[Bug c++/20021] New: warning behavior depends on textual format of literal constant

[igodard at pacbell dot net]

in:
#include 

static const signed char lwb = 0x80;
static const signed char lwba = -128;
static const signed char upb = 127;
static const size_t cnta = upb - lwba;
static const size_t cnt = upb - lwb;

int main() {
return 0;
}

the two variables lwb and lwba are of identical type and numeric value. 
However, 
the compiler gives:
~/ootbc/common/src$ g++ foo.cc
foo.cc:7: warning: integer overflow in expression

i.e. only warning on the use of lwb (reordering does not change this). It 
should 
warn on both or (correctly) neither.

This bug is related to bug #20019

-- 
   Summary: warning behavior depends on textual format of literal
constant
   Product: gcc
   Version: 3.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: igodard at pacbell dot net
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20021

[Bug c++/20022] New: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

[caolanm at redhat dot com]

Using built-in specs.
Target: i386-redhat-linux
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man
--infodir=/usr/share/info --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix
--enable-checking=release --with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit
--disable-libunwind-exceptions --with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/include/c++/3.4.3
--enable-languages=c,c++,java,f95 --enable-java-awt=gtk --host=i386-redhat-linux
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.0.0 20050216 (Red Hat 4.0.0-0.24)

---

--
Making: ../../../../unxlngi6.pro/slo/sw_atrfld.obj
g++4 -Wreturn-type -fmessage-length=0 -c -I.  -I. -I../inc -I../../../../inc
-I../../../../inc/bf_sw -I../../../../unx/inc -I../../../../unxlngi6.pro/inc -I.
-I/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/solver/680/unxlngi6.pro/inc/stl
-I/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/solver/680/unxlngi6.pro/inc/external
-I/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/solver/680/unxlngi6.pro/inc
-I/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/solenv/unxlngi6/inc
-I/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/solenv/inc
-I/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/res
-I/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/solver/680/unxlngi6.pro/inc/stl
-I/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/solenv/inc/Xp31 -I/usr/include
-I/usr/X11R6/include -Is:/solar/inc/hm -I../../../../res -I. -Wuninitialized
-g1 -Os -fno-strict-aliasing  -fno-access-control -pipe -mtune=pentiumpro
-Wno-ctor-dtor-privacy -fno-exceptions   -fpic -DLINUX -DUNX -DVCL -DGCC -DC341
-DINTEL -DGXX_INCLUDE_PATH=/usr/include/c++/3.4.3 -DCVER=C341 -D_USE_NAMESPACE
-DGLIBC=2 -DX86 -D_PTHREADS -D_REENTRANT -DNEW_SOLAR -D_USE_NAMESPACE=1
-DSTLPORT_VERSION=400 -DHAVE_GCC_VISIBILITY_FEATURE -D__DMAKE -DUNIX
-DCPPU_ENV=gcc3 -DSUPD=680 -DPRODUCT -DNDEBUG -DPRODUCT_FULL -DOSL_DEBUG_LEVEL=0
-DOPTIMIZE -DEXCEPTIONS_OFF -DCUI -DSOLAR_JAVA -DSRC680   -DNUM_RELSPACE
-DVERTICAL_LAYOUT -DACCESSIBLE_LAYOUT -DBIDI -DSHAREDLIB -D_DLL_  -DMULTITHREAD
 -o ../../../../unxlngi6.pro/slo/sw_atrfld.o
/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/binfilter/bf_sw/source/core/txtnode/sw_atrfld.cxx
../../../../inc/bf_sw/horiornt.hxx:89: internal compiler error: Segmentation 
fault
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
Preprocessed source stored into /tmp/ccHn4TcI.out file, please attach this to
your bugreport.
dmake:  Error code 1, while making '../../../../unxlngi6.pro/slo/sw_atrfld.obj'
'---* tg_merge.mk *---'

-- 
   Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: caolanm at redhat dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,jakub at gcc dot gnu dot
org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20022

[Bug c++/20022] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

[caolanm at redhat dot com]

--- Additional Comments From caolanm at redhat dot com  2005-02-17 08:51 
---
Created an attachment (id=8211)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8211&action=view)
bzip2 compressed preprocessed source dump


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20022

[Bug c++/20023] New: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

[caolanm at redhat dot com]

Using built-in specs.
Target: i386-redhat-linux
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man
--infodir=/usr/share/info --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix
--enable-checking=release --with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit
--disable-libunwind-exceptions --with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/include/c++/3.4.3
--enable-languages=c,c++,java,f95 --enable-java-awt=gtk --host=i386-redhat-linux
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.0.0 20050216 (Red Hat 4.0.0-0.24)

---

--
Making: ../../../unxlngi6.pro/slo/mmoutputpage.obj
g++4 -Wreturn-type -fmessage-length=0 -c -I.  -I. -I../inc -I../../../inc
-I../../../unx/inc -I../../../unxlngi6.pro/inc -I.
-I/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/solver/680/unxlngi6.pro/inc/stl
-I/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/solver/680/unxlngi6.pro/inc/external
-I/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/solver/680/unxlngi6.pro/inc
-I/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/solenv/unxlngi6/inc
-I/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/solenv/inc
-I/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/res
-I/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/solver/680/unxlngi6.pro/inc/stl
-I/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/solenv/inc/Xp31 -I/usr/include
-I/usr/X11R6/include -I. -I../../../res -I. -Wuninitialized -g1 -Os
-fno-strict-aliasing   -fvisibility=hidden -pipe -mtune=pentiumpro
-Wno-ctor-dtor-privacy -fexceptions -fno-enforce-eh-specs   -fpic -DLINUX -DUNX
-DVCL -DGCC -DC341 -DINTEL -DGXX_INCLUDE_PATH=/usr/include/c++/3.4.3 -DCVER=C341
-D_USE_NAMESPACE -DGLIBC=2 -DX86 -D_PTHREADS -D_REENTRANT -DNEW_SOLAR
-D_USE_NAMESPACE=1 -DSTLPORT_VERSION=400 -DHAVE_GCC_VISIBILITY_FEATURE -D__DMAKE
-DUNIX -DCPPU_ENV=gcc3 -DSUPD=680 -DPRODUCT -DNDEBUG -DPRODUCT_FULL
-DOSL_DEBUG_LEVEL=0 -DOPTIMIZE -DEXCEPTIONS_ON -DCUI -DSOLAR_JAVA -DSRC680  
-DNUM_RELSPACE -DVERTICAL_LAYOUT -DACCESSIBLE_LAYOUT -DBIDI
-DSW_DLLIMPLEMENTATION -DSHAREDLIB -D_DLL_  -DMULTITHREAD  -o
../../../unxlngi6.pro/slo/mmoutputpage.o
/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/sw/source/ui/dbui/mmoutputpage.cxx
/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/sw/source/ui/dbui/mmoutputpage.cxx: In member
function \u\u\ulong int
SwMailMergeOutputPage::SendDocumentsHdl_Impl(PushButton*)\u\u\u:
/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/SRC680_m77/sw/source/ui/dbui/mmoutputpage.cxx:1075:
internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
Preprocessed source stored into /tmp/ccmwCH46.out file, please attach this to
your bugreport.
dmake:  Error code 1, while making '../../../unxlngi6.pro/slo/mmoutputpage.obj'
'---* tg_merge.mk *---'
dmake:  Error code 255, while making 'do_it_exceptions'
'---* tg_merge.mk *---'

-- 
   Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: caolanm at redhat dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,jakub at gcc dot gnu dot
org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20023

[Bug c++/20023] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

[caolanm at redhat dot com]

--- Additional Comments From caolanm at redhat dot com  2005-02-17 08:55 
---
Created an attachment (id=8212)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8212&action=view)
bzip2 compressed proprocessed dump


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20023

[Bug target/19974] incorrect complex division on ia-64 with flag_complex_method = 2

[Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de]

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de  2005-02-17 
09:42 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Using Mathematica I get for
> (10^20 + 10^12 I)/(1 - 10^-8) = 10^20 + 2 * 10^12 I
> 
> so really neither of them are mathematically correct.

The test case was (10^20-10^12*I)/(1-10^(-8)*I), which is 10^20,
obviously.

For what it is worth, ifort also gets 18059 as the result.  I'll
do some checking to see what this should really be.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19974

[Bug c++/20008] [4.0 Regression] internal compiler error: in expand_case, at stmt.c:2397

[caolanm at redhat dot com]

--- Additional Comments From caolanm at redhat dot com  2005-02-17 10:00 
---
FWIW: openoffice.org 1.9.77 side patch to workaround at
http://people.redhat.com/caolanm/gcc4/xmlsecurity.gcc20008.gcc4.patch

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20008

[Bug tree-optimization/20024] New: [4.0 regression] miscompilation of division support functions

[hp at gcc dot gnu dot org]

Using a combined tree and Geoff K's regression tester script, a multitude of
failures have been introduced between LAST_UPDATED "Thu Feb 17 03:51:44 UTC
2005" and "Thu Feb 17 08:42:30 UTC 2005".  There's only one change in that
time-frame:

+ 2005-02-17  Jason Merrill  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+
+   PR mudflap/19319, c++/19317
+   * gimplify.c (gimplify_modify_expr_rhs) [CALL_EXPR]: Make return
+   slot explicit.
+

Here's an excerpt of the failures introduced:
Running
/home/hp/cvs_areas/combined/combined/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/execute.exp
...
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/2402-1.c execution,  -O0
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/2511-1.c execution,  -O0
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010222-1.c execution,  -O0
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010222-1.c execution,  -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010222-1.c execution,  -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010222-1.c execution,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010222-1.c execution,  -O3 -g
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010222-1.c execution,  -Os
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020201-1.c execution,  -O0
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020201-1.c execution,  -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020201-1.c execution,  -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020201-1.c execution,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020201-1.c execution,  -O3 -g
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020201-1.c execution,  -Os
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020904-1.c execution,  -O0
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020904-1.c execution,  -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020904-1.c execution,  -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020904-1.c execution,  -Os
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20021119-1.c execution,  -O0
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20021119-1.c execution,  -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20021119-1.c execution,  -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20021119-1.c execution,  -Os
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20021120-2.c execution,  -O0
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20021120-2.c execution,  -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20021120-2.c execution,  -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20021120-2.c execution,  -Os
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20021120-3.c execution,  -O0
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20021120-3.c execution,  -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20021120-3.c execution,  -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20021120-3.c execution,  -Os
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20030117-1.c execution,  -O0
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20030117-1.c execution,  -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20030117-1.c execution,  -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20030117-1.c execution,  -Os
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20030128-1.c execution,  -O0
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20030128-1.c execution,  -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20030128-1.c execution,  -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20030128-1.c execution,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20030128-1.c execution,  -O3 -g
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20030128-1.c execution,  -Os
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040629-1.c execution,  -O0
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040629-1.c execution,  -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040629-1.c execution,  -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040629-1.c execution,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040629-1.c execution,  -O3 -g
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040629-1.c execution,  -Os
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040705-1.c execution,  -O0
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040705-1.c execution,  -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040705-1.c execution,  -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040705-1.c execution,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040705-1.c execution,  -O3 -g
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040705-1.c execution,  -Os
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040705-2.c execution,  -O0
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040705-2.c execution,  -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040705-2.c execution,  -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040705-2.c execution,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040705-2.c execution,  -O3 -g
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040705-2.c execution,  -Os
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/920501-2.c execution,  -O0
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/920501-2.c execution,  -O1
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/920501-2.c execution,  -O2
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/920501-2.c execution,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/920501-2.c execution,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
-funroll-loops
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/920501-2.c execution,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
-funroll-all-loops -finline-functions
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/920501-2.c execution,  -O3 -g

Messages in gcc.log indicate that all or most of the failures are due to
calls to abort ().

Simulator traces on the simple gcc.c-torture/execute/20010222-1.c  -O0 
show that the libgcc __Div is miscompiled.
I'm attaching preprocessed source for it.  Compile with -O2.
Note that

[Bug tree-optimization/20024] [4.0 regression] miscompilation of division support functions

[hp at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 10:16 
---
Created an attachment (id=8213)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8213&action=view)
Preprocessed source for __Div

_divsi3.i

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20024

[Bug tree-optimization/20024] [4.0 regression] miscompilation of division support functions

[hp at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 10:23 
---
Here's the faulty program flow for the __Div call for
gcc.c-torture/execute/20010222-1.c -O0.
(-72 / 12; -72 in R10, 12 in R11; R10 holds the return value which should be
-6, not 0):

ffb8c6 ffb8   30 >__Div
000176subq 4,sp
000178 {sp-=4}movem r0,[sp]
00017amove.d r10,r0
00017c {r0=ffb8}  xor r11,r0
00017e {r0=ffb4}  abs r10,r12
000180 {r12=48}   blt 0x19a:__Div+0x24
000182abs r11,r11
000184clear.d r9
000186 {r9=0} move.d r9,r10
000188 {r10=0}add.d r9,r10
00018atest.d r0
00018cblt 0x194:__Div+0x1e
00018enop
000194neg.d r10,r10
000196ret
000198movem [sp+],r0

Ask if there's clarification needed.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20024

[Bug c++/20011] Templates and cyclic dependencies

[jmoro at latentzero dot com]

--- Additional Comments From jmoro at latentzero dot com  2005-02-17 10:47 
---
I am sorry but that is not good enough. If I read correcly, you recommend that
to solve the problem with my template function member of a class is ... not to
use template functions as members of the class.

My example was indeed simple and you could get the template out of the class but
if I alter slightly B.h, you can see why I want g() to be a member of the class.

I can obviouly come up with solutions where I don't use member template
functions or even where I don't use templates at all but what I want to know is
how you are supposed to deal with this problem at hand.

What is the recommended way, with gcc 3.4, to deal with template methods and
circular dependencies?

Again, when I read a good C++ book, the solution is to use the export keyword
but GCC does not support it.

///
// B.h
///
class A;

class B
{
public:

  B(){}
  ~B(){}

  template  int g( T t )
  {
A * a = GetA();
return ( a->getInt() + t );
  }

  int getInt() const
  {
return 2;
  }
  
private:

  A * GetA();
  
};

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
 Resolution|INVALID |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20011

[Bug c++/20019] incorrect overflow warning

[neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk]

--- Additional Comments From neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk  2005-02-17 
11:34 ---
Subject: Re:  incorrect overflow warning

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:-

> 
> --- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
> 03:14 ---
> No the warning is correct as char on a lot of targets is signed by default so 
> promoting (char)0x80 to int 
> will give 0xFF80.

This explanation just doesn't make sense.

What should get a warning is the assignment of 0x80 to a char.

Neil.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20019

[Bug c++/20011] Templates and cyclic dependencies

[giovannibajo at libero dot it]

--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it  2005-02-17 
11:58 ---
Maybe it is not very clear to you, but this is the GCC Bugzilla. This is where 
people report *bugs* of the GCC compiler. It is not a help desk for C++ 
programmers. If you have a BUG to report about GCC, we're eager to know. If you 
do not know how to write your program so that it follows all the ISO C++ rules, 
we really cannot help. Try asking in a newsgroup like comp.lang.c++.moderated.

Anyway, the solution for your problem is very easy, you just need to define 
your member functions outside the class definition.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||INVALID


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20011

[Bug c++/20011] Templates and cyclic dependencies

[jmoro at latentzero dot com]

--- Additional Comments From jmoro at latentzero dot com  2005-02-17 12:11 
---
Fair enough, you can indeed resolve the circular dependencies by moving the
definition but you still have more dependencies between files than you used to
with 3.3.

It's all good to follow the standard but implementing the two phase lookup
without implementing the export keyword makes it difficult to minimize the
dependencies.

Anyway, thanks for your "help"

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20011

[Bug c++/20025] New: Internal error while compiling

[sjt at star dot sr dot bham dot ac dot uk]

While compiling the routine datatypes.cpp in the GDL package, g++ generates an
internal error. This appears to be powerpc specific. 

Command line & Error messages follow.
g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I/usr/include/python2.3  -O2  -MT datatypes.o
-MD -MP -MF ".deps/datatypes.Tpo"   -c -o datatypes.o  datatypes.cpp -save-temps
In file included from /usr/include/python2.3/Python.h:8,
 from basegdl.hpp:26,
 from datatypes.hpp:31,
 from dstructgdl.hpp:25,
 from datatypes.cpp:27:
/usr/include/python2.3/pyconfig.h:856:1: warning: "_POSIX_C_SOURCE" redefined
In file included from /usr/include/c++/3.3/powerpc-linux/bits/os_defines.h:39,
 from /usr/include/c++/3.3/powerpc-linux/bits/c++config.h:35,
 from /usr/include/c++/3.3/iomanip:45,
 from datatypes.cpp:24:
/usr/include/features.h:131:1: warning: this is the location of the previous
definition
In file included from datatypes.cpp:40:
default_io.cpp: In function `std::istream& operator>>(std::istream&,
   Data_&) [with Sp2 = SpDFloat, Sp = SpDFloat]':
default_io.cpp:185: error: insn does not satisfy its constraints:
(insn 2857 445 511 12 (nil) (set (reg:SI 9 r9)
(reg/f:SI 114 virtual-stack-vars)) 298 {*movsi_internal1} (nil)
(nil))
default_io.cpp:185: internal compiler error: in reload_cse_simplify_operands,
   at reload1.c:8394
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
For Debian GNU/Linux specific bug reporting instructions, see
.

Compiling the included default_io.cpp on its own does NOT generate the error. 
Removing the optimization flag genrates a segfault at the same location.
The datatypes.ii file is too large (1.5MB) to attach here and can be obtained
at:  ftp://ftp.sr.bham.ac.uk/pub/sjt/datatypes.ii
Since the machine doesn't have problems with other large compiles (e.g. the
Linux kernel) I don't think it's a hardware problem.

-- 
   Summary: Internal error while compiling
   Product: gcc
   Version: 3.3.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: sjt at star dot sr dot bham dot ac dot uk
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
 GCC build triplet: powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu
  GCC host triplet: powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20025

[Bug debug/19345] [4.0 Regression] Segmentation fault with VLA and inlining and dwarf2

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 12:21 
---
BTW, this breaks glibc build, so it is quite important to get this fixed
for GCC 4.0 release.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Severity|normal  |critical


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19345

[Bug target/20020] x86_64 - 128 bit structs not targeted to TImode

[matz at suse dot de]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||matz at suse dot de


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20020

[Bug tree-optimization/19951] ICE in tree_split_edge, at tree-cfg.c:3199 with -ftree-vectorize

[giovannibajo at libero dot it]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-17 12:45:18
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19951

[Bug tree-optimization/19952] ICE: tree check: expected class 'declaration', have 'statement' (label_expr) in tree_verify_flow_info, at tree-cfg.c:3709

[giovannibajo at libero dot it]

--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it  2005-02-17 
12:45 ---
Confirmed then.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-17 12:45:49
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19952

[Bug target/20025] Internal error while compiling

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  Component|c++ |target


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20025

[Bug c++/20022] [4.0 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
13:03 ---
../../../../inc/bf_sw/horiornt.hxx:89: internal compiler error: vector 
VEC(deferred_access) last domain 
error, in perform_deferred_access_checks at cp/semantics.c:288
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.

Confirmed, reduced testcase:
enum A{};

-fno-access-control is broken.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-17 13:03:32
   date||
Summary|internal compiler error:|[4.0 Regression] internal
   |Segmentation fault  |compiler error: Segmentation
   ||fault
   Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20022

[Bug ada/19903] ACATS cxa4006 cxa4017 ada.string.(un)bounded fail at runtime

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
13:04 ---
Investgating.


-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19903

[Bug c++/20023] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
13:15 ---
Hmm, I cannot reproduce this with 4.0.0 20050215 on i686-pc-linux-gnu, so 
either this is new as of 
yesterday or it was just a fluk.  I am thinking the former.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20023

[Bug c++/20019] incorrect overflow warning

[schlie at comcast dot net]

--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net  2005-02-17 13:20 
---
(In reply to comment #6)
> What should get a warning is the assignment of 0x80 to a char.

Not that either, as although the two differ in sign, the value does not exceed 
the type's precision.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20019

[Bug tree-optimization/20024] [4.0 regression] miscompilation of division support functions

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
13:21 ---
It also broke Alpha too see the message from RTH:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg00978.html

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||wrong-code


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20024

[Bug c++/18968] [4.0 regression] ICE: tree check: expected ssa_name, have addr_expr in vrp_hash

[gj at pointblue dot com dot pl]

--- Additional Comments From gj at pointblue dot com dot pl  2005-02-17 
13:26 ---
Fixed for that specific testcase, but can't compile kernel today. 
Kernel version 2.6.11-rc4 vanilia, 
gcc (GCC) 4.0.0 20050217 (experimental) 
 
  CC  arch/x86_64/kernel/setup.o 
arch/x86_64/kernel/setup.c: In function 'setup_arch': 
arch/x86_64/kernel/setup.c:453: internal compiler error: tree check: expected 
ssa_name, have addr_expr in vrp_hash, at tree-ssa-dom.c:3310 
Please submit a full bug report, 
with preprocessed source if appropriate. 
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. 
make[1]: *** [arch/x86_64/kernel/setup.o] Error 1 
make: *** [arch/x86_64/kernel] Error 2 
 
 
#define EBDA_ADDR_POINTER 0x40E 
static void __init reserve_ebda_region(void) 
{ <-here 
unsigned int addr; 
/** 
 * there is a real-mode segmented pointer pointing to the 
 * 4K EBDA area at 0x40E 
 */ 
. 
 

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18968

[Bug fortran/20026] New: Weird optimization affects cpu200/178.galgel testing

[denis dot nagorny at intel dot com]

LAPACK tries to determine behavior of present double pre- 
precision numbers. One of used methods is based on property  
that (on IA32) 9.0071992547400992E+015 + 1 will be the same 
9.0071992547400992E+015, but 9.0071992547400992E+015 + 2 will  
be differ.  
This sample demonstrates that any level of optimization in  
gfortran version 4.0.0 20050215 breaks this functionality. 
Due to this feature it's impossible now to use 178.galgel test from 
cpu2000 testsuite. 
 
Please compile following sample (I'll attach them also) with and without option 
-O1. You'll obtain "Good" without optimization and "Bad" with -O1. 
!!*** 
  REAL*8   A, B, C  
  REAL*8   foo 
 
  A = 9.0071992547400992E+015 
  B = 1 
  C = foo( A, B ) 
  
  IF( C.EQ.A ) THEN 
 write(*,*) "Good" 
  ELSE 
 write(*,*) "Bad!!!" 
 write(*,*) "A=",A 
 write(*,*) "C=",C 
  END IF 
  END 
!!** 
  FUNCTION foo( A, B ) 
  REAL*8 foo 
  REAL*8   A, B 
  foo = A + B 
  RETURN 
  END 
!!* 
>gfortran -v 
Using built-in specs. 
Target: i586-suse-linux 
Configured with: ../src/gcc/configure --enable-threads=posix 
--prefix=/users/x/work/gcc40/real --disable-checking --enable-libgcj 
--with-system-zlib --enable-shared --enable-__cxa_atexit i586-suse-linux 
Thread model: posix 
gcc version 4.0.0 20050215 (experimental

-- 
   Summary: Weird optimization affects cpu200/178.galgel testing
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: critical
  Priority: P2
 Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: denis dot nagorny at intel dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,grigory dot zagorodnev
at intel dot com
 GCC build triplet: i586-suse-linux
  GCC host triplet: i586-suse-linux
GCC target triplet: i586-suse-linux


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20026

[Bug fortran/20026] Weird optimization affects cpu200/178.galgel testing

[denis dot nagorny at intel dot com]

--- Additional Comments From denis dot nagorny at intel dot com  2005-02-17 
13:28 ---
Created an attachment (id=8214)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8214&action=view)
sample for error reproducing


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20026

[Bug target/20026] Weird optimization affects cpu200/178.galgel testing

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Severity|critical|normal
  Component|fortran |target


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20026

[Bug target/20026] Weird optimization affects cpu200/178.galgel testing

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
13:37 ---
The problem is that on x86, we use the excessive precision, see PR 323.
This is a dup of bug 323.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 323 ***

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||DUPLICATE


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20026

[Bug rtl-optimization/323] optimized code gives strange floating point results

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
13:37 ---
*** Bug 20026 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||denis dot nagorny at intel
   ||dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323

[Bug c++/18968] [4.0 regression] ICE: tree check: expected ssa_name, have addr_expr in vrp_hash

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
13:38 ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> Fixed for that specific testcase, but can't compile kernel today. 
This is most likely the same as PR 20009.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||gj at pointblue dot com dot
   ||pl


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18968

[Bug tree-optimization/20009] [4.0 regression] cris-elf testsuite failures: gcc.c-torture/unsorted/USIcmp.c, -O1 and above

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
13:45 ---
Actually this is not a problem in DOM at all but in fold, say we have (which is 
the reduced testcase):
unsigned int glob1;
int imm0limm1 (int r0)
{
  if (22 <= ((unsigned int)&glob1))
return 1;
  else
return 0;
}

fold looks like it is removing the cast to "unsigned int" and does not convert 
22 to pointer type.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20009

[Bug c++/18968] [4.0 regression] ICE: tree check: expected ssa_name, have addr_expr in vrp_hash

[gj at pointblue dot com dot pl]

--- Additional Comments From gj at pointblue dot com dot pl  2005-02-17 
13:46 ---
Subject: Re:  [4.0 regression] ICE: tree check: expected ssa_name,
 have addr_expr in vrp_hash

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:

>--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
>13:38 ---
>(In reply to comment #14)
>  
>
>>Fixed for that specific testcase, but can't compile kernel today. 
>>
>>
>This is most likely the same as PR 20009.
>  
>
ok. I did quick google search and that was the only PR with simmilar 
error message (only line number was different acctualy).




-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18968

[Bug tree-optimization/20009] [4.0 regression] cris-elf testsuite failures: gcc.c-torture/unsorted/USIcmp.c, -O1 and above

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
13:49 ---
This is caused obviously by:
* convert.c (convert_to_integer) : Pass
TYPE_UNSIGNED (type) as type_for_size's UNSIGNEDP argument.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20009

[Bug target/19974] incorrect complex division on ia-64 with flag_complex_method = 2

[Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de]

--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de  2005-02-17 
13:52 ---
Another datapoint - the fact that slarrb "has problems"
has been confirmed by a Lapack developer.  A new version is
slated to appear as a patch soon.  Hopefully, this will reduce
the potential hang in the test program to a mere failure.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19974

[Bug c++/20023] [4.0 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
13:59 ---
It was the former, it regressed from the last two days, reducing.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
   ||org
   Severity|normal  |critical
   Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Summary|internal compiler error:|[4.0 Regression] internal
   |Segmentation fault  |compiler error: Segmentation
   ||fault
   Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20023

[Bug c++/20019] incorrect overflow warning

[neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk]

--- Additional Comments From neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk  2005-02-17 
14:00 ---
Subject: Re:  incorrect overflow warning

schlie at comcast dot net wrote:-

> 
> --- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net  2005-02-17 13:20 
> ---
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > What should get a warning is the assignment of 0x80 to a char.
> 
> Not that either, as although the two differ in sign, the value does not 
> exceed the type's precision.

I disagree.  Like so:

"/tmp/foo.c", line 1: warning: value changes sign during integer type
conversion
char x = 0x80;
 ^


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20019

[Bug c++/20023] [4.0 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 14:04 
---
Oops, started reducing it a couple of minutes already.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20023

[Bug middle-end/20023] [4.0 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
14:05 ---
Reduced testcase:
void f(void);
typedef __SIZE_TYPE__ size_t;
void g(void *a)
{
  size_t b = (size_t)a;
  switch (b)
  {
case 1:
  f();
break;
  }
}

This looks very much related to PR 20009 as I think it was caused by the same 
patch.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
  Component|c++ |middle-end
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-17 14:05:42
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20023

[Bug c++/20019] incorrect overflow warning

[schlie at comcast dot net]

--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net  2005-02-17 14:33 
---
(In reply to comment #8)
> char x = 0x80; warning: value changes sign during integer type conversion

Implying an analogous warning for all assignments between dissimilarly
signed variables (i.e. signed x; unsigned y; x = y;) which I believe are
considered "compatible"; and half of all unsigned hex constants being
assigned to signed types even if cast, as it's arguably the cast which
produces the virtual numerical over/underflow.

(where although you're numerically correct, seems like a lot of noise?)



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20019

[Bug c++/20023] [4.0 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 14:34 
---
Yeah, it is caused by that part of my patch.
The result of convert_to_integer is in one case
>>
and without that part of the patch:
>>
But fold folds the former into >
while in the latter case fold does nothing with it.
And expand_case is not prepared to deal with POINTER_TYPE's in SWITCH_COND.

Anyway, as already the other part of the PR middle-end/19857 fix is sufficient
to fix the bug, I'm leaning towards reverting the convert.c (convert_to_integer)
part of the patch and give it a shot after 4.0 branches.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  Component|middle-end  |c++


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20023

[Bug debug/19345] [4.0 Regression] Segmentation fault with VLA and inlining and dwarf2

[dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
15:04 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> BTW, this breaks glibc build, so it is quite important to get this fixed
> for GCC 4.0 release.

There is followup on how to get this fixed after the patch was rejected.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg00530.html

Unfortunately, i won't have time until at least next saturday (I have a state
bar exam).

The fix should be quite easy to implement if you want to just do it and regtest 
it.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19345

[Bug c++/20019] incorrect overflow warning

[neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk]

--- Additional Comments From neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk  2005-02-17 
15:12 ---
Subject: Re:  incorrect overflow warning

schlie at comcast dot net wrote:-

> 
> --- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net  2005-02-17 14:33 
> ---
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > char x = 0x80; warning: value changes sign during integer type conversion
> 
> Implying an analogous warning for all assignments between dissimilarly
> signed variables (i.e. signed x; unsigned y; x = y;) which I believe are
> considered "compatible"; and half of all unsigned hex constants being
> assigned to signed types even if cast, as it's arguably the cast which
> produces the virtual numerical over/underflow.
> 
> (where although you're numerically correct, seems like a lot of noise?)

Well it's certainly a matter of taste.  char is arguably a special
case as you cannot assign a value with the high bit set without
creating the warning on some targets.  But if you are assigning
values with the high bit set then arguably you have in mind whether
you are dealing with signed or unsigned values and should be explicit
about signedness.  As such like any warning it tends to expose sloppy
thinking.

Your x=y example is of course not the same; whether a value is
changing sign or not is not knowable at compile time and probably
rarely the case, so I agree complaining about that would be annoying.

Some people have in the past requested command-line switches to
generate warnings for any implicit integer conversion.  I agree a
singed <-> unsigned should not be on by default, though potentially
narrowing conversions are debatably more appropriate to have on by
default.

Neil.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20019

[Bug c++/20008] [4.0 Regression] internal compiler error: in expand_case, at stmt.c:2397

[aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed|2005-02-16 19:16:58 |2005-02-17 15:13:15
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20008

[Bug tree-optimization/20024] [4.0 regression] miscompilation of division support functions

[hp at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 15:31 
---
Yes I did read RTH's message at the time, but this breakage seems
different than what he described: it looks as if the whole inlined
do_31div (the one with the aggregate return value) is misoptimized
away.  Hope that helps.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20024

[Bug middle-end/20027] New: gcc.c-torture/execute/20050121.c execution fails

[jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org]

gcc.c-torture/execute/20050121-1.c execution has recently started
failing on multiple targets.

It's appeared for me on hppa64-hp-hpux11.23 between 20050212 and
20050217.  gcc-testresults also shows it on i686-pc-linux-gnu.

This would be a regression relative to 3.4 branch (though not to 3.4.3,
as the problem was fixed on 3.4 branch after then).

-- 
   Summary: gcc.c-torture/execute/20050121.c execution fails
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20027

[Bug middle-end/20027] [4.0 Regression] gcc.c-torture/execute/20050121.c execution fails

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
15:43 ---
I want to say this is related to PR 20024.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||wrong-code
Summary|gcc.c-  |[4.0 Regression] gcc.c-
   |torture/execute/20050121.c  |torture/execute/20050121.c
   |execution fails |execution fails
   Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20027

[Bug middle-end/20027] [4.0 Regression] gcc.c-torture/execute/20050121.c execution fails

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
15:46 ---
Looks like more than that is failing:
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/complex-1.c execution,  -O0 
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/complex-1.c execution,  -O1 
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/complex-1.c execution,  -O2 
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/complex-1.c execution,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer 
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/complex-1.c execution,  -O3 -g 
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/complex-1.c execution,  -Os 


-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jason at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20027

[Bug middle-end/20027] [4.0 Regression] gcc.c-torture/execute/20050121.c execution fails

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Severity|normal  |critical
   Priority|P2  |P1


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20027

[Bug middle-end/20024] [4.0 regression] miscompilation of division support functions

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  Component|tree-optimization   |middle-end


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20024

[Bug c++/20028] New: problem with protected members in template inheritance

[jcobyrne at cox dot net]

Apparently g++ isn't recognizing protected members in inheritance before the 
class declaration.  Furthermore, G++ segfaults when adding the first line, and 
the friend class.

--

[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ $ cat a.cc
class Foo;

template  class A
{ friend class Foo; protected: typedef T someType; };

template  class B
{ protected: typedef T anotherType; };

template  class X, template  class Y>
class Foo : public X , public Y ::someType>
{ typedef Y::someType> yetAnotherType; };

int main ()
{ Foo x; return 0; }

-

[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ $ g++40 -v -save-temps -o a a.cc
Using built-in specs.
Configured with: ./..//gcc-4.0-20050130/configure --disable-nls --with-system-
zlib --with-libiconv-prefix=/usr/local --program-suffix=40 --with-gxx-include-
dir=/usr/local/lib/gcc/i386-portbld-freebsd5.3/4.0.0/include/c++/ --disable-
shared --disable-libgcj --prefix=/usr/local i386-portbld-freebsd5.3
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.0.0 20050130 (experimental) [FreeBSD]
 /usr/local/libexec/gcc/i386-portbld-freebsd5.3/4.0.0/cc1plus -E -quiet -v 
a.cc -fpch-preprocess -o a.ii
ignoring nonexistent directory "/usr/local/lib/gcc/i386-portbld-
freebsd5.3/4.0.0/../../../../i386-portbld-freebsd5.3/include"
#include "..." search starts here:
#include <...> search starts here:
 /usr/local/lib/gcc/i386-portbld-freebsd5.3/4.0.0/include/c++/
 /usr/local/lib/gcc/i386-portbld-freebsd5.3/4.0.0/include/c++//i386-portbld-
freebsd5.3
 /usr/local/lib/gcc/i386-portbld-freebsd5.3/4.0.0/include/c++//backward
 /usr/local/include
 /usr/local/lib/gcc/i386-portbld-freebsd5.3/4.0.0/include
 /usr/include
End of search list.
 /usr/local/libexec/gcc/i386-portbld-freebsd5.3/4.0.0/cc1plus -fpreprocessed 
a.ii -quiet -dumpbase a.cc -auxbase a -version -o a.s
GNU C++ version 4.0.0 20050130 (experimental) [FreeBSD] (i386-portbld-
freebsd5.3)
compiled by GNU C version 4.0.0 20050130 (experimental) [FreeBSD].
GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=30 --param ggc-min-heapsize=4096
a.cc:10: error: 'Foo' is not a template type
a.cc: In function 'int main()':
a.cc:14: error: 'Foo' is not a template
a.cc:13: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.

--

[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ $ cat a.ii
# 1 "a.cc"
# 1 ""
# 1 ""
# 1 "a.cc"
class Foo;

template  class A
{ friend class Foo; protected: typedef T someType; };

template  class B
{ protected: typedef T anotherType; };

template  class X, template  class Y>
class Foo : public X , public Y ::someType>
{ typedef Y::someType> yetAnotherType; };

int main ()
{ Foo x; return 0; }

-- 
   Summary: problem with protected members in template inheritance
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jcobyrne at cox dot net
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20028

[Bug c++/20028] problem with protected members in template inheritance

[jcobyrne at cox dot net]

--- Additional Comments From jcobyrne at cox dot net  2005-02-17 16:08 
---
By the way, when removing the friend class and line 1 of the source file, the 
code WILL compile on g++3.2.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20028

[Bug c++/19735] Grammar "error" in error message.

[lerdsuwa at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From lerdsuwa at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
16:12 ---
Fixed in the mainline by:
  http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg02230.html

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED
   Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19735

[Bug c++/20008] [4.0 Regression] internal compiler error: in expand_case, at stmt.c:2397

[aoliva at redhat dot com]

--- Additional Comments From aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
16:17 ---
Subject: [PR c++/20008, middle-end] handle switch with all cases out-of-range

Sure enough, the testcase relied on undefined behavior, but that's no
reason for us to ICE at compile time.  I suppose it might be nice to
get the tree cfg cleanup code to detect that it can discard cases that
are out of range, but I'm not all that familiar with the cfg cleanup
code, so I figured I'd try this first.

Ok to install if regression testing passes on x86_64-linux-gnu?

Index: gcc/ChangeLog
from  Alexandre Oliva  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

PR c++/20008
* stmt.c (expand_case): Don't assume cleanup_tree_cfg will remove
cases that are out-of-range for the index type.

Index: gcc/stmt.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/stmt.c,v
retrieving revision 1.412
diff -u -p -r1.412 stmt.c
--- gcc/stmt.c 13 Dec 2004 16:03:38 - 1.412
+++ gcc/stmt.c 17 Feb 2005 16:12:31 -
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 /* Expands front end tree to back end RTL for GCC
Copyright (C) 1987, 1988, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997,
-   1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+   1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005
+ Free Software Foundation, Inc.
 
 This file is part of GCC.
 
@@ -2393,8 +2394,14 @@ expand_case (tree exp)
   BITMAP_XFREE (label_bitmap);
 
   /* cleanup_tree_cfg removes all SWITCH_EXPR with a single
-destination, such as one with a default case only.  */
-  gcc_assert (count != 0);
+destination, such as one with a default case only.  However,
+it doesn't remove cases that are out of range for the switch
+type, so we may still get a zero here.  */
+  if (count == 0)
+   {
+ emit_jump (default_label);
+ return;
+   }
 
   /* Compute span of values.  */
   range = fold (build2 (MINUS_EXPR, index_type, maxval, minval));
Index: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
from  Alexandre Oliva  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

PR c++/20008
* g++.dg/opt/switch3.C: New.

Index: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/switch3.C
===
RCS file: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/switch3.C
diff -N gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/switch3.C
--- /dev/null   1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/switch3.C 17 Feb 2005 16:12:45 -
@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+// { dg-do compile }
+
+// PR c++/20008
+
+// We failed to compile this because CFG cleanup left the switch
+// statement intact, whereas expand_case expected at least one
+// in-range case to remain.
+
+typedef enum _SECStatus {
+  SECWouldBlock = -2,
+  SECFailure = -1,
+  SECSuccess = 0
+} SECStatus;
+
+typedef enum {
+  SEC_ERROR_BAD_SIGNATURE = (-0x2000) + 10
+} SECErrorCodes;
+
+void g(void);
+void f(SECStatus status)
+{
+  switch( status )
+{
+case SEC_ERROR_BAD_SIGNATURE :
+  // This case can be optimized away in C++ (but apparently not in
+  // C), because the enum type is defined with a narrow range.
+  g();
+  break ;
+}
+}

-- 
Alexandre Oliva http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   [EMAIL PROTECTED], gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  [EMAIL PROTECTED], gnu.org}


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20008

[Bug AWT/20029] New: Robot needs XTest

[mark at gcc dot gnu dot org]

Whenever you try to use java.awt.Robot you will get an error like:

: relocation error:
/usr/local/gcc40/lib/lib-gnu-java-awt-peer-gtk.so.6: undefined symbol:
XTestQueryExtension

This is probably because the following Change didn't come correctly from the gui
branch onto the trunk:

+2005-02-15  Thomas Fitzsimmons  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+
+   * Makefile.am (gtk_c_source_files): Add GdkRobotPeer.c.
+   (gtk_awt_peer_sources): Add GdkScreenGraphicsDevice.java and
+   GdkRobotPeer.java.
+   (lib_gnu_java_awt_peer_gtk_la_CFLAGS): Add X flags.
+   (lib_gnu_java_awt_peer_gtk_la_LDFLAGS): Add XTest flags.
+   * gnu/awt/xlib/XToolkit.java (createRobot): New method.
+   * gnu/java/awt/ClasspathToolkit.java (createRobot): New method.
+   * gnu/java/awt/peer/gtk/GdkGraphicsEnvironment.java
+   (getDefaultScreenDevice): Implement.
+   * gnu/java/awt/peer/gtk/GdkRobotPeer.java: New file.
+   * gnu/java/awt/peer/gtk/GdkScreenGraphicsDevice.java: Likewise.
+   * gnu/java/awt/peer/gtk/GtkToolkit.java (createRobot): New method.
+   * java/awt/Robot.java: Implement.
+   * java/awt/peer/RobotPeer.java: Rename parameters.
+   * jni/gtk-peer/gnu_java_awt_peer_gtk_GdkRobotPeer.c: New file.
+   * jni/gtk-peer/gnu_java_awt_peer_gtk_GtkComponentPeer.c
+   (awt_keycode_to_keysym): Make non-static.
+   * jni/gtk-peer/gtkpeer.h (AWT_BUTTON1_MASK, AWT_BUTTON2_MASK,
+   AWT_BUTTON3_MASK): Declare constants.
+   (awt_keycode_to_keysym): Declare.
+
+   * Makefile.am (AM_MAKEFLAGS): Set KEYS variable.
+   * testsuite/libjava.mauve/mauve.exp (test_mauve): If KEYS exists
+   and is non-empty pass its value to "make check".
+   (test_mauve_sim): Likewise.

-- 
   Summary: Robot needs XTest
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: AWT
AssignedTo: fitzsim at redhat dot com
ReportedBy: mark 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=20029

[Bug middle-end/20030] New: Broken arguments access

[grigory dot zagorodnev at intel dot com]

Broken arguments access

Starting February 13th, gfrotran fails on the following test case on 
ia32/ia64/x86_64 platforms with all kinds of optimizations: -O0, -O1, -O2 etc. 
The issue is critical because it affects SPEC cpu2k tests wupwise and galgel on 
all platforms. 

$ cat foo.f
  program foo
  character*1 a1, a2, b
  a1='A'
  a2='A'
  b='B'
  x = LSAME(a1,a2)
  if ( x.eq.1 ) then
write(*,*) 'passsed'
  else
write(*,*) 'failed'
  endif
  end
 
  logical function LSAME( CA, CB )
  character CA, CB
  integer   INTA, INTB
  
  INTA = ICHAR( CA )
  INTB = ICHAR( CB )
  
  write(*,*) INTA, INTB
  
  LSAME = INTA.EQ.INTB
  end


The reason of failure is the broken argument access for the function. Here is 
the ia32 Linux code obtained with -O0 optimization.
.type   lsame_, @function
lsame_:
pushl   %ebp
movl%esp, %ebp
subl$16, %esp
movl8(%ebp), %eax
movb-1(%eax), %al   <-- Wrong. Must be "movb (%eax), %al"
movzbl  %al, %eax
movl%eax, -8(%ebp)
movl12(%ebp), %eax
movb-1(%eax), %al   <-- Wrong. Must be "movb (%eax), %al"
movzbl  %al, %eax

This issue has been discussed here http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-
02/msg00685.html but not resolved yet and bug search gave me nothing. It 
appears that breakage introduced by revision 2.110 (and later 2.112) of 
gcc/gimplify.c. The exact place is:

$ cvs diff -r 2.111 -r 2.112 
gcc/gimplify.c  
3797a3799,3803
>   case INDIRECT_REF:
> *expr_p = fold_indirect_ref (*expr_p);
> if (*expr_p != save_expr)
>   break;
> /* else fall through.  */
3800d3805
<   case INDIRECT_REF:

-- 
   Summary: Broken arguments access
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: grigory dot zagorodnev at intel dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
  GCC host triplet: i686-redhat-linux


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20030

[Bug c++/20022] [4.0 Regression] -fno-access-control is broken

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
16:42 ---
Subject: Bug 20022

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-02-17 16:42:10

Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog semantics.c 
gcc/testsuite  : ChangeLog 
Added files:
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/other: access3.C 

Log message:
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR c++/20022
* semantics.c (perform_deferred_access_checks): Use
get_deferred_access_checks to get the top of the stack.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR c++/20022
* g++.dg/other/access3.C: New.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.4631&r2=1.4632
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/semantics.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.460&r2=1.461
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.5042&r2=1.5043
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/other/access3.C.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20022

[Bug c++/20022] [4.0 Regression] -fno-access-control is broken

[aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed|2005-02-17 13:03:32 |2005-02-17 16:42:54
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20022

[Bug c++/20022] [4.0 Regression] -fno-access-control is broken

[aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
16:43 ---
Fixed with the patch above.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20022

[Bug ada/19323] ACATS cdd2a03 fails at compile time

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
16:44 ---
Confirmed, now in the norun.lst file.


-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-17 16:44:21
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19323

[Bug c++/19883] [4.0 regression] Even more array bounds rejected as non-constant in template...

[bredelin at ucla dot edu]

--- Additional Comments From bredelin at ucla dot edu  2005-02-17 16:45 
---
Note that this bug breaks BOOST.

Here is a reduced testcase, which comes from 
boost/mpl/aux_/integral_wrapper.hpp:

-- begin testcase
template< typename T, T N >
struct integral_c
{
  static const T value = N;

  typedef integral_c< T, static_cast((value + 1)) > next;
  //  typedef integral_c< T, static_cast((value - 1)) > prior;

  //  operator T() const { return static_cast(this->value); }
};
--- end testcase 
% g++-cvs testcase.C
c.C:6: error: template argument 2 is invalid


The original error was obtained by including 
The following error was recieved:

In file included from /usr/include/boost/config.hpp:35,
 from /usr/include/boost/numeric/ublas/config.hpp:24,
 from /usr/include/boost/numeric/ublas/matrix.hpp:20,
 from a.C:1:
/usr/include/boost/config/compiler/gcc.hpp:92:7: warning: #warning "Unknown
compiler version - please run the configure tests and report the results"
/usr/include/boost/mpl/aux_/integral_wrapper.hpp:72: error: template argument 2
is invalid
/usr/include/boost/mpl/aux_/integral_wrapper.hpp:73: error: template argument 2
is invalid





-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19883

[Bug ada/18819] ACATS cdd2a02 fails at runtime

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
16:45 ---
Confirmed as of today on x86.


-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-17 16:45:38
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18819

[Bug ada/18819] ACATS cdd2a02 fails at runtime

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
16:46 ---
Investigating.


-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18819

[Bug java/20031] New: [4.0 regression] ICE on missing files

[bonniot at users dot sf dot net]

I'm getting two different ICEs in certain compilation situations, with trivially
small files. This seems to be about where source/class files are located, not
what's inside them (although the second bug does only occur if class B has the
abstract modifier).

Instead of painfully explaining what exacts steps to take to reproduce, I
included a small Makefile in the archive.

This is a regression: I get the ICEs with gcj 4.0.0 20050212 (Debian
gcc-snapshot), while both gcj 3.3 and 3.4 work correctly (report errors, without
ICE).

-- 
   Summary: [4.0 regression] ICE on missing files
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: java
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bonniot at users dot sf dot net
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,java-prs at gcc dot gnu
dot org
  GCC host triplet: i386-debian-linux-gnu


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20031

[Bug java/20031] [4.0 regression] ICE on missing files

[bonniot at users dot sf dot net]

--- Additional Comments From bonniot at users dot sf dot net  2005-02-17 
16:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=8215)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8215&action=view)
testcase


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20031

[Bug java/20031] [4.0 regression] ICE on missing files

[bonniot at users dot sf dot net]

--- Additional Comments From bonniot at users dot sf dot net  2005-02-17 
16:57 ---
I forgot, here is the output I get:

/usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/bin/gcj -d classes -C pkg/A.java pkg/B.java
/usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/bin/gcj classes/pkg/B.class
jc1: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
make: [bug1] Error 1 (ignored)
mv pkg pkg.bak
/usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/bin/gcj classes/pkg/B.class
jc1: error: cannot find file for class pkg.A
pkg/B.java:0: error: cannot find file for class pkg.A
pkg/B.java:0: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
make: [bug2] Error 1 (ignored)
mv pkg.bak pkg


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20031

[Bug middle-end/20030] Broken arguments access

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
17:03 ---
I think this is a bug in fold_indirect_ref and not in the fortran front-end as 
Jason as has said, the front-
end provides a cast to char* and then dereferences the pointer.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20030

[Bug middle-end/20030] Broken arguments access

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jason at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20030

[Bug middle-end/20030] [4.0 Regression] Broken arguments access

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
   ||org
   Keywords||wrong-code
Summary|Broken arguments access |[4.0 Regression] Broken
   ||arguments access


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20030

[Bug java/20031] [4.0 regression] ICE on missing files

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20031

[Bug middle-end/20030] [4.0 Regression] Broken arguments access

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
17:25 ---
This is a bug in fold_indirect_ref.

We get now:
  D.485 = (*ca)[0]{lb: 1 sz: 1};

See how the lower bound is 1, that is wrong.

A related C testcase is:
typedef char a[1];
int f(a * b)
{
  char a1 = *(char*)(b);
  return a1;
}

But for C we don't have lower bounds.  In fact in fortran we lower already all 
the array access so they 
start at 0.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-17 17:25:38
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20030

[Bug middle-end/20030] [4.0 Regression] Broken arguments access

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
17:40 ---
I have a fix which I am testing.

Yes this was a bug in fold_indirect_ref and not in the fortran front-end (it 
could also effect Ada too but I 
have no test case for Ada).

Basically what happens is that the fortran front-end creates an array which has 
a lower bound of 1 and 
then casts the reference to one of those to the pointer type of the type (of 
what is in the array) and the 
dereferences it.  fold_indirect_ref would get the lower bound wrong which 
causes us to create wrong 
code.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20030

[Bug c++/20032] New: internal error

[pentek_imre at mailbox dot hu]

Here you find two files:
http://people.inf.elte.hu/pentek_i/doksik/Linux/bugs/gcc/
they caused an internal error, and asked me to report a bug.

-- 
   Summary: internal error
   Product: gcc
   Version: 3.3.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: critical
  Priority: P2
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pentek_imre at mailbox dot hu
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
 GCC build triplet: i386-pc-linux-gnu
  GCC host triplet: i386-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i386-pc-linux-gnu


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20032

[Bug middle-end/20030] [4.0 Regression] Broken arguments access

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
17:45 ---
Patch here: .

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||patch


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20030

[Bug c++/20032] internal error

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
17:48 ---
Can you read http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html like the ICE said and provide all the 
needed information.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Severity|critical|normal


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20032

[Bug c++/20028] [3.4/4.0 Regression] class and then template class gives an ICE

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
17:55 ---
The code is invalid.
But this is a regression from 3.3.3 where we did not ICE.
Reduced testcase:
class Foo;
template  class Foo { };
int main ()
{
  Foo x;
  return 0;
}


-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Keywords||error-recovery, ice-on-
   ||invalid-code
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-17 17:55:25
   date||
Summary|problem with protected  |[3.4/4.0 Regression] class
   |members in template |and then template class
   |inheritance |gives an ICE
   Target Milestone|--- |3.4.4


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20028

[Bug middle-end/20027] [4.0 Regression] gcc.c-torture/execute/20050121.c execution fails

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-17 17:57:25
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20027

[Bug java/20031] [4.0 regression] ICE on missing files

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
18:04 ---
Confirmed, this is a java front-end bug.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-17 18:04:06
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20031

[Bug middle-end/20030] [4.0 Regression] Broken arguments access

[tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 18:12 
---
Adding Steve Kargl to CC, as this is most likely the BLAS bug he's been looking
into.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||sgk at troutmask dot apl dot
   ||washington dot edu


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20030

[Bug middle-end/19920] [4.0 Regression] build broken on several targets due to recent 'DC' type update to libgcc2

[rth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 18:27 
---
Fixed.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19920

[Bug c++/20028] [3.4/4.0 Regression] class and then template class gives an ICE

[aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed|2005-02-17 17:55:25 |2005-02-17 19:09:18
   date||
   Target Milestone|3.4.4   |---


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20028

[Bug middle-end/20030] [4.0 Regression] Broken arguments access

[sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu]

--- Additional Comments From sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot 
edu  2005-02-17 19:17 ---
Tobi, thanks for adding me to the CC list.  Andrew's patch
fixes the problems with BLAS.  I extemely happy someone else
was able to find a small testcase, because I was starting
to trim 10K LOC.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20030

[Bug AWT/20029] Robot needs XTest

[fitzsim at redhat dot com]

--- Additional Comments From fitzsim at redhat dot com  2005-02-17 19:18 
---
Yes, I'll have to re-add the -lXtst flag.  The problem I've seen is that
re-adding this causes an abort failure.


-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-02-17 19:18:52
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20029

[Bug c++/20028] [3.4/4.0 Regression] class and then template class gives an ICE

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
19:25 ---
Subject: Bug 20028

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-02-17 19:25:05

Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog class.c 
gcc/testsuite  : ChangeLog 
Added files:
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template: crash34.C 

Log message:
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR c++/20028
* class.c (finish_struct): Initialize TYPE_SIZE_UNIT of a
template along with TYPE_SIZE.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR c++/20028
* g++.dg/template/crash34.C: New.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.4632&r2=1.4633
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/class.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.705&r2=1.706
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.5043&r2=1.5044
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/crash34.C.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20028

[Bug target/20020] x86_64 - 128 bit structs not targeted to TImode

[gary at intrepid dot com]

--- Additional Comments From gary at intrepid dot com  2005-02-17 19:35 
---
The MAX_FIXED_REC_SIZE defintion is a relatively recent addition to 
config/rs6000.h (and from a quick review of the cvs log, it seems that this 
change hasn't yet been incorporated into a release.) Just fyi.

revision 1.330 
date: 2004/08/11 19:18:14;  author: dje;  state: Exp;  lines: +6 -0
* config/rs6000/rs6000.h (MAX_FIXED_MODE_SIZE): Define.
 
* config/rs6000/rs6000.md (mfcr rlwinm patterns): Set length to 8.
(mfcr rlwinm rlwinm patterns): Set length to 12.




-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20020

[Bug bootstrap/20033] New: Bootstrap fails on 32-bit hppa-hpux

[jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org]

Bootstrap fails on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 and hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.23.
This may be related to bug 20027.

../../gcc-mainline/gcc/libgcc2.c: In function '__multc3':
../../gcc-mainline/gcc/libgcc2.c:1637: error: Invalid operand to binary operator
a___0D.3239

../../gcc-mainline/gcc/libgcc2.c:1637: error: Invalid operand to binary operator
b___1D.3240

../../gcc-mainline/gcc/libgcc2.c:1637: error: Invalid operand to binary operator
a___0D.3239

../../gcc-mainline/gcc/libgcc2.c:1637: error: Invalid operand to binary operator
b___1D.3240

../../gcc-mainline/gcc/libgcc2.c:1637: error: Invalid operand to binary operator
a___0D.3239

../../gcc-mainline/gcc/libgcc2.c:1637: error: Invalid operand to binary operator
a___0D.3239

../../gcc-mainline/gcc/libgcc2.c:1637: error: Invalid operand to binary operator
a___0D.3239

../../gcc-mainline/gcc/libgcc2.c:1637: error: Invalid operand to binary operator
b___1D.3240

../../gcc-mainline/gcc/libgcc2.c:1637: error: Invalid operand to binary operator
b___1D.3240

../../gcc-mainline/gcc/libgcc2.c:1637: error: Invalid operand to binary operator
b___1D.3240

../../gcc-mainline/gcc/libgcc2.c:1637: error: Invalid operand to binary operator
c___2D.3241

../../gcc-mainline/gcc/libgcc2.c:1637: error: Invalid operand to binary operator
d___3D.3242

../../gcc-mainline/gcc/libgcc2.c:1637: internal compiler error: verify_stmts 
failed.
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
make[3]: *** [libgcc/./_multc3.o] Error 1

-- 
   Summary: Bootstrap fails on 32-bit hppa-hpux
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: bootstrap
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: hppa2.0w-*-hpux11.*


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20033

[Bug tree-optimization/20009] [4.0 regression] cris-elf testsuite failures: gcc.c-torture/unsorted/USIcmp.c, -O1 and above

[jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 20:00 
---
Also fails on ia64-hpux.


-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20009

[Bug middle-end/20033] [4.0 Regression] Bootstrap fails on 32-bit hppa-hpux

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
20:00 ---
Critical and P1 because this is primary target and there is no workaround 
except for reverting the patch 
as of now.
And Yes I doubled check to make sure that this is a primary target: 
.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jason at gcc dot gnu dot org
   Severity|normal  |critical
  Component|bootstrap   |middle-end
   Keywords||build, ice-on-valid-code
   Priority|P2  |P1
Summary|Bootstrap fails on 32-bit   |[4.0 Regression] Bootstrap
   |hppa-hpux   |fails on 32-bit hppa-hpux
   Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20033

[Bug c++/20028] [3.4 Regression] class and then template class gives an ICE

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
20:02 ---
Patch here:  for 3.4.x.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||patch
Summary|[3.4/4.0 Regression] class  |[3.4 Regression] class and
   |and then template class |then template class gives an
   |gives an ICE|ICE
   Target Milestone|--- |3.4.4


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20028

Re: [Bug target/20020] x86_64 - 128 bit structs not targeted to TImode

[Andrew Pinski]

On Feb 17, 2005, at 2:35 PM, gary at intrepid dot com wrote:
The MAX_FIXED_REC_SIZE defintion is a relatively recent addition to
config/rs6000.h (and from a quick review of the cvs log, it seems that 
this
change hasn't yet been incorporated into a release.) Just fyi.
Yes so, just a note the patch to fix this if it is approved will always 
have
to go on the mainline.  Also note MAX_FIXED_MODE_SIZE was changed on 
rs6000
for a reason and not for an optimization issue.

-- Pinski

[Bug target/20020] x86_64 - 128 bit structs not targeted to TImode

[pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu  2005-02-17 
20:05 ---
Subject: Re:  x86_64 - 128 bit structs not targeted to TImode


On Feb 17, 2005, at 2:35 PM, gary at intrepid dot com wrote:

> The MAX_FIXED_REC_SIZE defintion is a relatively recent addition to
> config/rs6000.h (and from a quick review of the cvs log, it seems that 
> this
> change hasn't yet been incorporated into a release.) Just fyi.

Yes so, just a note the patch to fix this if it is approved will always 
have
to go on the mainline.  Also note MAX_FIXED_MODE_SIZE was changed on 
rs6000
for a reason and not for an optimization issue.

-- Pinski



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20020

[Bug target/19887] g++.dg/warn/weak1.C fails on HPUX

[jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 20:07 
---
Also fails on hppa64-hpux (same link failure).  Not a regression there either.


-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 GCC target triplet|ia64-*-hpux11.* |*-*-hpux11.*
Summary|g++.dg/warn/weak1.C fails on|g++.dg/warn/weak1.C fails on
   |ia64-hpux   |HPUX


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19887

[Bug middle-end/20033] [4.0 Regression] Bootstrap fails on 32-bit hppa-hpux

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
20:12 ---
I would not doubt that this is related to what RTH reported on alpha:
.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20033

[Bug target/20034] New: g++.dg/inherit/thunk2.C fails

[jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org]

g++.dg/inherit/thunk2.C fails on hppa64-hpux.  Regression, new since 20050212.
Not tested on 32-bit HPPA because of bootstrap failure there (bug 20033).

/scratch/joseph/gcc-mainline/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/inherit/thunk2.C: In member
function 'ClassC ClassB::_ZTv0_n24_N6ClassB1fEv()':
/scratch/joseph/gcc-mainline/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/inherit/thunk2.C:17: internal 
compiler error: in create_tmp_var, at gimplify.c:368
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.

-- 
   Summary: g++.dg/inherit/thunk2.C fails
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: hppa64-*-hpux11.*


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20034

[Bug middle-end/20034] [4.0 Regression] g++.dg/inherit/thunk2.C fails

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
20:20 ---
I would not doubt this was caused by the same patch which caused "bug 20033" 
and many other 
failures.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jason at gcc dot gnu dot org
  Component|target  |middle-end
   Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Summary|g++.dg/inherit/thunk2.C |[4.0 Regression]
   |fails   |g++.dg/inherit/thunk2.C
   ||fails


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20034

[Bug ada/20035] New: failed run-time assertion : Tasking not implemented on this configuration on sparc-linux

[christian dot joensson at gmail dot com]

well, building gcc cvs trunk for sparc-linux and running the testsuite shows 
tests not run and the log file message is this:

failed run-time assertion : Tasking not implemented on this configuration

-- 
   Summary: failed run-time assertion : Tasking not implemented on
this configuration on sparc-linux
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: ada
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: christian dot joensson at gmail dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
 GCC build triplet: sparc-unknown-linux-gnu
  GCC host triplet: sparc-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: sparc-unknown-linux-gnu


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20035

[Bug ada/20035] failed run-time assertion : Tasking not implemented on this configuration on sparc-linux

[phython at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From phython at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
20:26 ---
Created an attachment (id=8216)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8216&action=view)
Ada system file

 I don't know if this will do anything as I didn't record the before and after
failures with this file.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20035

[Bug ada/20035] failed run-time assertion : Tasking not implemented on this configuration on sparc-linux

[phython at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From phython at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-17 
20:26 ---
Created an attachment (id=8217)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8217&action=view)
V9 version


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20035

[Bug c/20036] New: gcc.dg/compat/vector-[12]_y.c fails to compile

[winfried dot magerl at mch dot sbs dot de]

Testsuite failes with the same error for this four testcases:
FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/vector-1 c_compat_x_tst.o compile
FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/vector-1 c_compat_y_tst.o compile
FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/vector-2 c_compat_x_tst.o compile
FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/vector-2 c_compat_y_tst.o compile

Called manually with gcc and with "-v -Q" I get the following output:
  
gcc -v -Q -w  -c  -o c_compat_y_tst.o
/home/winfried/gcc-cvs/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/vector-1_y.c
Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/3.4.3/specs
Configured with: ../gcc/configure --prefix=/usr --enable-shared --with-gnu-ld
--with-gnu-as --sysconfdir=/etc --localstatedir=/var --enable-multilib=no
Thread model: posix
gcc version 3.4.3
 /usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/3.4.3/cc1 -v
/home/winfried/gcc-cvs/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/vector-1_y.c -dumpbase
vector-1_y.c -mtune=k8 -auxbase-strip c_compat_y_tst.o -w -version -o
/tmp/ccoOLY9r.s
ignoring nonexistent directory "/usr/local/include"
ignoring nonexistent directory
"/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/3.4.3/../../../../x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/include"
#include "..." search starts here:
#include <...> search starts here:
 /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/3.4.3/include
 /usr/include
End of search list.
GNU C version 3.4.3 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
compiled by GNU C version 3.4.3.
GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=98 --param ggc-min-heapsize=128397
options passed:  -v -mtune=k8 -auxbase-strip -w
options enabled:  -feliminate-unused-debug-types -fpeephole -ffunction-cse
 -fkeep-static-consts -freg-struct-return -fgcse-lm -fgcse-sm -fgcse-las
 -fsched-interblock -fsched-spec -fsched-stalled-insns
 -fsched-stalled-insns-dep -fbranch-count-reg -funwind-tables
 -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fcommon -fargument-alias
 -fzero-initialized-in-bss -fident -fmath-errno -ftrapping-math -m80387
 -mhard-float -mno-soft-float -mieee-fp -mfp-ret-in-387
 -maccumulate-outgoing-args -mmmx -msse -msse2 -m128bit-long-double -m64
 -mtls-direct-seg-refs -mtune=k8 -march=x86-64
 checkp_8qi
 checkg_8qi
 init_8qi
 test_v8qi
 checkp_16qi
 checkg_16qi
 init_16qi
 test_v16qi
 checkp_2hi
 checkg_2hi
 init_2hi
 test_v2hi

/home/winfried/gcc-cvs/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/vector-1_y.c: In function
`test_v2hi':
/home/winfried/gcc-cvs/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/vector-1_y.c:10: internal
compiler error: in classify_argument, at config/i386/i386.c:2284
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.

-- 
   Summary: gcc.dg/compat/vector-[12]_y.c fails to compile
   Product: gcc
   Version: 3.4.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: winfried dot magerl at mch dot sbs dot de
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
 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=20036