struct K : J, public Dint
+{
+};
+
+struct F
+{
+ K *operator-();
+};
+
+struct N : public K
+{
+ void foo (int , int);
+ I n;
+ void foo (I ) const {}
+};
+
+struct L : J
+{
+ F l;
+};
+
+struct M : F
+{
+ L *operator-();
+};
+
+struct G
+{
+ G ();
+};
+
+M h;
+
+G::G ()
+try
+{
+ N f;
+ f.bar ();
+ throw;
+}
+catch (int)
+{
+}
+
+void
+baz ()
+{
+ h-l-bar ();
+}
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1286343
Title:
mrpt triggers ICE on armf, powerpc, ppc64el at -O2 or higher
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1286343/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1286343]
Honza or Martin, can you please have a look? The #c5 testcase should be reproduceable with a cross to powerpc64-linux. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1286343 Title: mrpt triggers ICE on armf, powerpc, ppc64el at -O2 or higher To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1286343/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1286343]
The slsr issue is just a pilot error, I've mistakenly used ~ r205NNN compiler in that case, so it looks like an already fixed issue. Anyway, the ICE on ppc64 with the reduced testcase started with r208184 (thus I wonder about the 4.8 regression status), the problem is that getMeanVal function (method?) calls _ZThn8_NK4mrpt5utils16CPosePDFGaussian7getMeanERNS_5poses7CPose2DE thunk that has NULL node-callee (without -fPIC it ICEs in one spot, with -fPIC in another one). node-callees is set to non-NULL in: #0 cgraph_create_edge (caller=cgraph_node* 0x70f32148 _ZThn8_NK4mrpt5utils16CPosePDFGaussian7getMeanERNS_5poses7CPose2DE, callee=cgraph_node* 0x70f32000 *.LTHUNK0, call_stmt=gimple 0x0, count=0, freq=1000) at ../../gcc/cgraph.c:927 #1 0x008ffe81 in analyze_function ( node=cgraph_node* 0x70f32148 _ZThn8_NK4mrpt5utils16CPosePDFGaussian7getMeanERNS_5poses7CPose2DE) at ../../gcc/cgraphunit.c:611 #2 0x009010b4 in analyze_functions () at ../../gcc/cgraphunit.c:1017 #3 0x00904979 in finalize_compilation_unit () at ../../gcc/cgraphunit.c:2320 #4 0x0068b61d in cp_write_global_declarations () at ../../gcc/cp/decl2.c:4612 #5 0x00d0ee72 in compile_file () at ../../gcc/toplev.c:562 #6 0x00d11015 in do_compile () at ../../gcc/toplev.c:1914 #7 0x00d11180 in toplev_main (argc=8, argv=0x7fffe358) at ../../gcc/toplev.c:1990 #8 0x012c0464 in main (argc=8, argv=0x7fffe358) at ../../gcc/main.c:36 and cleared again in: #0 cgraph_node_remove_callees (node=cgraph_node* 0x70f32148 _ZThn8_NK4mrpt5utils16CPosePDFGaussian7getMeanERNS_5poses7CPose2DE) at ../../gcc/cgraph.c:1617 #1 0x00b2dc63 in symtab_remove_unreachable_nodes (before_inlining_p=false, file=0x0) at ../../gcc/ipa.c:493 #2 0x0124c93f in ipa_inline () at ../../gcc/ipa-inline.c:2060 #3 0x0124d385 in (anonymous namespace)::pass_ipa_inline::execute (this=0x1c73710) at ../../gcc/ipa-inline.c:2412 #4 0x00c299d6 in execute_one_pass (pass=opt_pass* 0x1c73710 inline(53)) at ../../gcc/passes.c:2229 #5 0x00c2a71b in execute_ipa_pass_list (pass=opt_pass* 0x1c73710 inline(53)) at ../../gcc/passes.c:2607 #6 0x009042ad in ipa_passes () at ../../gcc/cgraphunit.c:2084 #7 0x0090455e in compile () at ../../gcc/cgraphunit.c:2174 #8 0x00904988 in finalize_compilation_unit () at ../../gcc/cgraphunit.c:2329 #9 0x0068b61d in cp_write_global_declarations () at ../../gcc/cp/decl2.c:4612 #10 0x00d0ee72 in compile_file () at ../../gcc/toplev.c:562 #11 0x00d11015 in do_compile () at ../../gcc/toplev.c:1914 #12 0x00d11180 in toplev_main (argc=8, argv=0x7fffe358) at ../../gcc/toplev.c:1990 #13 0x012c0464 in main (argc=8, argv=0x7fffe358) at ../../gcc/main.c:36 At that point the thunk apparently has no callers. But somewhat later it gains one: #0 cgraph_set_edge_callee (e=0x7fffef50a8f0, n=cgraph_node* 0x70f32148 _ZThn8_NK4mrpt5utils16CPosePDFGaussian7getMeanERNS_5poses7CPose2DE) at ../../gcc/cgraph.c:1080 #1 0x008f74a8 in cgraph_make_edge_direct (edge=0x7fffef50a8f0, callee=cgraph_node* 0x70f32148 _ZThn8_NK4mrpt5utils16CPosePDFGaussian7getMeanERNS_5poses7CPose2DE) at ../../gcc/cgraph.c:1313 #2 0x00b1f7ae in ipa_make_edge_direct_to_target (ie=0x7fffef50a8f0, target=function_decl 0x70fc5a00 _ZThn8_NK4mrpt5utils16CPosePDFGaussian7getMeanERNS_5poses7CPose2DE) at ../../gcc/ipa-prop.c:2551 #3 0x00b20091 in try_make_edge_direct_virtual_call (ie=0x7fffef50a8f0, jfunc=0x7085b078, new_root_info=0x1e4cce0) at ../../gcc/ipa-prop.c:2799 #4 0x00b201e2 in update_indirect_edges_after_inlining (cs=0x7fffef9baf08, node=cgraph_node* 0x70ad58f8 getMeanVal, new_edges=0x0) at ../../gcc/ipa-prop.c:2852 #5 0x00b20476 in propagate_info_to_inlined_callees (cs=0x7fffef9baf08, node=cgraph_node* 0x70ad58f8 getMeanVal, new_edges=0x0) at ../../gcc/ipa-prop.c:2924 #6 0x00b20c3d in ipa_propagate_indirect_call_infos (cs=0x7fffef9baf08, new_edges=0x0) at ../../gcc/ipa-prop.c:3086 #7 0x0124e183 in inline_call (e=0x7fffef9baf08, update_original=true, new_edges=0x0, overall_size=0x0, update_overall_summary=true) at ../../gcc/ipa-inline-transform.c:277 #8 0x0124c6da in inline_to_all_callers (node=cgraph_node* 0x70ad58f8 getMeanVal, data=0x7fffe024) at ../../gcc/ipa-inline.c:1987 #9 0x008f9a18 in cgraph_for_node_and_aliases (node=cgraph_node* 0x70ad58f8 getMeanVal, callback= 0x124c5f5 inline_to_all_callers(cgraph_node*, void*), data=0x7fffe024, include_overwritable=true) at ../../gcc/cgraph.c:2212 #10 0x0124cacc in ipa_inline () at ../../gcc/ipa-inline.c:2118 #11 0x0124d385 in (anonymous namespace)::pass_ipa_inline::execute (this=0x1c73710) at ../../gcc/ipa-inline.c:2412 #12 0x00c299d6 in
[Bug 1286343]
Created attachment 32321 pr60419.C This is quite impossible to reduce, at least after 4 days of attempting to delta/creduce reduce this I got only to 132KB. Compile with -m64 -O3 -std=c++11. Anyway, it is reduced enough that it compiles (and ICEs in a different place) with x86_64-linux cc1plus, so also shows a bug in slsr, with -m64 -O3 -std=c++11 -fno-tree-slsr it compiles with x86_64 target though and thus I can't bisect this on x86_64. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1286343 Title: mrpt triggers ICE on armf, powerpc, ppc64el at -O2 or higher To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1286343/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1112499]
GCC 4.6.4 has been released and the branch has been closed. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1112499 Title: WiFi.cpp doesn't compile with default flags To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1112499/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1185028]
GCC 4.8.2 has been released. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1185028 Title: drizzle FTBFS due to internal compiler error: Segmentation fault whilst compiling drizzle on i386|armhf To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1185028/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1175744]
The difference in *.uninit before/after that commit is small, just: @@ -78,7 +79,7 @@ fn4 (struct F * x, unsigned int k) goto bb 7; bb 7: - # retval_25 = PHI 0(3), retval_26(6) + # err_25 = PHI 0(3), retval_26(6) _12 = y_9-f; if (_12 == 0) goto bb 9; @@ -89,17 +90,17 @@ fn4 (struct F * x, unsigned int k) goto bb 13; bb 9: - if (retval_25 0) + if (err_25 0) goto bb 10; else goto bb 11; bb 10: - retval_14 = fn0 (); + err_14 = fn0 (); bb 11: - # retval_2 = PHI retval_25(9), retval_14(10) - if (retval_2 0) + # err_2 = PHI err_25(9), err_14(10) + if (err_2 0) goto bb 12; else goto bb 8; and in both cases there is # retval_26 = PHI retval_27(D)(4), retval_21(5) that is the reason for the warning. The important thing is that the retval decl has TREE_NO_WARNING set (because of the retval = retval uninit warning suppression), while err doesn't. Trying a patch not to consider TREE_NO_WARNING SSA_NAME_VARs ssa_undefined_value_p when inside of tree-ssa-uninit.c now. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1175744 Title: [4.8 Regression] wrong -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning with -Os To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1175744/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1175744]
Author: jakub Date: Tue May 7 10:30:13 2013 New Revision: 198671 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=198671root=gccview=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/57149 * tree-ssa-uninit.c (uninit_undefined_value_p): New inline. (can_skip_redundant_opnd, compute_uninit_opnds_pos, collect_phi_def_edges, execute_late_warn_uninitialized): Use uninit_undefined_value_p instead of ssa_undefined_value_p. * gcc.dg/pr57149.c: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr57149.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-ssa-uninit.c Author: jakub Date: Tue May 7 10:32:41 2013 New Revision: 198672 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=198672root=gccview=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/57149 * tree-ssa-uninit.c (uninit_undefined_value_p): New inline. (can_skip_redundant_opnd, compute_uninit_opnds_pos, collect_phi_def_edges, execute_late_warn_uninitialized): Use uninit_undefined_value_p instead of ssa_undefined_value_p. * gcc.dg/pr57149.c: New test. Added: branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr57149.c Modified: branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/tree-ssa-uninit.c -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1175744 Title: [4.8 Regression] wrong -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning with -Os To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1175744/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1175744]
I'd say the problem comes from the
int retval = retval;
in isr_tr_complete_low, which is supposedly inlined into the function
containing err = istr_tr_complete_low (mEp);
At least replacing that with retval = 0; makes the warning go away.
Reduced testcase for -Os -Wall:
struct A { struct A *a, *b; };
struct D { struct A e; };
struct E { unsigned char f; struct { struct A e; } g; };
struct F { struct E i[32]; };
extern int fn0 (void);
extern int fn1 (struct E *, struct D *);
static inline __attribute__ ((always_inline)) int
fn2 (const struct A *x)
{
return x-a == x;
}
static int
fn3 (struct E *x)
{
struct D *l, *m;
int retval = retval;
if (fn2 (x-g.e))
return 0;
for (l = (struct D *) x-g.e.a, m = (struct D *) l-e.a; l-e != x-g.e; l
= m, m = (struct D *) m-e.a)
retval = fn1 (x, l);
return retval;
}
void
fn4 (struct F *x, unsigned k)
{
unsigned i;
for (i = 0; i k; i++)
{
struct E *y = x-i[i];
int err = -22;
err = fn3 (y);
if (y-f == 0)
{
if (err 0)
err = fn0 ();
if (err 0)
fn0 ();
}
}
}
I believe if fn2 returns zero, then the for body will be run at least
once, but perhaps it isn't simplified as such early enough.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1175744
Title:
[4.8 Regression] wrong -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning with -Os
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1175744/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1175744]
Started with http://gcc.gnu.org/r190339 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1175744 Title: [4.8 Regression] wrong -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning with -Os To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1175744/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1135633]
Started with http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188526 but it was merely latent before that, so it isn't LRA bug, because it fails with reload equally. I think the problem is in combine, where we have: ax = call ... flags = r59 != 0 r60 = flags = 0 ? ax : r59 r65 = buf r68 = 768 rep stosd [r65 .. r65 + r68 - 4] = 0 r59 = r60 and the combiner combines the r60 = flags = 0 ? ax : r59 instruction with r59 = r60 into r59 = flags = 0 ? ax : r59 instruction in the last spot, thus extending the lifetime of the ax and flags hard registers across various other instructions. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1135633 Title: [linaro regression] alsa-tools FTBFS with error unable to find a register to spill in class ‘AREG’ To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1135633/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1135633]
Actually, looking more at this, I'd say combiner is innocent here, the problem
is earlier , during ce1 pass, which transforms:
16: ax:SI=call [`output_play'] argc:0
REG_DEAD di:DI
REG_DEAD si:SI
17: r60:SI=ax:SI
REG_DEAD ax:SI
18: flags:CCGOC=cmp(r59:SI,0)
19: pc={(flags:CCGOC=0)?L21:pc}
REG_DEAD flags:CCGOC
REG_BR_PROB 0x1c84
20: NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK 4
6: r60:SI=r59:SI
REG_DEAD r59:SI
21: L21:
22: NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK 5
into:
16: ax:SI=call [`output_play'] argc:0
REG_DEAD di:DI
REG_DEAD si:SI
17: r60:SI=ax:SI
REG_DEAD ax:SI
18: flags:CCGOC=cmp(r59:SI,0)
53: flags:CCGOC=cmp(r59:SI,0)
54: r60:SI={(flags:CCGOC=0)?ax:SI:r59:SI}
22: NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK 4
i.e. does what combiner tries to avoid with hard registers. I don't understand
why it can't use r60:SI instead of ax:SI.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1135633
Title:
[linaro regression] alsa-tools FTBFS with error unable to find a
register to spill in class ‘AREG’
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1135633/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1135633]
Created attachment 29583 gcc48-pr56484.patch Untested fix. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1135633 Title: [linaro regression] alsa-tools FTBFS with error unable to find a register to spill in class ‘AREG’ To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1135633/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1135633]
Author: jakub Date: Tue Mar 5 22:25:43 2013 New Revision: 196478 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=196478 Log: PR rtl-optimization/56484 * ifcvt.c (noce_process_if_block): If else_bb is NULL, avoid extending lifetimes of hard registers on small register class machines. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr56484.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ifcvt.c -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1135633 Title: [linaro regression] alsa-tools FTBFS with error unable to find a register to spill in class ‘AREG’ To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1135633/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1135633]
Fixed. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1135633 Title: [linaro regression] alsa-tools FTBFS with error unable to find a register to spill in class ‘AREG’ To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1135633/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1132012]
Yes, it does, just verified that. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 56405 *** -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1132012 Title: [4.8 regression] ICE in expand_asm_operands, at stmt.c:910 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1132012/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1123588]
Well, perhaps we need to improve documentation, because for calloc the memory doesn't have undefined contents either, it is well defined to be all zeros. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1123588 Title: [4.7 Regression] wrong code with the fix for PR53844 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1123588/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1123588]
(In reply to comment #6) Do you think I should revert the patch on the branch nevertheless? (it was a fix for a missed-optimization regression only ...) Yeah, missed-optimization regression can wait for 4.8, but just the tree-ssa-dse.c part + related testcase, not all the other fixes. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1123588 Title: [4.7 Regression] wrong code with the fix for PR53844 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1123588/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1065122]
Assuming fixed. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1065122 Title: kumofs ftbfs on armhf (gcc ICE) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1065122/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 598462]
4.4 branch is being closed, moving to 4.5.4 target. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/598462 Title: [PR38292] corrupted profile info with -O[23] -fprofile-use To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/598462/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 564492]
Fixed in 4.5+, 4.4 is no longer supported. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/564492 Title: [PR 44626, armel] ICE: output_operand: invalid expression as operand To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/564492/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 472056]
4.4 branch is being closed, moving to 4.5.4 target. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/472056 Title: [PR42536] crash trying to build portable .net To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/472056/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 89408]
4.4 branch is being closed, moving to 4.5.4 target. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/89408 Title: gcj-dbtool segfaults on hppa-linux To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/89408/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 953617]
The testcase is invalid C, while x86_64/i?86 will do the expected thing of doing unaligned loads/stores silently, it won't do that in vectorized code or for atomic accesses. You need to tell the compiler that ia isn't aligned through aligned attribute. E.g. typedef int T __attribute__((aligned (2))); and using T *__restrict ia instead of int *__restrict ia. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/953617 Title: gcc tree optimizer generates incorrect vector load instructions for x86_64 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/953617/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 931542]
Please read http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html, you should provide a self- contained and if possible small testcase, it could very well be a bug in the application you are using. If you suspect a gcc bug, you can use use either a debugger or brute-force - e.g. binary search in between objects compiled with various compilation flags or various versions of the compiler (-O0 vs. standard flags, or standard flags + -fno-strict- aliasing, etc.). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/931542 Title: using the gcc-4.7.0 prerelease as packaged by Fedora Rawhide, there is a segfault in the program that results from compiling sha512-hash.c To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/931542/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 910791]
Dup of PR51915. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 51915 *** -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/910791 Title: [armhf] trunk 20111223, ICE in output_move_double, at config/arm/arm.c To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/910791/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 836588]
Ramana (or some other ARM maintainer), could you please try to implement this? Thanks. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/836588 Title: armel FTBFS with gcc 4.5 org 4.6 O2 and fPIC To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/836588/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 836588]
Note, can't be reproduced on the trunk, the strcmp isn't DCEd there, but
guess the problem is just latent there.
It looks like a target bug to me. Before RTL loop opts we have:
(insn 91 90 92 13 (set (reg:SI 167)
(unspec:SI [
(const:SI (unspec:SI [
(symbol_ref/v/f:SI (*.LC4) [flags 0x82]
var_decl 0x7f5ebb0a5500 *.LC4)
(const:SI (plus:SI (unspec:SI [
(const_int 4 [0x4])
] 21)
(const_int 8 [0x8])))
] 27))
] 3)) pr48308.i:228 170 {pic_load_addr_32bit}
(nil))
(insn 92 91 94 13 (set (reg:SI 167)
(unspec:SI [
(reg:SI 167)
(const_int 8 [0x8])
(const_int 4 [0x4])
] 4)) pr48308.i:228 173 {pic_add_dot_plus_eight}
(expr_list:REG_EQUAL (symbol_ref/v/f:SI (*.LC4) [flags 0x82] var_decl
0x7f5ebb0a5500 *.LC4)
(nil)))
and the pseudo 167 is then used to load one of the strcmp parameters.
Then (probably loop invariant motion) moves insn 91 before the loop, as it
looks to be loop invariant, but insn 92 is kept in the loop.
Next during RA, the register pressure is high and thus pseudo 167 is spilled, so
before the loop there is a store. Then during the *.csa pass DCE is performed
and the strcmp is removed, which means insn 92 is removed as well, but the
store before the loop of course is kept. And there is no further DSE pass that
would optimize that (now dead) store away.
So, IMHO arm_reorg needs to handle this case, find out what minipool entries
don't have the corresponding UNSPEC_PIC_BASE insn and handle them somehow
(either by emitting there a dummy 0 or similar, or trying to replace the insn
with UNSPEC_PIC_SYM with something else, ...).
That said, perhaps it would be nice to help the loop optimizers somehow figure
out that even the UNSPEC_PIC_BASE is loop invariant (wrap it into CONST?).
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/836588
Title:
armel FTBFS with gcc 4.5 org 4.6 O2 and fPIC
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/836588/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 897583]
Author: jakub Date: Thu Dec 8 13:36:40 2011 New Revision: 182112 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=182112 Log: Backport from mainline 2011-12-05 Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com PR middle-end/51323 PR middle-end/50074 * calls.c (internal_arg_pointer_exp_state): New variable. (internal_arg_pointer_based_exp_1, internal_arg_pointer_exp_scan): New functions. (internal_arg_pointer_based_exp): New function. (mem_overlaps_already_clobbered_arg_p): Use it. (expand_call): Free internal_arg_pointer_exp_state.cache vector and clear internal_arg_pointer_exp_state.scan_start. 2011-11-26 Joern Rennecke joern.renne...@embecosm.com PR middle-end/50074 * calls.c (mem_overlaps_already_clobbered_arg_p): Return false if no outgoing arguments have been stored so far. 2011-12-05 Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com PR middle-end/51323 PR middle-end/50074 * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr51323.c: New test. Added: branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr51323.c Modified: branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/calls.c branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/897583 Title: Code generation bug with -O2 (-foptimize-sibling-calls) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/897583/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 897583]
Fixed. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/897583 Title: Code generation bug with -O2 (-foptimize-sibling-calls) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/897583/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 897583]
Author: jakub Date: Mon Dec 5 08:15:23 2011 New Revision: 182000 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=182000 Log: PR middle-end/51323 PR middle-end/50074 * calls.c (internal_arg_pointer_exp_state): New variable. (internal_arg_pointer_based_exp_1, internal_arg_pointer_exp_scan): New functions. (internal_arg_pointer_based_exp): New function. (mem_overlaps_already_clobbered_arg_p): Use it. (expand_call): Free internal_arg_pointer_exp_state.cache vector and clear internal_arg_pointer_exp_state.scan_start. * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr51323.c: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr51323.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/calls.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/897583 Title: Code generation bug with -O2 (-foptimize-sibling-calls) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/897583/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 897583]
Fixed on the trunk so far. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/897583 Title: Code generation bug with -O2 (-foptimize-sibling-calls) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/897583/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 841825]
We have: bb 4: # DEBUG this = this_2(D) reason_15 = reason_10(D); reason_17 = reason_15; # DEBUG reason = reason_17 D.137092_16 = this_2(D)-D.122214; mozilla::net::PWyciwygChannelChild::Send__delete__ (D.137092_16); D.132395_6 = 0; and ccp (substitute_and_fold called from ccp_finalize) decides (because has_zero_uses is true for reason_17) to remove reason_17 = reason_15; stmt first, which during gsi_remove adds a # DEBUG D#xxx = reason_15 stmt. Then reason_15 = reason_10(D); is being removed, but for some reason the newly added debug stmt isn't found during FOR_EACH_IMM_USE_FAST for reason_15. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/841825 Title: gcc SIGSEGV when building Firefox and Thunderbird To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/841825/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 841825]
It is gimple_modified_p and gsi_insert_before does call build_stmt_operands on it. Still debugging... -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/841825 Title: gcc SIGSEGV when building Firefox and Thunderbird To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/841825/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 721378]
Author: jakub Date: Fri Jul 22 08:33:37 2011 New Revision: 176617 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=176617 Log: PR c++/49756 * libiberty.h (stack_limit_increase): New prototype. * stack-limit.c: New file. * Makefile.in: Regenerate deps. (CFILES): Add stack-limit.c. (REQUIRED_OFILES): Add ./stack-limit.$(objext). * configure.ac (checkfuncs): Add getrlimit and setrlimit. (AC_CHECK_FUNCS): Likewise. * configure: Regenerated. * config.in: Regenerated. * gcc.c (main): Call stack_limit_increase (64MB). * toplev.c (toplev_main): Likewise. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/gcc.c trunk/gcc/toplev.c trunk/include/ChangeLog trunk/include/libiberty.h trunk/libiberty/ChangeLog trunk/libiberty/Makefile.in trunk/libiberty/config.in trunk/libiberty/configure trunk/libiberty/configure.ac -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/721378 Title: g++ ICE (segfault in cc1plus) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/721378/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 721378]
Author: jakub Date: Fri Jul 22 09:21:49 2011 New Revision: 176622 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=176622 Log: PR c++/49756 * libiberty.h (stack_limit_increase): New prototype. * stack-limit.c: New file. * Makefile.in: Regenerate deps. (CFILES): Add stack-limit.c. (REQUIRED_OFILES): Add ./stack-limit.$(objext). * configure.ac (checkfuncs): Add getrlimit and setrlimit. (AC_CHECK_FUNCS): Likewise. * configure: Regenerated. * config.in: Regenerated. * gcc.c (main): Call stack_limit_increase (64MB). * toplev.c (toplev_main): Likewise. Added: trunk/libiberty/stack-limit.c -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/721378 Title: g++ ICE (segfault in cc1plus) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/721378/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 721378]
More probably the gcc/g++ driver already, because inside of tbe main of a program it might be too late to increase the stack limits - if something is already mmapped right below the old smaller stack the increase won't be effective. I guess increasing the RLIMIT_STACK in the driver to MIN (hard_limit, MAX (soft_limit, 30MB)) wouldn't be a bad idea. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/721378 Title: g++ ICE (segfault in cc1plus) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/721378/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 721378]
Created attachment 24788 gcc47-pr49756.patch Untested patch. Clueless people will be still able to construct twice or 4 times as large testcases of similar quality when they really should be using an array, but I guess this can help even with reasonable testcases. The drawback is I think that endless recursion bugs might take much more compile time before they fail. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/721378 Title: g++ ICE (segfault in cc1plus) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/721378/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 791327]
GCC 4.6.1 is being released. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/791327 Title: codeblocks version 10.05-2 failed to build on armel To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/791327/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
