[Bug target/29377] Build for h8300-elf crashes on 64bit hosts due to int/HWI mismatch
--- Comment #8 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2006-11-02 07:57 --- Fixed everywhere. -- ubizjak at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to fail|4.2.0 | Known to work|4.1.2 4.3.0 |4.0.4 4.1.2 4.3.0 4.2.0 Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.0.4 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29377
[Bug rtl-optimization/25514] [4.0/4.1 regression] internal consistency failure
--- Comment #11 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-02 07:55 --- Ack that, thanks Eric. Roger and I did discuss this a bit off-list, but I don't think we came to any conclusion. (Tardiness on my part being the dominant problem, sorry.) I think Roger is OK in principle with a backport, but the questions are (a) whether we should keep your patch on mainline too and, if not, (b) whether we should revert it on the branches too. Roger, let me know if I've misrepresented you there. Richard -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25514
[Bug target/29377] Build for h8300-elf crashes on 64bit hosts due to int/HWI mismatch
--- Comment #7 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-02 07:55 --- Subject: Bug 29377 Author: uros Date: Thu Nov 2 07:55:35 2006 New Revision: 118411 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118411 Log: PR target/29377 * config/h8300/h8300.c (h8300_emit_stack_adjustment): Change "size" argument to HOST_WIDE_INT. Update function prototype. (round_frame_size): Change return type to HOST_WIDE_INT. Change "size" argument to HOST_WIDE_INT. Update function prototype. Modified: branches/gcc-4_0-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_0-branch/gcc/config/h8300/h8300.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29377
[Bug rtl-optimization/29329] [4.1 regression] internal consistency failure
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-02 07:44 --- The combiner drops a REG_DEAD note without updating liveness info. -- ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||25514 Known to work|4.2.0 |4.0.4 4.2.0 Summary|[4.1 regression] internal |[4.1 regression] internal |consistency failure at -O2 |consistency failure http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29329
[Bug rtl-optimization/25514] [4.0, 4.1 regression] internal consistency failure
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-02 07:42 --- Richard, I'm on another problem related to REG_NOTEs in the combiner (PR 29329) present on the 4.1 branch so I think it's time to make a definitive decision on this PR. I'd be in favor of backporting all your changes to the 4.1 branch but I'll let you and Roger decide. Thanks in advance. -- ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sayle at gcc dot gnu dot ||org, ebotcazou at gcc dot ||gnu dot org Component|target |rtl-optimization Summary|[4.0, 4.1 regression] [m68k]|[4.0, 4.1 regression] |internal consistency failure|internal consistency failure http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25514
[Bug target/29377] Build for h8300-elf crashes on 64bit hosts due to int/HWI mismatch
--- Comment #6 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-02 07:42 --- Subject: Bug 29377 Author: uros Date: Thu Nov 2 07:42:05 2006 New Revision: 118410 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118410 Log: PR target/29377 * config/h8300/h8300.c (h8300_emit_stack_adjustment): Change "size" argument to HOST_WIDE_INT. Update function prototype. (round_frame_size): Change return type to HOST_WIDE_INT. Change "size" argument to HOST_WIDE_INT. Update function prototype. Modified: branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/config/h8300/h8300.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29377
[Bug bootstrap/28400] install-driver is missing $(exeext) from gcc-$(version)
--- Comment #9 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2006-11-02 07:37 --- Does this fix also fixes PR bootstrap/10626? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28400
[Bug target/29686] [4.1 Regression] ICE when building the kernel on ARM
--- Comment #2 from vapier at gentoo dot org 2006-11-02 06:54 --- Created an attachment (id=12533) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12533&action=view) PR29686-original.i this is the original testcase that fails at -O[123] but not -O0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0 ~ $ arm-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc -c PR29686-original.i -O0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0 ~ $ arm-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc -c PR29686-original.i -O1 include/asm/arch/io.h: In function 'imu_dev_init': include/asm/arch/io.h:43: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://bugs.gentoo.org/> for instructions. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0 ~ $ arm-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc -c PR29686-original.i -O2 include/asm/arch/io.h: In function 'imu_dev_init': include/asm/arch/io.h:43: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://bugs.gentoo.org/> for instructions. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0 ~ $ arm-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc -c PR29686-original.i -O3 include/asm/arch/io.h: In function 'imu_dev_init': include/asm/arch/io.h:43: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://bugs.gentoo.org/> for instructions. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29686
[Bug target/29686] [4.1 Regression] ICE when building the kernel on ARM
--- Comment #1 from vapier at gentoo dot org 2006-11-02 06:53 --- Created an attachment (id=12532) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12532&action=view) PR29686-reduced-O1-only.i this is a reduced test case that only fails with -O1 :) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0 ~ $ arm-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc -c PR29686-reduced-O1-only.i -O0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0 ~ $ arm-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc -c PR29686-reduced-O1-only.i -O2 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0 ~ $ arm-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc -c PR29686-reduced-O1-only.i -O3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0 ~ $ arm-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc -c PR29686-reduced-O1-only.i -O1 PR29686-reduced-O1-only.i: In function 'meremap': PR29686-reduced-O1-only.i:5: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://bugs.gentoo.org/> for instructions. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29686
[Bug target/29686] New: [4.1 Regression] ICE when building the kernel on ARM
when cross-compiling the kernel for ARM with gcc-4.1.1, we hit an ICE: include/asm/arch/io.h: In function 'imu_dev_init': include/asm/arch/io.h:43: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault checked on a Gentoo ppc/x86_64 host for the arm target with gcc-3.4.6 and gcc-4.1.1 and gcc-4.1-20061027 gcc-4.2-20061014 ... only the 4.1.x versions failed -- Summary: [4.1 Regression] ICE when building the kernel on ARM Product: gcc Version: 4.1.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: vapier at gentoo dot org GCC host triplet: x86_64-linux GCC target triplet: arm-linux http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29686
[Bug fortran/29539] ICE in variable_decl
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-02 06:37 --- (In reply to comment #3) > Yes, from the looks it will also fix pr29634. > I submitted half of the patch already to fix PR29565; I will submit the rest this morning or this evening, depending on how long I take to fix that error message. Paul -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29539
[Bug middle-end/29335] transcendental functions with constant arguments should be resolved at compile-time
--- Comment #29 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-02 03:21 --- Subject: Bug 29335 Author: ghazi Date: Thu Nov 2 03:20:49 2006 New Revision: 118409 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118409 Log: PR middle-end/29335 * builtins.c (do_mpfr_sincos): New. (fold_builtin_1): Use it to fold builtin sincos. testsuite: * gcc.dg/torture/builtin-math-3.c: Fix semicolons. (TESTIT_2P, TESTIT_2P_R): New macros. Test sincos. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/builtins.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/builtin-math-3.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29335
[Bug libfortran/29302] nan_inf_fmt.f90 segfaults on Darwin PPC starting with Xcode 2.4
--- Comment #24 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2006-11-02 03:19 --- The previous comment should indicate the crash in nan_inf_fmt disappears when n is a double. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29302
[Bug libfortran/29302] nan_inf_fmt.f90 segfaults on Darwin PPC starting with Xcode 2.4
--- Comment #23 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2006-11-02
03:16 ---
One more observation. If I change...
Index: write.c
===
--- write.c (revision 118343)
+++ write.c (working copy)
@@ -893,7 +893,7 @@ write_l (st_parameter_dt *dtp, const fno
static void
write_float (st_parameter_dt *dtp, const fnode *f, const char *source, int
len)
{
- GFC_REAL_LARGEST n;
+ double n;
int nb =0, res, save_scale_factor;
char * p, fin;
fnode *f2 = NULL;
the crash in nan_int_fmt. So this reinforces what I initially suspected. This
likely another side effect of the broken long double support on Darwin PPC.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29302
[Bug libfortran/29302] nan_inf_fmt.f90 segfaults on Darwin PPC starting with Xcode 2.4
--- Comment #22 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2006-11-02 02:51 --- A couple other observations. The latest Xcode 2.4.1 release doesn't fix this problem. Also, shorter version of the testcase... implicit none character*40 l character*12 fmt real zero, pos_inf zero = 0.0 pos_inf = 1.0/zero fmt = '(F0.0)' write(l,fmt=fmt)pos_inf end fails when zero and pos_inf is declared as real, real*4 or real*8 so all forms of the builtin isfinite macros are broken on Darwin PPC with Xcode 2.4.x. Also, if I compile write.c with -DHAVE_BROKEN_ISFINITE, the resulting libgfortran passes the nan_inf_fmt test. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29302
[Bug ada/29685] New: testsuite hang running c910002
,.,. C910002 ACATS 2.5 06-11-01 00:36:44 C910002 Check that selected_component notation can be used to access task discriminants. /home/dave/gcc-4.2/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ada/acats/run_all.sh: line 15: 20294 Killed $* [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/gcc-4.2/objdir/gcc/testsuite/ada/acats/tests/c9/c910002$ ls -ltr total 16 -rw-r--r-- 1 dave users 12 Nov 1 00:36 c910002.lst -rw-r--r-- 1 dave users 5000 Nov 1 00:36 c910002.adb -rw-r--r-- 1 dave users 253 Nov 1 16:24 c910002.log -- Summary: testsuite hang running c910002 Product: gcc Version: 4.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: ada AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: hppa-unknown-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: hppa-unknown-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: hppa-unknown-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29685
[Bug other/28145] C++ (throw() and catch(...) {/* fall through */ } ) and pthread cancellation are incompatible (at least with NPTL)
--- Comment #14 from hhinnant at apple dot com 2006-11-01 23:33 --- So swallowing a cancel-exception (in C++) is sometimes the right thing to do. Imagine a thread pool executing a queue of tasks. These tasks can well have handles so that clients can wait/join with results in the future. Such results could be normal or exceptional. If you've got a hung task in a thread pool, maybe you want to cancel it. That means the task should end, but once the OS thread dumps the task, records the exception that ended it (cancellation), the thread should be free to get the next task out of the queue and execute it. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28145
[Bug c++/29577] overload/SFINAE problem
--- Comment #4 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2006-11-01 22:57 --- You don't need a cast when converting to pointer, but the data type of "0" is still int. When determining the type of a template parameter, it therefore tries to to make the template parameter 'int'. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29577
[Bug libstdc++/29496] _M_invalidate function is not thread-safe in GLIBCXX_DEBUG mode
--- Comment #22 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-11-01 22:42 --- Created an attachment (id=12531) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12531&action=view) All the functions working on a set of _Safe_iterators fixed In my present understanding *all* the functions belonging to _Safe_iterator_base, _Safe_iterator, _Safe_sequence_base, and _Safe_sequence going through a full set of iterators attached to a container are currently weak wrt the scenario presented in this PR, where _M_detach is called by iterator destructor. This new draft patch reflects that, consistently. I'm currently testing it, so far everything seems ok on x86-linux and ia64-linux four-way. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29496
[Bug fortran/29634] ICE in variable_decl, for function returning a derived type
--- Comment #2 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 21:44 --- For your initial testcase, Lahey talks about Compiling program unit main at line 1: Interface body name(fun) 1173-S: "SOURCE.F90", line 6: Derived type definition for 'foo' missing. Internal subprogram name() 2007-W: "SOURCE.F90", line 12: No value assigned to function, entry, or function result name of function subprogram. 1712-S: "SOURCE.F90", line 12, column 22: 'fun' already used as an external function name. 1069-S: "SOURCE.F90", line 13, column 16: Name 'ieee_class_r4' specified in END FUNCTION statement must be identical to function name specified in FUNCTION statement. Encountered 3 errors, 1 warning, 0 informations in file SOURCE.F90. Compiling file SOURCE.F90. With the proposed fix (the hunk against decl.c, the rest seems to be already fixed on trunk) from Paul for PR 29539, we have $ gfortran-4.3-HEAD -W -Wall -Wextra -c -o pr29634.o pr29634.f90 In file pr29634.f90:12 type(foo) function fun() 1 Error: Syntax error in data declaration at (1) In file pr29634.f90:13 end function ieee_class_r4 1 Error: Expecting END PROGRAM statement at (1) Which doesn't sound optimal to me. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29634
[Bug tree-optimization/29680] [4.3 Regression] Misscompilation of spec2006 gcc
--- Comment #11 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-11-01 21:26 --- Created an attachment (id=12530) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12530&action=view) An updates run-time testcase This is smaller. -- hjl at lucon dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #12523|0 |1 is obsolete|| Attachment #12529|0 |1 is obsolete|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29680
[Bug tree-optimization/29680] [4.3 Regression] Misscompilation of spec2006 gcc
--- Comment #10 from rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2006-11-01 20:26 --- Subject: Re: Misscompilation of spec2006 gcc > > > I will work around this problem by teaching PTA about casts from > > > nonpointers to pointers, which will cause it to end up with a nonlocal > > > var in the set. > > > > ??? There is no cast from non-pointer to pointer in this testcase. > > Actually, there is. > That's why you end up with SMT's in the first place. > # VUSE ; > fde_table_in_use.0D.1617_7 = fde_table_in_useD.1609; > D.1618_8 = fde_table_in_use.0D.1617_7 * 24; > D.1619_9 = (struct dw_fde_struct *) D.1618_8; You mean that whenever there is a pointer arithmetics other than adding constants, we end up with points-to anything? :-( -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29680
[Bug ada/26317] Accessing array embedded in a record with representation clause
--- Comment #6 from charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 20:20 --- Both fixed on trunk. -- charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26317
[Bug ada/24992] gcc aborts compiling record whose component definition refers to 'Size of current type
--- Comment #2 from charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 20:15 --- Fixed on trunk: main.adb:5:33: in a constraint the current instance can only be used with an access attribute -- charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24992
[Bug tree-optimization/29680] [4.3 Regression] Misscompilation of spec2006 gcc
--- Comment #9 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-11-01 20:03 --- Created an attachment (id=12529) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12529&action=view) A run-time testcase Here is a run-time testcase: [EMAIL PROTECTED] yyy]$ /usr/gcc-bad/bin/gcc -O2 bad.c [EMAIL PROTECTED] yyy]$ ./a.out Aborted [EMAIL PROTECTED] yyy]$ /usr/gcc-bad/bin/gcc -O bad.c [EMAIL PROTECTED] yyy]$ ./a.out [EMAIL PROTECTED] yyy]$ /usr/gcc-good/bin/gcc -O2 bad.c [EMAIL PROTECTED] yyy]$ ./a.out [EMAIL PROTECTED] yyy]$ -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29680
[Bug ada/26306] Use of volatile array with bounds determined at run time.
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 20:02 --- > this bug is still present in trunk: Right. It may already be fixed in our internal tree though. -- ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26306
[Bug ada/15605] invalid program not detected, RM 8.3(22)
--- Comment #3 from charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 20:00 --- Right, fixed. -- charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15605
[Bug ada/25838] Ada Assert Failure with Bug Box
--- Comment #3 from charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 19:59 --- Reduced test case now produce a clean error as expected, and full test case compiles with no error on trunk. -- charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25838
[Bug ada/29681] gnat Bug Box on 'valid of packed array field
--- Comment #3 from charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 19:53 --- Fixed on trunk. -- charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29681
[Bug bootstrap/29684] New: Bootstrap comparison failure
With this configure and make command
make: *** [bootstrap] Error 2
[EMAIL PROTECTED] objdir]$ cat ../build-gcc
#!/bin/tcsh
/bin/rm -rf *; ../configure --prefix=/pkgs/gcc-4.2.0 ; make -j 3 bootstrap >&
build.log && (make -k -j 6 check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board 'unix{,-m64}'"
>& check.log ; make mail-report-with-warnings.log)
bootstrap fails with
Comparing stages 2 and 3
Bootstrap comparison failure!
./gcc.o differs
--
Summary: Bootstrap comparison failure
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: lucier at math dot purdue dot edu
GCC build triplet: powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29684
[Bug ada/26306] Use of volatile array with bounds determined at run time.
--- Comment #5 from charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 19:39 --- You built GCC with --disable-checking, which is not a good idea (in particular with GCC >= 4.1, at a minimum you should use --enable-checking=release). this bug is still present in trunk: << gcc -c scratch.adb +===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+ | 4.3.0 20061101 (experimental) (i686-pc-linux-gnu) GCC error: | | in force_constant_size, at gimplify.c:708| | Error detected around scratch.adb:47 | >> -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26306
[Bug fortran/29634] ICE in variable_decl, for function returning a derived type
--- Comment #1 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 19:33 --- (In reply to comment #0) > The following gives an ICE: > > type foo > integer :: i > end type foo > > interface fun_interface > type(foo) function fun() > end function fun > end interface > > contains > > type(foo) function fun() > end function ieee_class_r4 ieee_class_r4? Shouldn't this be fun instead? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29634
[Bug bootstrap/28400] install-driver is missing $(exeext) from gcc-$(version)
--- Comment #8 from vprus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 19:32 --- Fixed -- vprus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28400
[Bug fortran/29537] ICE in gfc_match_common for blank common in BLOCK DATA unit
--- Comment #14 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 19:30 --- Fixed on trunk. -- aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29537
[Bug fortran/29539] ICE in variable_decl
--- Comment #3 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 19:29 --- Yes, from the looks it will also fix pr29634. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29539
[Bug middle-end/29683] Arg split between stack/regs can cause stack corruption
--- Comment #1 from jconner at apple dot com 2006-11-01 19:11 --- What's happening is that TER is inserting the call to GetConst in place of 'result' in the call to VerifyValues, as such: (pre-TER) result_4 = GetConst (filler, a); VerifyValues (filler, 0, a$mbr1_5, result_4); (post-TER) VerifyValues (filler, 0, a$mbr1, GetConst (filler, a)); While this itself isn't a problem, it exposes a problem in the argument handling mechanism where an argument split between regs/stack doesn't correctly detect collision with other in-use stack locations. I believe this is a problem on platforms that ACCUMULATE_OUTGOING_ARGS. I have a patch I'll send out for consideration. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29683
[Bug middle-end/29683] New: Arg split between stack/regs can cause stack corruption
On targets which allow a function argument to be split between registers and
the stack, values can be corrupted by later function calls.
Specifically - this code:
~~
/* { dg-do run } */
/* { dg-options "-Os -fno-inline-functions" } */
void abort (void);
typedef struct {
int x[7];
} agg7;
typedef struct {
int mbr1;
int mbr2;
} agg2;
int expected = 31415;
agg7 filler;
int GetConst (agg7 filler, agg2 split)
{
return expected;
}
void VerifyValues (agg7 filler, int last_reg, int first_stack, int
second_stack)
{
if (first_stack != 123 || second_stack != expected)
abort ();
}
void RunTest (agg2 a)
{
int result;
result = GetConst (filler, a);
VerifyValues (filler, 0, a.mbr1, result);
}
int main(void)
{
agg2 result = {123, 456};
RunTest (result);
return 0;
}
~~
compiled with "gcc -O1" incorrectly aborts.
--
Summary: Arg split between stack/regs can cause stack corruption
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jconner at apple dot com
GCC host triplet: powerpc-apple-darwin8
GCC target triplet: powerpc-apple-darwin8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29683
[Bug bootstrap/28400] install-driver is missing $(exeext) from gcc-$(version)
--- Comment #7 from vprus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 19:01 --- Subject: Bug 28400 Author: vprus Date: Wed Nov 1 19:01:36 2006 New Revision: 118392 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118392 Log: 2006-11-01 Chris Johns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR bootstrap/28400 * Makefile.in (install-driver): Use exeext when installing $target-gcc-$version. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/Makefile.in -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28400
[Bug ada/27194] raised CONSTRAINT_ERROR : gnatvsn.adb:60 index check failed
--- Comment #2 from charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 18:49 --- Maximum length increased, so closing this PR. -- charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27194
[Bug ada/28394] Ada: Ambiguous call not detected when using dotted notation
--- Comment #4 from charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 18:40 --- Fixed on trunk. -- charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28394
[Bug c++/29570] [4.1/4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with brace-enclosed initializer
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29570
[Bug ada/26162] "GNAT BUG DETECTED" in AWS
--- Comment #4 from charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 18:32 --- Is it still happening with GCC 4.2 or GCC 4.3 ? Arno -- charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26162
[Bug fortran/29565] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] ICE in gimplify_var_or_parm_decl, at gimplify.c
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29565
[Bug c++/29535] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] ICE in instantiate_class_template, at cp/pt.c:5728
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29535
[Bug c++/29518] [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] rejects valid template argument, enums vs templates
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29518
[Bug target/29474] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] reload_cse_simplify_operands, at postreload.c:393 on m68k with -O -fPIC
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29474
[Bug target/29472] [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] in reload, at reload1.c:1081 on m68k with -O2 -fPIC
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29472
[Bug rtl-optimization/29329] [4.1 regression] internal consistency failure at -O2
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29329
[Bug target/29250] [4.0/4.1 Regression] internal compiler error: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2084
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29250
[Bug c++/29106] [4.0/4.1 Regression] sizeof(*var) in expression drops entire line of code out of compile
--- Comment #7 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 18:28 --- Egads, that's awful. -- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29106
[Bug c++/29054] [4.0/4.1 Regression] ICE on friend template specialization
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29054
[Bug target/29042] [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] Useless floating-point stores and loads on x86
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29042
[Bug bootstrap/28770] [4.1 Regression] one reference to powerpc-ibm-eabi-ar.exe when only xar.exe installed
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28770
[Bug target/28622] [4.1 regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2084
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28622
[Bug c++/28573] [4.0/4.1 Regression] incorrectly allowing non-constant expression to offsetof()
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28573
[Bug ada/26866] [4.1 regression] 428 test failures in ada testsuite
--- Comment #4 from charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 18:20 --- I do not think we can do much with such report. I'd suggest isolating one of the failure and investigating a little, and send additional info. Also, I'd suggest checking with 4.2 and 4.3 Arno -- charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26866
[Bug tree-optimization/29680] [4.3 Regression] Misscompilation of spec2006 gcc
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 18:18 --- This is more reason why we need a POINTER_PLUS_EXPR. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Summary|Misscompilation of spec2006 |[4.3 Regression] |gcc |Misscompilation of spec2006 ||gcc Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29680
[Bug c++/28553] [4.1 Regression] string processing -O3 optimization bug under GCC 4.1.1
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 18:16 --- Can the original submitter still reproduce this problem? -- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28553
[Bug tree-optimization/28545] [4.1 Regression] Wrong code for hoisted multiplication
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28545
[Bug c++/28460] [4.0/4.1 Regression] g++ emits bogus namespace DIE
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28460
[Bug tree-optimization/28411] [4.1 Regression] "Illegal instruction" error with -ftrapv
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28411
[Bug target/28376] [4.1 Regression] ICE when building opensp with -O3 on alpha
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28376
[Bug bootstrap/28326] [4.1 regression] profiledbootstrap will produce an ICE with "-mtune=power3 -mcpu=power3" in BOOT_CFLAGS
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28326
[Bug target/28132] [4.1 Regression] ICE instantiate_virtual_regs_in_insn when -fforce-addr -O1 used
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 18:11 --- P2, rather than P1, due to use of relatively obscure command-line option. -- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28132
[Bug middle-end/28116] [4.1 Regression] ICE when building konverter with gcc-4.1 with -O3 [RSO]
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28116
[Bug c++/28088] [4.1 Regression] Internal compiler error on boost mpl test/apply.cpp
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28088
[Bug c++/27962] [4.1 regression] ICE with invalid template parameter in specialization
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27962
[Bug target/27891] [4.0/4.1 regression] ICE in tree_split_edge, at tree-cfg.c:3107
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27891
[Bug middle-end/27881] [4.1 Regression] Memory exhausted with -finline-functions on testsuite file alias3.C
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27881
[Bug tree-optimization/29680] Misscompilation of spec2006 gcc
--- Comment #7 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-11-01 18:05 --- If I change the code from dw_fde_ref fde = &fde_table[fde_table_in_use - 1]; to dw_fde_node *fde = fde_table + fde_table_in_use - 1; I got the same problem. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29680
[Bug c++/27826] [4.0/4.1 Regression] ICE in copy_to_mode_reg
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27826
[Bug bootstrap/27822] [4.1 only] fastjar is asking for makeinfo in gmake bootstrap
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27822
[Bug ada/26866] [4.1 regression] 428 test failures in ada testsuite
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26866
[Bug c/25993] [4.0/4.1 Regression] -std= produces incorrect preprocessor output for .S
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 18:01 --- This is a nasty usability issue; can we backport the patch to 4.1? -- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25993
[Bug target/25514] [4.0, 4.1 regression] [m68k] internal consistency failure
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25514
[Bug tree-optimization/29680] Misscompilation of spec2006 gcc
--- Comment #6 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 17:53 --- Subject: Re: Misscompilation of spec2006 gcc > > > > > > and for_clobber is only true on call operands, we do not insert SMT. The > > > lists > > > of virtual operands thus become disjoint. > > We should not insert the SMT here. > > We are never supposed to use a bare SMT when it has aliases that we > > can use (IE something has not been pruned). > > but fde_13->dw_fde_cfi does not have any other aliases that can be used, > i.e., none_added is true. This is only true for one of the accesses, not both, or else the SMT would be used in both cases. :) > > > I will work around this problem by teaching PTA about casts from > > nonpointers to pointers, which will cause it to end up with a nonlocal > > var in the set. > > ??? There is no cast from non-pointer to pointer in this testcase. Actually, there is. That's why you end up with SMT's in the first place. # VUSE ; fde_table_in_use.0D.1617_7 = fde_table_in_useD.1609; D.1618_8 = fde_table_in_use.0D.1617_7 * 24; D.1619_9 = (struct dw_fde_struct *) D.1618_8; This causes D.1619_9 to point to anything # VUSE ; fde_table.1D.1620_11 = fde_tableD.1610; D.1621_12 = D.1619_9 + fde_table.1D.1620_11; causes D.1621_12 (the &fde_table[fde_table_in_use - 1]) to point to anything. All of this is what causes SMT's to be used. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29680
[Bug tree-optimization/29680] Misscompilation of spec2006 gcc
-- rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot |unassigned at gcc dot gnu |org |dot org Status|ASSIGNED|UNCONFIRMED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29680
[Bug bootstrap/28400] install-driver is missing $(exeext) from gcc-$(version)
--- Comment #6 from vprus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 15:31 --- Subject: Bug 28400 Author: vprus Date: Wed Nov 1 15:31:43 2006 New Revision: 118383 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118383 Log: 2006-11-01 Chris Johns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR bootstrap/28400 * Makefile.in (install-driver): Use exeext when installing $target-gcc-$version. Modified: branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/Makefile.in -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28400
[Bug bootstrap/28400] install-driver is missing $(exeext) from gcc-$(version)
--- Comment #5 from vprus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 14:40 --- Subject: Bug 28400 Author: vprus Date: Wed Nov 1 14:40:44 2006 New Revision: 118381 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118381 Log: 2006-11-01 Chris Johns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR bootstrap/28400 * Makefile.in (install-driver): Use exeext when installing $target-gcc-$version. Modified: branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/Makefile.in -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28400
[Bug target/29682] ICE: in change_pattern, at haifa-sched.c:4066 with -O3 -msched-control-spec
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-11-01 14:26 --- Created an attachment (id=12528) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12528&action=view) testcase -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29682
[Bug target/29682] New: ICE: in change_pattern, at haifa-sched.c:4066 with -O3 -msched-control-spec
This happens on 4.2 and 4.3. The option is new in 4.2. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/bin/gcc -c -O3 rpm-rpmpgp.c [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/bin/gcc -c -O3 -msched-control-spec rpm-rpmpgp.c rpm-rpmpgp.c: In function 'pgpReadPkts': rpm-rpmpgp.c:49: internal compiler error: in change_pattern, at haifa-sched.c:4066 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. -- Summary: ICE: in change_pattern, at haifa-sched.c:4066 with -O3 - msched-control-spec Product: gcc Version: 4.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: tbm at cyrius dot com GCC target triplet: ia64-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29682
[Bug ada/29681] gnat Bug Box on 'valid of packed array field
--- Comment #2 from johnm at wmi dot com 2006-11-01 14:10 --- Created an attachment (id=12527) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12527&action=view) gnatchop -able multifile example -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29681
[Bug ada/29681] gnat Bug Box on 'valid of packed array field
--- Comment #1 from johnm at wmi dot com 2006-11-01 14:10 --- Created an attachment (id=12526) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12526&action=view) single file example -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29681
[Bug ada/29681] New: gnat Bug Box on 'valid of packed array field
problem observed in: gcc-4.1.1 problem not observed in: gcc-3.2.3 --- gcc 4.1.1 -v $ gcc -v Using built-in specs. Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: ../crosstool-0.42/build/i686-unknown-linux-gnu/gcc-4.1.1-glibc-2.3.6/gcc-4.1.1/configure --prefix=/users/johnm/opt/gcc4.1.1-native/ --enable-languages=c,c++,ada Thread model: posix gcc version 4.1.1 --- gcc 3.2.3 -v $ /usr/bin/gcc -v Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-redhat-linux/3.2.3/specs Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man --infodir=/usr/share/info --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix --disable-checking --with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit --host=i386-redhat-linux Thread model: posix gcc version 3.2.3 20030502 (Red Hat Linux 3.2.3-53 --- Build of single-file example: $ gcc -c outt.adb +===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+ | 4.1.1 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) in expand_expr_addr_expr_1, at expr.c:6393 | | Error detected at outt.adb:19:5 | | Please submit a bug report; see http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html.| | Use a subject line meaningful to you and us to track the bug.| | Include the entire contents of this bug box in the report. | | Include the exact gcc or gnatmake command that you entered. | | Also include sources listed below in gnatchop format | | (concatenated together with no headers between files). | +==+ Please include these source files with error report Note that list may not be accurate in some cases, so please double check that the problem can still be reproduced with the set of files listed. outt.adb compilation abandoned - build of multifile example: --- +===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+ | 4.1.1 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) in expand_expr_addr_expr_1, at expr.c:6393 | | Error detected at s-secsta.ads:64:14 | | Please submit a bug report; see http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html.| | Use a subject line meaningful to you and us to track the bug.| | Include the entire contents of this bug box in the report. | | Include the exact gcc or gnatmake command that you entered. | | Also include sources listed below in gnatchop format | | (concatenated together with no headers between files). | +==+ Please include these source files with error report Note that list may not be accurate in some cases, so please double check that the problem can still be reproduced with the set of files listed. eerom.adb eerom.ads eerom.adb:4:17: warning: "Number_Units" is never assigned a value eerom.adb:5:17: warning: "Result" is never assigned a value compilation abandoned -- Summary: gnat Bug Box on 'valid of packed array field Product: gcc Version: 4.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: ada AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: johnm at wmi dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29681
[Bug fortran/29677] minimally informative gfortran -fbounds-check
--- Comment #4 from tobias dot burnus at physik dot fu-berlin dot de 2006-11-01 14:01 --- This has been fixed in the meanwhile. (Don't forget, gfortran is not that old.) Possibilities: - Use a GCC 4.1 branch build (newer than 4.1.1) - Use a GCC 4.2 branch build - Use a GCC 4.3 trunk build For openSUSE 10.x and SLED/SLES exist such packages (made by SUSE), for SL/SLES/SLED 9.x unfortunally not. I would suggest to download a gfortran 4.2 or gfortran 4.3 build, both available e.g. at http://www.physik.fu-berlin.de/~tburnus/gcc-trunk/ You probably need also lib64-gmp4.2.1-mpfr2.2.0.tar.gz * * * Alternatively, run the program in gdb: gdb ./yourExecutable (gdb) b _exit Function "_exit" not defined. Make breakpoint pending on future shared library load? (y or [n]) y Breakpoint 1 (_exit) pending. (gdb) run [...] (gdb) bt -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29677
[Bug libfortran/29302] nan_inf_fmt.f90 segfaults on Darwin PPC starting with Xcode 2.4
--- Comment #21 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2006-11-01
14:00 ---
This bug is rather confusing. It appears that the actual macros for isfinite on
Darwin PPC look like...
static __inline__ int __inline_isinff( float __x ) { return
__builtin_fabsf(__x) == __builtin_inff(); }
static __inline__ int __inline_isinfd( double __x ) { return
__builtin_fabs(__x) == __builtin_inf(); }
static __inline__ int __inline_isinf( long double __x ) { return
__builtin_fabsl(__x) == __builtin_infl(); }
static __inline__ int __inline_isfinitef( float __x ) { return __x == __x &&
__builtin_fabsf(__x) != __builtin_inff(); }
static __inline__ int __inline_isfinited( double __x ) { return __x == __x &&
__builtin_fabs(__x) != __builtin_inf(); }
static __inline__ int __inline_isfinite( long double __x ) { return __x ==
__x && __builtin_fabsl(__x) != __builtin_infl(); }
I assume that the __builtin_# entries are actually library function calls
and not macros themselves.
If that is the case, why would the isfinite macros break at higher optimization
levels?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29302
[Bug middle-end/29610] [4.1 Regression] ICE when compiling c++ code with -O2 -funswitch-loops
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 13:25 --- This problem is latent on the mainline as well. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29610
[Bug middle-end/29610] [4.1 Regression] ICE when compiling c++ code with -O2 -funswitch-loops
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 13:21 --- sccp destroys dominators, unswitching only enables the sccp opportunity. The destroying happens in cleanup_tree_cfg calling cleanup_control_flow calling tree_purge_dead_eh_edges which we don't record the true return value here even if it frees dominators, so dominators are not re-computed later in cleanup_tree_cfg_loop. We enter the function with the following BB: ;; basic block 5, loop depth 1, count 0 ;; prev block 4, next block 6 ;; pred: 4 [95.0%] (true,exec) ;; succ: 6 [100.0%] (fallthru,exec) 10 (ab,eh,loop_exit,exec) :; # D.1861_45 = V_MAY_DEF ; # TMT.44_3 = V_MAY_DEF ; # TMT.45_4 = V_MAY_DEF ; # TMT.46_5 = V_MAY_DEF ; # TMT.47_6 = V_MAY_DEF ; # TMT.49_7 = V_MAY_DEF ; redraw_window (this_20); -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2006-10-27 17:46:37 |2006-11-01 13:21:42 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29610
[Bug rtl-optimization/29329] [4.1 regression] internal consistency failure at -O2
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 12:27 --- Investigating. -- ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2006-10-08 02:40:57 |2006-11-01 12:27:34 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29329
[Bug rtl-optimization/28970] [4.1 regression] wrong code for simple loop test case
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 12:16 --- More of a kludge than a fix... -- ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc- ||patches/2006- ||11/msg00010.html Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28970
[Bug target/29639] [4.3 regression] ext/bitmap_allocator/check_allocate_max_size.cc execution test
--- Comment #14 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 12:14 --- > cd $build/libstdc++-v3/testsuite; > make testsuite_files > > Then, edit out the file "testsuite_files" to the actual file or files that you > want to test. > > Then, just type 'make check." Neat. Thanks! -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29639
[Bug rtl-optimization/28970] [4.1 regression] wrong code for simple loop test case
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 12:11 --- Subject: Bug 28970 Author: ebotcazou Date: Wed Nov 1 12:11:18 2006 New Revision: 118379 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=118379 Log: PR rtl-optimization/28970 * loop.c (loop_giv_reduce_benefit): Take the max of the addition cost on all the increments of the BIV. Added: branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/20061101-1.c Modified: branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/loop.c branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28970
[Bug target/29639] [4.3 regression] ext/bitmap_allocator/check_allocate_max_size.cc execution test
--- Comment #13 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 12:11 --- Eric, what I usually do is: cd $build/libstdc++-v3/testsuite; make testsuite_files Then, edit out the file "testsuite_files" to the actual file or files that you want to test. Then, just type 'make check." This will run the testsuite as per usual, just on a select group of files. Once you've got that, then you can just cut and paste from the generated libstdc++.log file if you are trying to compile just one testsuite. -benjamin -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29639
[Bug fortran/29532] [4.1 regression] test suite failures
--- Comment #2 from debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org 2006-11-01 11:37 --- no, closing. Matthias -- debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29532
[Bug libfortran/29627] [4.2/4.1 only] partial unformatted reads shouldn't succeed
--- Comment #7 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 10:17 --- Fixed on trunk. -- tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|partial unformatted reads |[4.2/4.1 only] partial |shouldn't succeed |unformatted reads shouldn't ||succeed http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29627
[Bug fortran/29523] ICE with some non up-to date .mod files
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 08:16 --- Using gfortran-4.1.1, I tried to reproduce your bug by adding a file foo.f90, but can't: $ cat foo.f90 use ackland use ackland_zbl use alloys use bcc use constants use filter use inifile use materials use predictcorr use stdlib use voronoi end $ gfortran foo.f90 -I src-ICE && echo Works Works So, if you want us to debug it further, we'll need more info. -- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29523
[Bug fortran/29630] "Unclassifiable statement" with vector subscripts in initialization
-- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-11-01 08:09:00 date|| Summary| "Unclassifiable statement" |"Unclassifiable statement" |with vector subscripts in |with vector subscripts in |initialization |initialization http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29630
[Bug fortran/29679] Inability to get shapes correct in initializations
-- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-11-01 08:08:53 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29679
[Bug tree-optimization/29680] Misscompilation of spec2006 gcc
--- Comment #5 from rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2006-11-01 08:05 --- Subject: Re: Misscompilation of spec2006 gcc > > --- Comment #3 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 00:49 > > --- > > access_can_touch_variable determines that fde_13->dw_fde_cfi cannot touch > > cie_cfi_head; the list of virtual operands of the load thus becomes empty, > > and > > we insert SMT.48 for it. > > > > On *p, we cannot eliminate cie_cfi_head, and since the condition for > > insertion > > of SMT is formulated as > > > > ... > > ||none_added > > || (TREE_CODE (var) == SYMBOL_MEMORY_TAG > > && for_clobber > > && SMT_USED_ALONE (var))) > > > > and for_clobber is only true on call operands, we do not insert SMT. The > > lists > > of virtual operands thus become disjoint. > We should not insert the SMT here. > We are never supposed to use a bare SMT when it has aliases that we > can use (IE something has not been pruned). but fde_13->dw_fde_cfi does not have any other aliases that can be used, i.e., none_added is true. > I will work around this problem by teaching PTA about casts from > nonpointers to pointers, which will cause it to end up with a nonlocal > var in the set. ??? There is no cast from non-pointer to pointer in this testcase. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29680
[Bug fortran/29532] [4.1 regression] test suite failures
--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 08:03 --- Does not appear in the recent published testresults (eg http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-10/msg01392.html). Is this regression still there? -- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29532
