[Bug rtl-optimization/22239] [4.0/4.1 Regression] i-cobol.adb:482: error: unrecognizable insn

[dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca]

--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca  
2005-07-09 02:44 ---
Subject: Re:  [4.0/4.1 Regression] i-cobol.adb:482: error: unrecognizable insn

>  --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9233&action=view)
> file that now ICEs with latest patch.
> 
> Compile the this file with -O2 -g on an arm-elf cross

This is totally untested but possibly something like the change below
would resolve the problem for both ports.

Dave
-- 
J. David Anglin  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
National Research Council of Canada  (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6602)

Index: loop.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/loop.c,v
retrieving revision 1.535
diff -u -3 -p -r1.535 loop.c
--- loop.c  7 Jul 2005 22:53:28 -   1.535
+++ loop.c  9 Jul 2005 02:34:18 -
@@ -5496,14 +5496,21 @@ loop_givs_rescan (struct loop *loop, str
  v->new_reg));
  else if (GET_CODE (*v->location) == PLUS
   && REG_P (XEXP (*v->location, 0))
-  && REG_P (v->new_reg)
   && CONSTANT_P (XEXP (*v->location, 1)))
-   loop_insn_emit_before (loop, 0, v->insn,
-  gen_move_insn (XEXP (*v->location, 0),
- gen_rtx_MINUS
- (GET_MODE (*v->location),
-  v->new_reg,
-  XEXP (*v->location, 1;
+   {
+ rtx reg, seq;
+ start_sequence ();
+ if (REG_P (v->new_reg))
+   reg = v->new_reg;
+ else
+   reg = force_reg (GET_MODE (*v->location), v->new_reg);
+ emit_move_insn (XEXP (*v->location, 0),
+ gen_rtx_MINUS (GET_MODE (*v->location), reg,
+XEXP (*v->location, 1)));
+ seq = get_insns ();
+ end_sequence ();
+ loop_insn_emit_before (loop, 0, v->insn, seq);
+   }
  else
{
  /* If it wasn't a reg, create a pseudo and use that.  */


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22239

[Bug fortran/20836] error needed

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||accepts-invalid
   Last reconfirmed|2005-04-09 19:00:33 |2005-07-09 01:41:10
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20836

[Bug fortran/20835] error needed with EQUIVALENCE and TARGET

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||accepts-invalid
   Last reconfirmed|2005-04-09 17:49:09 |2005-07-09 01:40:55
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20835

[Bug ada/22383] New: ada produces mis-match (non compatible) types in MODIFY_EXPR

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

Another one:
with Ada.Task_Identification; use Ada.Task_Identification;
with Unchecked_Conversion;
package body a is
   pragma Warnings (Off);
   function To_Tid  is new Unchecked_Conversion
 (System.Address, Ada.Task_Identification.Task_Id);
   function To_Task_Id
 (Id   : System.Address) return Ada.Task_Identification.Task_Id
   is
   begin
  return To_Tid (Id);
   end To_Task_Id;
end a;
with System;
with Ada.Task_Identification;
package a is
   function To_Task_Id
 (Id   : System.Address)
  return Ada.Task_Identification.Task_Id;
end a;

-- 
   Summary: ada produces mis-match (non compatible) types in
MODIFY_EXPR
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: ada
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: bosch at gcc dot gnu dot org,gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot
org
OtherBugsDependingO 22368
 nThis:


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22383

[Bug other/22368] [meta-bugs] mis-match types in GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  BugsThisDependsOn||22383


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368

[Bug rtl-optimization/22239] [4.0/4.1 Regression] i-cobol.adb:482: error: unrecognizable insn

[dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca]

--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca  
2005-07-09 00:41 ---
Subject: Re:  [4.0/4.1 Regression] i-cobol.adb:482: error: unrecognizable insn

> Compile the this file with -O2 -g on an arm-elf cross

Looks like a target, or possibly a different loop bug to me:

(gdb) p debug_rtx (v->new_reg)
(plus:SI (reg:SI 993)
(const_int -60 [0xffc4]))

(gdb) p debug_rtx (v->insn)
(insn 1785 3575 1792 (parallel [
(set (mem/s:SI (reg/f:SI 624) [41 adpm S4 A32])
(reg:SI 0 r0))
(set (mem/s:SI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 624)
(const_int 4 [0x4])) [41 adpm S4 A32])
(reg:SI 1 r1))
(set (mem/s:SI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 624)
(const_int 8 [0x8])) [41 adpm S4 A32])
(reg:SI 2 r2))
(set (mem/s:SI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 624)
(const_int 12 [0xc])) [41 adpm S4 A32])
(reg:SI 3 r3))
]) -1 (nil)
 (nil))

(gdb) p debug_rtx (*v->location)
(plus:SI (reg/f:SI 624)
(const_int 12 [0xc]))

So, it's apparently not valid to substitute a reg into the fourth instruction
of the above parallel on arm-elf.

Dave


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22239

[Bug target/22382] cris-axis-linux-gnu cross: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/common.f90 -O2 host difference?

[hp at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-07-09 00:35:00
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22382

[Bug target/22382] New: cris-axis-linux-gnu cross: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/common.f90 -O2 host difference?

[hp at gcc dot gnu dot org]

With LAST_UPDATED "Thu Jun 30 14:21:26 UTC 2005",
gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/common.f90 fails:
FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/common.f90 execution,  -O1
FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/common.f90 execution,  -O2
FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/common.f90 execution,  -O2
-fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions
FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/common.f90 execution,  -O2
-fno-repack-arrays
FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/common.f90 execution,  -Os

whereas cross from i686-pc-linux-gnu with "Mon Jul  4 10:24:52 UTC 2005"
shows no fail for that case.  (Results from previous tests has been
flushed.)  In constrast, the "nearby" in-pack.f90 fails with -Os
on both hosts, regardless of -fpic:y options.

Lots of apples and oranges regarding source dates, but this is just
a public note that I need to investigate, particularly since (1) it
does not fail *at all* when adding (just) -fpic, (2) a target patch
will cause it to fail when -O2 -fpic.  It also fails baseline with
-mno-gotplt -fPIC and -mno-gotplt *without* -fpic/-fPIC!

Also marked "target" so nobody thinks I'm implying there's a bug elsewhere,
like in libgfortran.  I suspect a "64-bit bug" lurking somewhere.

For the record, random people wanting to repeat this, need to install
the glibc from cris-dist-1.62 (developer.axis.com, use the rpm, the dpkg,
or follow the instructions and gcc in that distribution to compile it)
and use --prefix=/usr/local/cris with the current tree to be able to repeat
the observations noted above.

-- 
   Summary: cris-axis-linux-gnu cross: gfortran.fortran-
torture/execute/common.f90 -O2 host difference?
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: target
AssignedTo: hp at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hp at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
  GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: cris-axis-linux-gnu


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22382

[Bug ada/22381] Ada produces mis-match (non compatible) types in MODIFY_EXPR

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||bosch at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22381

[Bug fortran/18022] problem with structure and calling a function

[tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18022

[Bug other/22368] [meta-bugs] mis-match types in GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  BugsThisDependsOn||22381


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368

[Bug ada/22381] New: Ada produces mis-match (non compatible) types in MODIFY_EXPR

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

Take the following reduced testcase:
package body GNAT.Sockets is
   function To_Inet_Addr return Inet_Addr_Type
   is
  Result : Inet_Addr_Type;
   begin
  return Result;
   end To_Inet_Addr;
end GNAT.Sockets;
package GNAT.Sockets is
   type Family_Type is (Family_Inet, Family_Inet6);
   type Inet_Addr_Type (Family : Family_Type := Family_Inet) is private;
   function To_Inet_Addr  return Inet_Addr_Type;
private
   subtype Inet_Addr_Comp_Type is Natural range 0 .. 255;
   type Inet_Addr_VN_Type is array (Natural range <>) of Inet_Addr_Comp_Type;
   subtype Inet_Addr_V4_Type is Inet_Addr_VN_Type (1 ..  4);
   subtype Inet_Addr_V6_Type is Inet_Addr_VN_Type (1 .. 16);
   type Inet_Addr_Type (Family : Family_Type := Family_Inet) is record
  case Family is
 when Family_Inet =>
Sin_V4 : Inet_Addr_V4_Type := (others => 0);
 when Family_Inet6 =>
Sin_V6 : Inet_Addr_V6_Type := (others => 0);
  end case;
   end record;
end GNAT.Sockets;

Using the patch in PR 22368, we get an ICE:
g-socket.adb: In function 'GNAT.SOCKETS.TO_INET_ADDR':
g-socket.adb:8: error: statement types mismatch
*TARGETD.469 = resultD.524;

struct gnat__sockets__inet_addr_typeD.454
struct gnat__sockets__to_inet_addr__result___PAD

Looking at the types we are missing a COMPONENT_REF.

-- 
   Summary: Ada produces mis-match (non compatible) types in
MODIFY_EXPR
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: ada
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
OtherBugsDependingO 22368
 nThis:


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22381

[Bug rtl-optimization/22239] [4.0/4.1 Regression] i-cobol.adb:482: error: unrecognizable insn

[rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
23:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=9233)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9233&action=view)
file that now ICEs with latest patch.

Compile the this file with -O2 -g on an arm-elf cross

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22239

[Bug rtl-optimization/22239] [4.0/4.1 Regression] i-cobol.adb:482: error: unrecognizable insn

[rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
23:00 ---
The latest patch causes a bootstrap failure on arm-elf and arm-netbsdelf.  I'll
attach a file momentarily.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22239

[Bug middle-end/22380] [4.1 Regression] stack usage of g++.dg/opt/inline4.C increased (GC with blocks)

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
22:46 ---
Confirmed,  the stack is overflowing when doing GC, marking the BLOCKs.  This 
test regressed when 
the early inliner came in.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
   ||org
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
  Component|c++ |middle-end
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-07-08 22:46:37
   date||
Summary|[4.1 Regression] stack usage|[4.1 Regression] stack usage
   |of g++.dg/opt/inline4.C |of g++.dg/opt/inline4.C
   |increased   |increased (GC with blocks)
   Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22380

[Bug c++/22380] New: [4.1 Regression] stack usage of g++.dg/opt/inline4.C increased

[jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org]

On hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11, on mainline between 20050627 and 20050630 both at
07:00 UTC, the failure

FAIL: g++.dg/opt/inline4.C (test for excess errors)

appeared, the error being compile-time stack overflow.

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/2005-06/msg00121.html
shows the same failure appearing on Darwin.  I can reproduce the problem on
i686-pc-linux-gnu if I use "ulimit -s 4096", while a 4.0 branch compiler works
on the same testcase with "ulimit -s 256".  I don't know how much stack the test
needed just before the failure appeared.

-- 
   Summary: [4.1 Regression] stack usage of g++.dg/opt/inline4.C
increased
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: c++
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=22380

[Bug middle-end/22379] [4.1 Regression] ICE in cgraph_early_inlining, at ipa-inline.c:990

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
21:45 ---
Confirmed, since this was only a foward from the email.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot
   ||org
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-07-08 21:45:39
   date||
   Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22379

[Bug middle-end/22379] New: [4.1 Regression] ICE in cgraph_early_inlining, at ipa-inline.c:990

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

Forwarded from: 
void __add_entropy_words(void);
void __wake_up(void);
void SHATransform(void);
static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) void add_entropy_words(void){}
void extract_entropy(void);
static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) void xfer_secondary_pool(void)
{
extract_entropy();
add_entropy_words();
}
void extract_entropy(void)
{
xfer_secondary_pool();
__wake_up();
}
void init_std_data(void)
{
add_entropy_words();
}
void rand_initialize(void)
{
init_std_data();
}

-- 
   Summary: [4.1 Regression] ICE in cgraph_early_inlining, at ipa-
inline.c:990
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22379

[Bug fortran/21257] [4.0 only] Duplicate use of construct name

[kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 21:26 
---
Back ported to 4.0

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21257

[Bug fortran/19926] [4.0 only] Incorrect rank with PARAMETER and array element.

[kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 21:26 
---
Back ported to 4.0

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19926

[Bug fortran/17792] [4.0 only] deallocate does not return stat

[kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 21:25 
---
Back port to 4.0

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17792

[Bug fortran/19926] [4.0 only] Incorrect rank with PARAMETER and array element.

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
21:21 ---
Subject: Bug 19926

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-07-08 21:21:38

Modified files:
gcc/testsuite  : ChangeLog 
Added files:
gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg: deallocate_stat.f90 
   duplicate_labels.f90 pr19926.f90 

Log message:
PR fortran/17792
PR fortran/21375
* gfortran.dg/deallocate_stat.f90:  New test.

PR fortran/19926
* gfortran.dg/pr19926.f90: New test.

PR fortran/21257
* gfortran.dg/duplicate_labels.f90: New test.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.5084.2.253&r2=1.5084.2.254
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/deallocate_stat.f90.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=NONE&r2=1.1.8.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/duplicate_labels.f90.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=NONE&r2=1.1.8.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr19926.f90.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=NONE&r2=1.1.8.1



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19926

[Bug fortran/17792] [4.0 only] deallocate does not return stat

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
21:21 ---
Subject: Bug 17792

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-07-08 21:21:38

Modified files:
gcc/testsuite  : ChangeLog 
Added files:
gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg: deallocate_stat.f90 
   duplicate_labels.f90 pr19926.f90 

Log message:
PR fortran/17792
PR fortran/21375
* gfortran.dg/deallocate_stat.f90:  New test.

PR fortran/19926
* gfortran.dg/pr19926.f90: New test.

PR fortran/21257
* gfortran.dg/duplicate_labels.f90: New test.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.5084.2.253&r2=1.5084.2.254
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/deallocate_stat.f90.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=NONE&r2=1.1.8.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/duplicate_labels.f90.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=NONE&r2=1.1.8.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr19926.f90.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=NONE&r2=1.1.8.1



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17792

[Bug fortran/21257] [4.0 only] Duplicate use of construct name

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
21:21 ---
Subject: Bug 21257

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-07-08 21:21:38

Modified files:
gcc/testsuite  : ChangeLog 
Added files:
gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg: deallocate_stat.f90 
   duplicate_labels.f90 pr19926.f90 

Log message:
PR fortran/17792
PR fortran/21375
* gfortran.dg/deallocate_stat.f90:  New test.

PR fortran/19926
* gfortran.dg/pr19926.f90: New test.

PR fortran/21257
* gfortran.dg/duplicate_labels.f90: New test.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.5084.2.253&r2=1.5084.2.254
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/deallocate_stat.f90.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=NONE&r2=1.1.8.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/duplicate_labels.f90.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=NONE&r2=1.1.8.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr19926.f90.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=NONE&r2=1.1.8.1



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21257

[Bug fortran/21375] Rising run-time errors at DEALLOCATE with STAT clause

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
21:21 ---
Subject: Bug 21375

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-07-08 21:21:38

Modified files:
gcc/testsuite  : ChangeLog 
Added files:
gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg: deallocate_stat.f90 
   duplicate_labels.f90 pr19926.f90 

Log message:
PR fortran/17792
PR fortran/21375
* gfortran.dg/deallocate_stat.f90:  New test.

PR fortran/19926
* gfortran.dg/pr19926.f90: New test.

PR fortran/21257
* gfortran.dg/duplicate_labels.f90: New test.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.5084.2.253&r2=1.5084.2.254
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/deallocate_stat.f90.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=NONE&r2=1.1.8.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/duplicate_labels.f90.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=NONE&r2=1.1.8.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr19926.f90.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=NONE&r2=1.1.8.1



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21375

[Bug fortran/17792] [4.0 only] deallocate does not return stat

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
21:19 ---
Subject: Bug 17792

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-07-08 21:19:28

Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog intrinsic.c match.c primary.c 
 trans-array.c trans-array.h trans-decl.c 
 trans-stmt.c 

Log message:
Backport from the mainline:
PR fortran/21257
(port from g95)
* match.c (gfc_match_label): Detect duplicate labels.
* gfortran.dg/duplicate_labels.f90: New test.

PR fortran/19926
* primary.c (gfc_match_rvalue):  expr_type can be EXPR_CONSTANT
for an array; check that sym->as is NULL.
* gfortran.dg/pr19926.f90: New test.

PR fortran/17792
PR fortran/21375
* trans-array.c (gfc_array_deallocate): pstat is new argument
(gfc_array_allocate): update gfc_array_deallocate() call.
(gfc_trans_deferred_array): ditto.
* trans-array.h: update gfc_array_deallocate() prototype.
* trans-decl.c (gfc_build_builtin_function_decls): update declaration
* trans-stmt.c (gfc_trans_deallocate): Implement STAT= feature.

* intrinsic.c (gfc_intrinsic_func_interface): Enable errors for generic
functions whose simplification routine return FAILURE.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.335.2.76&r2=1.335.2.77
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/intrinsic.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.44.2.3&r2=1.44.2.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/match.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.31.8.7&r2=1.31.8.8
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/primary.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.22.2.4&r2=1.22.2.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.39.2.5&r2=1.39.2.6
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-array.h.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.7.18.1&r2=1.7.18.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.54.2.3&r2=1.54.2.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.24.6.5&r2=1.24.6.6



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17792

[Bug fortran/19926] [4.0 only] Incorrect rank with PARAMETER and array element.

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
21:19 ---
Subject: Bug 19926

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-07-08 21:19:28

Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog intrinsic.c match.c primary.c 
 trans-array.c trans-array.h trans-decl.c 
 trans-stmt.c 

Log message:
Backport from the mainline:
PR fortran/21257
(port from g95)
* match.c (gfc_match_label): Detect duplicate labels.
* gfortran.dg/duplicate_labels.f90: New test.

PR fortran/19926
* primary.c (gfc_match_rvalue):  expr_type can be EXPR_CONSTANT
for an array; check that sym->as is NULL.
* gfortran.dg/pr19926.f90: New test.

PR fortran/17792
PR fortran/21375
* trans-array.c (gfc_array_deallocate): pstat is new argument
(gfc_array_allocate): update gfc_array_deallocate() call.
(gfc_trans_deferred_array): ditto.
* trans-array.h: update gfc_array_deallocate() prototype.
* trans-decl.c (gfc_build_builtin_function_decls): update declaration
* trans-stmt.c (gfc_trans_deallocate): Implement STAT= feature.

* intrinsic.c (gfc_intrinsic_func_interface): Enable errors for generic
functions whose simplification routine return FAILURE.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.335.2.76&r2=1.335.2.77
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/intrinsic.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.44.2.3&r2=1.44.2.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/match.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.31.8.7&r2=1.31.8.8
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/primary.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.22.2.4&r2=1.22.2.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.39.2.5&r2=1.39.2.6
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-array.h.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.7.18.1&r2=1.7.18.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.54.2.3&r2=1.54.2.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.24.6.5&r2=1.24.6.6



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19926

[Bug fortran/21257] [4.0 only] Duplicate use of construct name

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
21:19 ---
Subject: Bug 21257

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-07-08 21:19:28

Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog intrinsic.c match.c primary.c 
 trans-array.c trans-array.h trans-decl.c 
 trans-stmt.c 

Log message:
Backport from the mainline:
PR fortran/21257
(port from g95)
* match.c (gfc_match_label): Detect duplicate labels.
* gfortran.dg/duplicate_labels.f90: New test.

PR fortran/19926
* primary.c (gfc_match_rvalue):  expr_type can be EXPR_CONSTANT
for an array; check that sym->as is NULL.
* gfortran.dg/pr19926.f90: New test.

PR fortran/17792
PR fortran/21375
* trans-array.c (gfc_array_deallocate): pstat is new argument
(gfc_array_allocate): update gfc_array_deallocate() call.
(gfc_trans_deferred_array): ditto.
* trans-array.h: update gfc_array_deallocate() prototype.
* trans-decl.c (gfc_build_builtin_function_decls): update declaration
* trans-stmt.c (gfc_trans_deallocate): Implement STAT= feature.

* intrinsic.c (gfc_intrinsic_func_interface): Enable errors for generic
functions whose simplification routine return FAILURE.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.335.2.76&r2=1.335.2.77
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/intrinsic.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.44.2.3&r2=1.44.2.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/match.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.31.8.7&r2=1.31.8.8
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/primary.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.22.2.4&r2=1.22.2.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.39.2.5&r2=1.39.2.6
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-array.h.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.7.18.1&r2=1.7.18.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.54.2.3&r2=1.54.2.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.24.6.5&r2=1.24.6.6



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21257

[Bug fortran/21375] Rising run-time errors at DEALLOCATE with STAT clause

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
21:19 ---
Subject: Bug 21375

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-07-08 21:19:28

Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog intrinsic.c match.c primary.c 
 trans-array.c trans-array.h trans-decl.c 
 trans-stmt.c 

Log message:
Backport from the mainline:
PR fortran/21257
(port from g95)
* match.c (gfc_match_label): Detect duplicate labels.
* gfortran.dg/duplicate_labels.f90: New test.

PR fortran/19926
* primary.c (gfc_match_rvalue):  expr_type can be EXPR_CONSTANT
for an array; check that sym->as is NULL.
* gfortran.dg/pr19926.f90: New test.

PR fortran/17792
PR fortran/21375
* trans-array.c (gfc_array_deallocate): pstat is new argument
(gfc_array_allocate): update gfc_array_deallocate() call.
(gfc_trans_deferred_array): ditto.
* trans-array.h: update gfc_array_deallocate() prototype.
* trans-decl.c (gfc_build_builtin_function_decls): update declaration
* trans-stmt.c (gfc_trans_deallocate): Implement STAT= feature.

* intrinsic.c (gfc_intrinsic_func_interface): Enable errors for generic
functions whose simplification routine return FAILURE.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.335.2.76&r2=1.335.2.77
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/intrinsic.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.44.2.3&r2=1.44.2.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/match.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.31.8.7&r2=1.31.8.8
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/primary.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.22.2.4&r2=1.22.2.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.39.2.5&r2=1.39.2.6
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-array.h.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.7.18.1&r2=1.7.18.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.54.2.3&r2=1.54.2.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.24.6.5&r2=1.24.6.6



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21375

[Bug libfortran/21593] FAIL: gfortran.dg/dev_null.f90

[kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 21:01 
---
I've committed FX's mainline change to dev_null.f90 that causes this
test program to only be compiled on linux and solaris to the
4.0 branch.

Andrew, is this sufficient to close this PR?  The behavior of
ftruncate() on /dev/null appears to be system dependent.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21593

[Bug tree-optimization/21356] [4.1 Regression] Dominance error after aggressive dead code elimination (cd_dce)

[dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21356

[Bug tree-optimization/21356] [4.1 Regression] Dominance error after aggressive dead code elimination (cd_dce)

[dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
20:53 ---

The patch for this PR causes bootstrap failures after enabling the new points-to
solver.  I will try to find another solution for this problem.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
 Resolution|FIXED   |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21356

[Bug c++/22361] Fails to identify

[bangerth at dealii dot org]

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org  2005-07-08 20:48 
---
Yes, they were. Fixed now. 
W. 

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22361

[Bug ada/22328] Ada produces mis-match (non compatible) types in MODIFY_EXPR

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-07-08 20:25:48
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22328

Compiler error from libio.h & stdio.h

[Poon, Lily]

Please help, I cant figure out why there would be a parse error from a
standard library..

Here is the log:


g++ -c -c -Wall -I.   -c -o bkos.o bkos.cpp
In file included from /usr/include/stdio.h:65,
 from bkos.cpp:25:
/usr/include/libio.h:457: type specifier omitted for parameter
/usr/include/libio.h:459: type specifier omitted for parameter
In file included from bkos.cpp:25:
/usr/include/stdio.h:285: type specifier omitted for parameter
/usr/include/stdio.h:285: parse error before `)'
/usr/include/stdio.h:287: type specifier omitted for parameter
/usr/include/stdio.h:287: parse error before `)'
/usr/include/stdio.h:291: type specifier omitted for parameter
/usr/include/stdio.h:291: parse error before `)'
/usr/include/stdio.h:300: type specifier omitted for parameter
/usr/include/stdio.h:300: parse error before `)'
make: *** [bkos.o] Error 1


Thanks,
Lily

[Bug c++/22378] [regression 4.0.1 -> 4.0.0,3.4.x] Friend decl ceases to declare class

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
19:53 ---
The code is in fact invalid.

friend should not inject the class at all.

The reason why we did not have a deprecated period or allow it with 
-fpermissive is because we 
actually got a bug report about accepting this invalid code.

Just add the forward declaration.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||INVALID


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22378

[Bug c++/22378] New: [regression 4.0.1 -> 4.0.0,3.4.x] Friend decl ceases to declare class

[John at xza5 dot com]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] misc]$ cat -n decl_friend_class.cpp
 1
 2  #ifdef DD
 3  class d;
 4  #endif
 5
 6  class c
 7  {
 8friend class d;
 9d* p;
10  };
11
[EMAIL PROTECTED] misc]$ /usr/local/gcc/gcc-4.0.0/bin/g++ -c -W -Wall 
decl_friend_class.cpp
[EMAIL PROTECTED] misc]$ /usr/local/gcc/gcc-4.0.1/bin/g++ -c -W -Wall 
decl_friend_class.cpp
decl_friend_class.cpp:9: error: ISO C++ forbids declaration of 'd' with no type
decl_friend_class.cpp:9: error: expected ';' before '*' token
[EMAIL PROTECTED] misc]$ /usr/local/gcc/gcc-4.0.1/bin/g++ -c -W -Wall 
-fpermissive
decl_friend_class.cpp
decl_friend_class.cpp:9: warning: ISO C++ forbids declaration of 'd' with no 
type
decl_friend_class.cpp:9: error: expected ';' before '*' token
[EMAIL PROTECTED] misc]$ /usr/local/gcc/gcc-4.0.1/bin/g++ -c -W -Wall -DDD
decl_friend_class.cpp
[EMAIL PROTECTED] misc]$ icc -c -w2 decl_friend_class.cpp
[EMAIL PROTECTED] misc]$

The icc here is icc 8.1

The original testcase comes from SystemC 2.0.1,
in include/systemc/kernel/sc_module_name.h

( http://www.systemc.org/ )

IANAC++LL.  It is not immediately clear to me from the
standard whether a friend class decl declares that class,
though the description of a friend function decl suggests
- to me, anyway - that it might.

I would be grateful if anyone could refer me to a discussion
of whether or not this is valid C++, acording to current
interpretations of the standard.

However:

I believe that this code is accepted by gcc-2.95, gcc-3.2.x, gcc-3.4.x,
gcc-4.0.0 without warning, so if it has been determined to be invalid,
it should reeceive a "deprecated" warning and/or require -fpermissive
before it ceases to be accepted by gcc.

Regards,

John.

I will test minor release candidates more in future...

-- 
   Summary: [regression 4.0.1 -> 4.0.0,3.4.x] Friend decl ceases to
declare class
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: John at xza5 dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22378

[Bug middle-end/17961] ICE for operation on small vector with altivec enabled

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
19:34 ---
Subject: Bug 17961

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-07-08 19:34:41

Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog 
gcc/config/rs6000: sysv4.h linux64.h 
Added files:
gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg: simd-3.c 

Log message:
PR 17961
* config/rs6000/sysv4.h (ROUND_TYPE_ALIGN): Remove.
* config/rs6000/linux64.h (ROUND_TYPE_ALIGN): Remove vector check.
* testsuite/gcc.dg/simd-3.c: New.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=2.7592.2.302&r2=2.7592.2.303
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/rs6000/sysv4.h.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.158&r2=1.158.4.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/rs6000/linux64.h.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.74.10.1&r2=1.74.10.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/simd-3.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=NONE&r2=1.1.8.1



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17961

[Bug tree-optimization/22329] VRP produces mis-matched (non compatible) types in MODIFY_EXPR

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
19:26 ---
Subject: Bug 22329

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-07-08 19:26:17

Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog tree-ssa-propagate.c 
gcc/testsuite  : ChangeLog 
Added files:
gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg: pr22329.c 

Log message:
2005-07-08  Andrew Pinski  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

PR tree-opt/22329
* gcc.dg/pr22329.c: New test.
2005-07-08  Andrew Pinski  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

PR tree-opt/22329
* tree-ssa-propagate.c (fold_predicate_in): Convert the value
to the correct type if we have a MODIFY_EXPR.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.9386&r2=2.9387
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/tree-ssa-propagate.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.25&r2=2.26
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.5744&r2=1.5745
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr22329.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22329

[Bug tree-optimization/22329] VRP produces mis-matched (non compatible) types in MODIFY_EXPR

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
19:25 ---
Fixed.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED
   Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22329

[Bug other/22368] [meta-bugs] mis-match types in GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
Bug 22368 depends on bug 22329, which changed state.

Bug 22329 Summary: VRP produces mis-matched (non compatible) types in 
MODIFY_EXPR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22329

   What|Old Value   |New Value

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368

[Bug tree-optimization/22335] DOM creates mis-matched types

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
19:12 ---
Patch posted here: .

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
   ||patches/2005-
   ||07/msg00593.html
   Keywords||patch


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22335

[Bug regression/20139] [4.0/4.1 regression] cris-elf testsuite: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020720-1.c

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
19:12 ---
Subject: Bug 20139

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-07-08 19:11:55

Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog tree-cfg.c tree-optimize.c 
 tree-ssanames.c 
gcc/testsuite  : ChangeLog 
Added files:
gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa: pr20139.c 

Log message:
PR tree-optimization/20139
* tree-cfg.c (remove_bb): Check in_ssa_p before calling
release_defs.
* tree-optimize.c (execute_cleanup_cfg_post_optimizing): Call
fold_cond_expr_cond.
* tree-ssanames.c (release_defs): Assert in_ssa_p.
* tree.c (upper_bound_in_type, lower_bound_in_type): Rewrite.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.9385&r2=2.9386
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/tree-cfg.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.208&r2=2.209
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/tree-optimize.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.118&r2=2.119
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/tree-ssanames.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.27&r2=2.28
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.5743&r2=1.5744
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr20139.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20139

[Bug java/12725] [meta-bug] gcj does not conform to Binary Compatibility specification

[tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  BugsThisDependsOn||22377


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12725

[Bug java/22377] New: BC compilation fails to detect abstract instantiation

[tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org]

Suppose you have bytecode that tries to instantiate an abstract class.
The compiler accepts this (as it ought to), but then at runtime the
instantiation succeeds.  Instead it should throw InstantiationException
(This problem applies to interfaces as well.)

The simplest way to fix this would be to add a check to _Jv_AllocObject
and friends.  However, this may be too expensive (we want to keep allocation
paths short...)

Another approach would be a table of "new pointers", which points to the
allocator for any class instantiated from the current compilation unit.
This could be filled in at link time.

-- 
   Summary: BC compilation fails to detect abstract instantiation
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: java
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,java-prs at gcc dot gnu
dot org
OtherBugsDependingO 12725
 nThis:


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22377

[Bug c++/22361] Fails to identify

[igodard at pacbell dot net]

--- Additional Comments From igodard at pacbell dot net  2005-07-08 18:49 
---
Er - aren't the "known to fail" and "known to work" reversed?

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22361

[Bug tree-optimization/22360] [4.0/4.1 Regression] upper_bound_in_type and lower_bound_in_type are buggy

[kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 18:49 
---
Just checked in a fix.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22360

[Bug tree-optimization/22360] [4.0/4.1 Regression] upper_bound_in_type and lower_bound_in_type are buggy

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
18:49 ---
Subject: Bug 22360

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-07-08 18:49:07

Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog tree.c 

Log message:
PR tree-optimization/22360
* tree.c (upper_bound_in_type): Fix calculations for casting
to a non-wider signed type and casting a signed value to a
wider unsigned type.
(lower_bound_in_type): Fix calculations for casting to a
non-wider signed type.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.9384&r2=2.9385
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/tree.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.494&r2=1.495



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22360

[Bug tree-optimization/22335] DOM creates mis-matched types

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
18:43 ---
Another testcase for a different related problem but still in DOM:
void abort(void) __attribute__((__noreturn__));
typedef struct {
  int container;
} edge_iterator;
struct ls_expr
{
  int index;
  int stores;
  struct ls_expr * next;
};
struct ls_expr * pre_ldst_mems;
edge_iterator ei;
void
store_motion (void)
{
  struct ls_expr * ptr, **prev_next_ptr_ptr;
  edge_iterator ei1;
  edge_iterator ei2;
  int a = ptr != ((void *)0);
  for (ptr = pre_ldst_mems, prev_next_ptr_ptr = &pre_ldst_mems;
   ptr != ((void *)0);
   ptr = *prev_next_ptr_ptr)
if (!((ptr)->stores))
 *prev_next_ptr_ptr = ptr->next;
else
  prev_next_ptr_ptr = &ptr->next;
  
  for (ptr = pre_ldst_mems; ptr != 0; ptr = ptr->next)
;
  ei1 = ei;
  ei2 = ei1;
  if (!ei2.container)
abort ();
  ei2 = ei1;
  if (!ei2.container)
abort ();
}


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22335

[Bug tree-optimization/22329] VRP produces mis-matched (non compatible) types in MODIFY_EXPR

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
18:41 ---
Patch here: .

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
   ||patches/2005-
   ||07/msg00588.html
   Keywords||patch


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22329

[Bug middle-end/21766] [4.1 Regression] Bootstrap failure on i686-pc-cygwin

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
18:40 ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> Is the just released 4.0.1 on another branch? is that working?
Yes and yes (well bootstrap is).

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21766

[Bug middle-end/21766] [4.1 Regression] Bootstrap failure on i686-pc-cygwin

[dims at yahoo dot com]

--- Additional Comments From dims at yahoo dot com  2005-07-08 18:39 ---
Is the just released 4.0.1 on another branch? is that working?

-- dims

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21766

[Bug target/22083] [3.4/4.0 Regression] TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS is wrongly defined on AIX 5.1

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  Known to work|3.3.3 4.1.0 |3.3.3 4.1.0 4.0.2
   Target Milestone|4.0.2   |3.4.5


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22083

[Bug target/22083] [3.4/4.0 Regression] TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS is wrongly defined on AIX 5.1

[dje at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From dje at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 18:35 
---
Patch applied to gcc-4.0 and gcc-3.4 branches.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22083

[Bug target/22083] [3.4/4.0 Regression] TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS is wrongly defined on AIX 5.1

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
18:33 ---
Subject: Bug 22083

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-07-08 18:33:45

Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog 
gcc/config/rs6000: aix51.h 

Log message:
2005-07-08  David Edelsohn  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Backport from mainline:
2005-06-18  Roger Sayle  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR target/22083
* config/rs6000/aix51.h (TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS): Remove definition.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-3_4-branch&r1=2.2326.2.879&r2=2.2326.2.880
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/rs6000/aix51.h.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-3_4-branch&r1=1.20&r2=1.20.14.1



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22083

[Bug target/22083] [3.4/4.0 Regression] TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS is wrongly defined on AIX 5.1

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
18:28 ---
Subject: Bug 22083

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-07-08 18:28:25

Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog 
gcc/config/rs6000: aix51.h 

Log message:
2005-07-08  David Edelsohn  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Backport from mainline:
2005-06-18  Roger Sayle  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR target/22083
* config/rs6000/aix51.h (TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS): Remove definition.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=2.7592.2.301&r2=2.7592.2.302
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/rs6000/aix51.h.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.25&r2=1.25.8.1



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22083

[Bug tree-optimization/18316] Missed IV optimization

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
18:19 ---
We still have either a ra issue (or ivopts issue which our current ra cannot 
resolve).
On the tree level we get the following difference.
strength_test2:
:;
  *(data + (int *) ((unsigned int) *pretmp.9 * 4)) = 2;
  D.1276 = (int) ivtmp.14;
  ivtmp.14 = ivtmp.14 + ivtmp.17;
  if (*pretmp.11 > D.1276) goto ; else goto ;

strength_result2:
:;
  *(data + (int *) ((unsigned int) *pretmp.27 * 4)) = 2;
  i = (int) ((unsigned int) i + (unsigned int) k);
  if (*pretmp.28 > i) goto ; else goto ;


The PPC asm is:
test:
L2:
lwz r0,0(r7)
mr r9,r11
add r11,r11,r8
slwi r0,r0,2
stwx r6,r3,r0
lwz r2,0(r10)
cmpw cr7,r2,r9
bgt+ cr7,L2

result:
L9:
lwz r0,0(r10)
add r9,r9,r8
slwi r0,r0,2
stwx r7,r3,r0
lwz r2,0(r11)
cmpw cr7,r2,r9
bgt+ cr7,L9

Notice the extra mv.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords|patch   |ra


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18316

[Bug other/22368] [meta-bugs] mis-match types in GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
Bug 22368 depends on bug 22356, which changed state.

Bug 22356 Summary: mis-match types in cplxlower
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22356

   What|Old Value   |New Value

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368

[Bug tree-optimization/22356] mis-match types in cplxlower

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
18:05 ---
Fixed.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED
   Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22356

[Bug tree-optimization/22356] mis-match types in cplxlower

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
18:05 ---
Subject: Bug 22356

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   2005-07-08 18:05:12

Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog tree-complex.c 
gcc/testsuite  : ChangeLog 
Added files:
gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg: pr22356-1.c 

Log message:
2005-07-08  Andrew Pinski  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

PR tree-opt/22356
* testsuite/gcc.dg/pr22356-1.c: New test.

2005-07-08  Andrew Pinski  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

PR tree-opt/22356
* tree-complex.c (expand_complex_libcall): Produce
REALPART_EXPR/IMAGPART_EXPR with the correct type.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.9383&r2=2.9384
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/tree-complex.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.34&r2=2.35
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr22356-1.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.5742&r2=1.5743



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22356

[Bug tree-optimization/22356] mis-match types in cplxlower

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
17:23 ---
Patch here: .

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
   ||patches/2005-
   ||07/msg00578.html
   Keywords||patch


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22356

[Bug ada/22340] Ada build fails with --enable-bootsrap

[v dot haisman at sh dot cvut dot cz]

--- Additional Comments From v dot haisman at sh dot cvut dot cz  
2005-07-08 17:19 ---
The "fix" doesn't fix it.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22340

[Bug c++/22369] C++ produces mis-matched types with pointers to member functions

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
16:30 ---
Oh, I copied the wrong testcase.
Anyways here is the testcase which fails:
struct A { void f() { } };
struct B: public A { };
struct C: public A { };
struct D : public B, public C { };

typedef void (C::*cp)();
typedef void (D::*dp)();

int main()
{
  cp c;
  dp d2 = c;
}
pmf6.C:12: error: statement types mismatch
d2D.1741.__pfnD.1734 = D.1742;

DD.1726:: *
CD.1724:: *

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22369

[Bug middle-end/22376] New: PTA is slow on a silly unrealistic test case

[steven at gcc dot gnu dot org]

Compile this at -O1, and you get 
 
 tree PTA  :  12.25 (36%) usr   0.08 ( 5%) sys  12.35 (35%) wall   
44137 kB (16%) ggc 
 
=== 
int *a; 
 
#define C1(A) \ 
  a[A##1] = A; a[A##2] = A; a[A##3] = A; a[A##4] = A; a[A##5] = A; \ 
  a[A##6] = A; a[A##7] = A; a[A##8] = A; a[A##9] = A; a[A##0] = A 
 
#define C2(A) \ 
  C1(A##1); C1(A##2); C1(A##3); C1(A##4); C1(A##5); \ 
  C1(A##6); C1(A##7); C1(A##8); C1(A##9); C1(A##0) 
 
#define C3(A) \ 
  C2(A##1); C2(A##2); C2(A##3); C2(A##4); C2(A##5); \ 
  C2(A##6); C2(A##7); C2(A##8); C2(A##9); C2(A##0) 
 
#define C4(A) \ 
  C3(A##1); C3(A##2); C3(A##3); C3(A##4); C3(A##5); 
//  C3(A##6); C3(A##7); C3(A##8); C3(A##9); C3(A##0) 
 
#define C5() \ 
  C4(1); C4(2); C4(3); C4(4); C4(5); \ 
  C4(6); C4(7); C4(8); C4(9) 
 
void 
foo (void) 
{ 
  C5 (); 
} 
===

-- 
   Summary: PTA is slow on a silly unrealistic test case
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org,gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu
dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22376

[Bug tree-optimization/22375] New: DOM (or fold_builtins) creates mis-matched types

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

Take the following fortran code:
! { dg-do run }
! Option passed to avoid excess errors from obsolete warning
! { dg-options "-w" }
! PR18827
  integer i,j
  common /foo/ i,j
  assign 1000 to j
  j = 5
  goto j
 1000 continue
  end

We get errors as __builtin_expect is foldded to 0 but someone forgot to cast 
the constant:
assign_2.f90:7: error: statement types mismatch
D.472_9 = 0;


logical4D.6

Patch in PR 22368 is used to find this.

-- 
   Summary: DOM (or fold_builtins) creates mis-matched types
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
OtherBugsDependingO 22368
 nThis:


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22375

[Bug other/22368] [meta-bugs] mis-match types in GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  BugsThisDependsOn||22375


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368

[Bug c++/22374] New: C++ front-end produces mis-match types in MODIFY_EXPR (dynamic_cast)

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

Testcase:
struct B {
  virtual int f() { }
} ob;

struct D : public B {
  virtual int f() { }
} od;

main() {
  B *b = &ob;
  D *c = &dynamic_cast(*b);
}


Reduced from g++.old-deja/g++.mike/dyncast2.C
Patch in PR 22368 is used to find this.

-- 
   Summary: C++ front-end produces mis-match types in MODIFY_EXPR
(dynamic_cast)
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
OtherBugsDependingO 22368
 nThis:


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22374

[Bug other/22368] [meta-bugs] mis-match types in GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  BugsThisDependsOn||22374


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368

[Bug other/22368] [meta-bugs] mis-match types in GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  BugsThisDependsOn||22373


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368

[Bug tree-optimization/22373] New: loop linear produces type mis-match

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

Testcase:
double u[1782225];
int foo(int N, int *res)
{
  unsigned int i, j;
  double sum = 0;
  for (i = 0; i < N; i++)
{
  for (j = 0; j < N; j++)
{
  sum = sum + u[i + 1335 * j];
}
}
  *res = sum + N;
}

Patch in PR 22368 finds this.
ltrans-3.c: In function 'foo':
ltrans-3.c:6: error: statement types mismatch
lletmp.14D.1311_31 = 0;

unsigned intD.3
intD.0

-- 
   Summary: loop linear produces type mis-match
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org,gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu
dot org
OtherBugsDependingO 22368
 nThis:


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22373

[Bug tree-optimization/22372] New: Vectorizer produces mis-match types

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

Testcase:
void f(int *);

int main ()
{
  int i;
  char ia[16];
  char ic[16] = {0,3,6,9,12,15,18,21,24,27,30,33,36,39,42,45};
  char ib[16] = {0,3,6,9,12,15,18,21,24,27,30,33,36,39,42,45};
  for (i = 0; i < 16; i++)
  ia[i] = ib[i] + ic[i];
  f(ia);
  return 0;
}

See PR 22368 for the patch which catches this.

-- 
   Summary: Vectorizer produces mis-match types
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
OtherBugsDependingO 22368
 nThis:


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22372

[Bug other/22368] [meta-bugs] mis-match types in GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  BugsThisDependsOn||22372


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368

[Bug target/20126] [3.4 Regression] Inlined memcmp makes one argument null on entry

[uweigand at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From uweigand at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
15:48 ---
(In reply to comment #51)
> I don't know whether I just forgot about it, or figured we'd be better off
> leaving it as it was for a bit longer, so as to expose more cases we could
> handle especially.

Well, in my case the problem is that the pattern has two memory operands 
whose addresses need to agree, and loop is trying to change one of them
--> the insn predicate rejects.

I don't see how this can be fixed easily, and don't think much effort
should be put into the old loop code -- but we need a safe fall-back
to avoid the ICE.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20126

[Bug other/22368] [meta-bugs] mis-match types in GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  BugsThisDependsOn||22371


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368

[Bug c/22371] New: C front-end produces mis-match types in MODIFY_EXPR

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

Reduced from gcc.dg/debug/redecl-2.c:
typedef int IA[];
typedef int A5[5];
int array10[10];
A5 *ap;
void
f (void)
{
  int ap;
  {
extern IA *ap;
ap = &array10;
  }
}

See PR 22368 for the patch which catches this.

-- 
   Summary: C front-end produces mis-match types in MODIFY_EXPR
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
OtherBugsDependingO 22368
 nThis:


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22371

[Bug ada/22328] Ada produces mis-match (non compatible) types in MODIFY_EXPR

[bosch at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Attachment #9230|application/octet-stream|text/plain
  mime type||
Attachment #9230 is|0   |1
  patch||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22328

[Bug other/22368] [meta-bugs] mis-match types in GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  BugsThisDependsOn||22370


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368

[Bug middle-end/22370] New: Vec lower produces mis-match types

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

Testcase:
typedef short __attribute__((vector_size (16))) vecint;
vecint i;
vecint j;
vecint k;
int
main ()
{
  k = i ^ j;
}

See PR 22368 for the patch which finds this.

-- 
   Summary: Vec lower produces mis-match types
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
OtherBugsDependingO 22368
 nThis:


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22370

[Bug ada/22328] Ada produces mis-match (non compatible) types in MODIFY_EXPR

[bosch at adacore dot com]

--- Additional Comments From bosch at adacore dot com  2005-07-08 15:39 
---
Subject: Re:  Ada produces mis-match (non compatible) types in MODIFY_EXPR

Something like the attached patch (untested) should work.
I've got child duty today, so won't be able to test this until
at least tonight.

This is slightly different from the code that was earlier removed,
in that it doesn't check recursively. Nested arrays and records
should always have proper types.

   -Geert


--- Additional Comments From bosch at adacore dot com  2005-07-08 15:39 
---
Created an attachment (id=9230)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9230&action=view)


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22328

[Bug c++/22369] New: C++ produces mis-matched types with pointers to member functions

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

Testcase:
struct A { void f() { } };
struct B: public A { };

typedef void (B::*bp)();

int main()
{
  bp b = &A::f;
}

-- 
   Summary: C++ produces mis-matched types with pointers to member
functions
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
OtherBugsDependingO 22368
 nThis:


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22369

[Bug other/22368] [meta-bugs] mis-match types in GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  BugsThisDependsOn||22369


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368

[Bug other/22368] [meta-bugs] mis-match types in GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-07-08 15:31:26
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368

[Bug middle-end/22366] [meta-bug] issues holding up the removal of loop.c

[steven at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
15:30 ---
Bug 19581 is about store motion that only loop.c currently does. 
 
Bug 19078 reports on a few tuning issues with BIV splitting in the unroller. 
 
Bug 11707 is about the lack of a constant propagation pass after loop2. 
Basically the question is here how late or early loop unrolling should happen. 

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22366

[Bug other/22368] [meta-bugs] mis-match types in GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  BugsThisDependsOn||22356
  BugsThisDependsOn||22358


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368

[Bug other/22368] [meta-bugs] mis-match types in GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  BugsThisDependsOn||22329
  BugsThisDependsOn||22335


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368

[Bug ada/22328] Ada produces mis-match (non compatible) types in MODIFY_EXPR

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO||22368
  nThis||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22328

[Bug other/22368] [meta-bugs] mis-match types in GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  BugsThisDependsOn||22328


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368

[Bug other/22368] New: [meta-bugs] mis-match types in GCC

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

This is a meta bug for all of the mis-match type bugs in GCC.

-- 
   Summary: [meta-bugs] mis-match types in GCC
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Keywords: meta-bug
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: other
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22368

[Bug target/22085] [4.1 Regression] error with -fpreprocessed

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
15:20 ---
Patch posted here: .

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
   ||patches/2005-
   ||07/msg00550.html
   Keywords||patch


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22085

[Bug middle-end/22366] [meta-bug] issues holding up the removal of loop.c

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
15:15 ---
[[old loop optimizer]]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
   ||org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22366

[Bug c/22367] constraints on '&' not fully implemented

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
15:08 ---
Confirmed.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Keywords||accepts-invalid
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-07-08 15:08:42
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22367

[Bug tree-optimization/22360] [4.0/4.1 Regression] upper_bound_in_type and lower_bound_in_type are buggy

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
15:07 ---
This also blocks the tree combiner even though I don't see the regression on 
ppc-darwin.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO||15459
  nThis||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22360

[Bug tree-optimization/22360] [4.0/4.1 Regression] upper_bound_in_type and lower_bound_in_type are buggy

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
15:06 ---
Confirmed, this is a latent bug in 4.0.0.  The code was not in 3.4.0 so this is 
4.0.0 regression.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Keywords||patch, wrong-code
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-07-08 15:06:22
   date||
Summary|upper_bound_in_type and |[4.0/4.1 Regression]
   |lower_bound_in_type are |upper_bound_in_type and
   |buggy   |lower_bound_in_type are
   ||buggy
   Target Milestone|--- |4.0.2
Version|unknown |4.1.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22360

[Bug ada/22340] Ada build fails with --enable-bootsrap

[v dot haisman at sh dot cvut dot cz]

--- Additional Comments From v dot haisman at sh dot cvut dot cz  
2005-07-08 15:02 ---
I have the same problem on FreeBSD. The following patch seems to fix (bootstrap
still in progess).

Index: Makefile.in
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/Makefile.in,v
retrieving revision 1.268
diff -c -p -d -r1.268 Makefile.in
*** Makefile.in 7 Jul 2005 15:39:17 -   1.268
--- Makefile.in 8 Jul 2005 14:58:22 -
*** objext = .o
*** 33746,33752 
  # Flags to pass to stage2 and later makes.
  POSTSTAGE1_FLAGS_TO_PASS = \
CC="$${CC}" CC_FOR_BUILD="$${CC_FOR_BUILD}" \
!   STAGE_PREFIX=$$r/stage-gcc/ \
CFLAGS="$(BOOT_CFLAGS)" \
ADAC="\$$(CC)"

--- 33746,33752 
  # Flags to pass to stage2 and later makes.
  POSTSTAGE1_FLAGS_TO_PASS = \
CC="$${CC}" CC_FOR_BUILD="$${CC_FOR_BUILD}" \
!   STAGE_PREFIX=$$r/stage1-gcc/ \
CFLAGS="$(BOOT_CFLAGS)" \
ADAC="\$$(CC)"


Howerver this is just a hack and the proper fix should be changing Makefile.tpl.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22340

[Bug c++/22363] Problems with friend function injection and destructor

[bangerth at dealii dot org]

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org  2005-07-08 14:58 
---
I don't quite know what to say, whether this is a bug or not. Take 
this reduced snippet: 
--- 
template  struct S { 
friend void foo(T *); 
}; 
 
template  void bar() { foo((T*)0); } 
 
template  
struct X : S< X > 
{ 
X() { bar(); } 
}; 
 
X< X > test; 
 
icc compiles this, but gcc doesn't, with this error message: 
 
g/x> /home/bangerth/bin/gcc-4.1*/bin/c++ -c x.cc 
x.cc:2: warning: friend declaration ‘void foo(T*)’ declares a 
non-template 
function 
x.cc:2: warning: (if this is not what you intended, make sure the function 
template has already been declared and add <> after the function name here) 
-Wno-non-template-friend disables this warning 
x.cc: In function ‘void bar() [with T = X]’: 
x.cc:10:   instantiated from ‘X::X() [with T = X]’ 
x.cc:13:   instantiated from here 
x.cc:5: error: cannot convert ‘X*’ to ‘X 
>*’ for argument ‘1’ to 
‘void foo(X >*)’ 
 
What is happening is that in the definition of 'test', we instantiate 
X >, which through its derivation from S>> makes sure  
that there is a function foo>> (that this function is available 
is visible from the error message). However, in the destructor of 
X>, we call bar> which in turn wants to call foo>, 
which doesn't exist. 
 
I believe that the reason why icc can compile this is that in the definition 
of 'test', the compiler does not only instantiate X>, but also X. 
If that were the case, then we would have a function foo> from that 
instantiation, available for use when we get to instantiate the destructor 
of X>. The question is: do we need to instantiate X in order to 
instantiate X>? 
 
(Here's a sidenote: apparently, icc only instantiates the *type* X, 
but not the destructor X::~X. I can infer this because if it did, 
then it would want to call bar which in turn would want to call 
foo; that one, however, doesn't exist...) 
 
W. 

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22363

[Bug target/21323] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

[steven at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO||22366
  nThis||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21323

[Bug c/16989] [meta-bug] C99 conformance bugs

[jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  BugsThisDependsOn||22367


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16989

[Bug c/22367] New: constraints on '&' not fully implemented

[jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org]

extern void v;
void f(void) { &v; }

is invalid in both C90 and C99: lvalues cannot have type void, although they can
have types const void or volatile void, and none of the other possibilities for
operands on '&' are met.  However, GCC fails to diagnose this code.

extern void *p;
void f(void) { &*p; }

is invalid in C90 (for the same reason) but valid in C99 because the result of a
'*' operator is a permitted operand for '&' in C99 even if not an lvalue.  GCC
gives a warning "dereferencing 'void *' pointer", but not an error with
-pedantic-errors.  In C90 mode, but not in C99 mode, the use of '&' in this code
should receive a pedwarn.  See also DRs 012 and 106.

I hope to fix these issues properly for 4.2 by moving information about whether
an expression has the right syntax to be an lvalue, or is the result of * or []
operators, into the c_expr structure; the difference between the above cases is
why this naturally involves two flags rather than one in that structure.  It is
however likely a simpler local fix could be found before then that examines the
trees to distinguish the two cases.

-- 
   Summary: constraints on '&' not fully implemented
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: c
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
OtherBugsDependingO 16620,16989
 nThis:


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22367

[Bug fortran/22359] fseek intrinsic appears to be unimplemented

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-08 
14:58 ---
Confirmed.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

OtherBugsDependingO||19292
  nThis||
   Severity|normal  |enhancement
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-07-08 14:58:38
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22359

[Bug c/16620] [meta-bug] C90 conformance bugs

[jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

  BugsThisDependsOn||22367


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16620