[Bug tree-optimization/29922] [4.3 Regression] [Linux] ICE in insert_into_preds_of_block
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-27 07:51 --- (In reply to comment #9) > Though the good question is why we have those PHIs still there even though > they > don't do anything except produce a copy. All the copyprop passes as far as I > can tell skip them because they are virtual. The reason why they still exist is because they have a loop variant on the arugment which causes us to reject it during copyprop (and during dom). I have a patch to remove the conditional on virtual operands but I don't know if this is enough to make sure we never produce this type of PHIs again. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29922
[Bug rtl-optimization/29840] [4.3 Regression] build/genconditions ../../gcc/gcc/config/pa/pa.md > tmp-condmd.c: /bin/sh: 13354 Memory fault(coredump)
--- Comment #20 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-11-27 07:16 --- This may be a df bug too. I don't know if it is ok to expect, when DF_HARD_REGS is set, that the list of defs include a def for every hard register that is call-clobbered and live at the call? -- bonzini at gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zadeck at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29840
[Bug c++/14329] [tree-ssa] badly formatted warnings for SRA replacements used uninitialized
--- Comment #17 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-27 06:41
---
Here is the patch which passes the C++ testsuite, I have to do a full
bootstrap/testsuite run still but I am happy with it currrently which is why I
am pasting it here:
Index: error.c
===
--- error.c (revision 119217)
+++ error.c (working copy)
@@ -2337,7 +2337,22 @@ cp_printer (pretty_printer *pp, text_inf
{
case 'A': result = args_to_string (next_tree, verbose);break;
case 'C': result = code_to_string (next_tcode);break;
-case 'D': result = decl_to_string (next_tree, verbose);break;
+case 'D':
+ {
+ tree temp = next_tree;
+ if (DECL_P (temp)
+ && DECL_DEBUG_EXPR_IS_FROM (temp) && DECL_DEBUG_EXPR (temp))
+ {
+ temp = DECL_DEBUG_EXPR (temp);
+ if (!DECL_P (temp))
+ {
+ result = expr_to_string (temp);
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+ result = decl_to_string (temp, verbose);
+ }
+ break;
case 'E': result = expr_to_string (next_tree); break;
case 'F': result = fndecl_to_string (next_tree, verbose); break;
case 'L': result = language_to_string (next_lang); break;
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14329
[Bug fortran/29976] [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE on optional arg
--- Comment #2 from paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr 2006-11-27 06:19 --- Subject: Re: [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE on optional arg Andrew, > > We are calling build_int_cst on a "real" type. > Yes, I discovered the same on my flight back to France last night. Will come up with a fix tonight. Paul -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29976
[Bug c++/14329] [tree-ssa] badly formatted warnings for SRA replacements used uninitialized
--- Comment #16 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2006-11-27 05:51 --- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] badly formatted warnings for SRA replacements used uninitialized On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 05:46 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > That fixed most of the failures but there are still some ICEs that need to be > fixed. I have a fix for those ICEs, it is just checking for DECL_P. -- Pinski -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14329
Re: [Bug c++/14329] [tree-ssa] badly formatted warnings for SRA replacements used uninitialized
On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 05:46 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > That fixed most of the failures but there are still some ICEs that need to be > fixed. I have a fix for those ICEs, it is just checking for DECL_P. -- Pinski
[Bug c++/14329] [tree-ssa] badly formatted warnings for SRA replacements used uninitialized
--- Comment #15 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-27 05:46 --- (In reply to comment #14) > The problem with RTH's patch was the use of t which shadowed the variable in > the function which is used for setting the locus. I am testing the corrected > patch now. That fixed most of the failures but there are still some ICEs that need to be fixed. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14329
[Bug fortran/29982] [4.1 only] ICE in write() with gfortran 4.1.2 (and 4.2 and 4.3...)
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-27 05:01 --- Fixed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.1.2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29982
[Bug fortran/29982] [4.1 only] ICE in write() with gfortran 4.1.2 (and 4.2 and 4.3...)
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-27 05:01 --- Subject: Bug 29982 Author: pinskia Date: Mon Nov 27 05:00:58 2006 New Revision: 119245 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=119245 Log: 2006-11-26 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR fortran/29982 * trans-expr.c (gfc_conv_expr_reference): Strip off NOP_EXPRs. 2006-11-26 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR fortran/29982 * gfortran.fortran-torture/compile/parameter_3.f90: New testcase. Added: branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.fortran-torture/compile/parameter_3.f90 - copied unchanged from r119218, trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.fortran-torture/compile/parameter_3.f90 Modified: branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29982
[Bug c++/29886] [4.0 regression] Cast misinterpreted as variable declaration
--- Comment #7 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-27 04:56 --- Fixed in 4.2.0. -- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[4.0/4.2 regression] Cast |[4.0 regression] Cast |misinterpreted as variable |misinterpreted as variable |declaration |declaration http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29886
[Bug c++/29886] [4.0/4.2 regression] Cast misinterpreted as variable declaration
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-27 04:56 --- Subject: Bug 29886 Author: mmitchel Date: Mon Nov 27 04:56:02 2006 New Revision: 119244 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=119244 Log: PR c++/29886 * parser.c (cp_parser): Add in_function_body. (cp_parser_new): Initialize it. (cp_parser_primary_expression): Use parser->in_function_body instead of at_function_scope_p. (cp_parser_asm_definition): Likewise. (cp_parser_direct_declarator): Likewise. (cp_parser_class_specifier): Clear parser->in_function_body. (cp_parser_constructor_declarator_p): Use parser->in_function_body instead of at_function_scope_p. (cp_parser_function_body_after_declarator): Set parser->in_function_body. PR c++/29886 * g++.dg/expr/cast8.C: New test. Added: branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/expr/cast8.C Modified: branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/cp/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/cp/parser.c branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29886
[Bug target/29990] Linking fails because __ZdlPv can't be a weak definition
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2006-11-27 04:51 --- Subject: Re: Linking fails because __ZdlPv can't be a weak definition On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 04:49 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > > --- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-27 04:49 > --- > I don't think you can use -flat_namespace with dynamic libraries and > libstdc++. Also I don't think this is a GCC issue. I think it is an user issue, and it is harder to reproduce without full sources. -- Pinski -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29990
Re: [Bug target/29990] Linking fails because __ZdlPv can't be a weak definition
On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 04:49 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > > --- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-27 04:49 > --- > I don't think you can use -flat_namespace with dynamic libraries and > libstdc++. Also I don't think this is a GCC issue. I think it is an user issue, and it is harder to reproduce without full sources. -- Pinski
[Bug target/29990] Linking fails because __ZdlPv can't be a weak definition
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-27 04:49 --- I don't think you can use -flat_namespace with dynamic libraries and libstdc++. Also this should have been fixed by: * config/darwin.c (machopic_select_section): Remove the hack to mark "::operator new" and "::operator delete" for coalescing even though they are not weak. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c++ |target http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29990
[Bug c++/29886] [4.0/4.2 regression] Cast misinterpreted as variable declaration
--- Comment #5 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-27 04:39 --- Fixed in 4.1.2. -- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Summary|[4.0/4.1/4.2 regression]|[4.0/4.2 regression] Cast |Cast misinterpreted as |misinterpreted as variable |variable declaration|declaration http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29886
[Bug c++/29886] [4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] Cast misinterpreted as variable declaration
--- Comment #4 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-27 04:38 --- Subject: Bug 29886 Author: mmitchel Date: Mon Nov 27 04:38:34 2006 New Revision: 119243 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=119243 Log: PR c++/29886 * parser.c (cp_parser): Add in_function_body. (cp_parser_new): Initialize it. (cp_parser_primary_expression): Use parser->in_function_body instead of at_function_scope_p. (cp_parser_asm_definition): Likewise. (cp_parser_direct_declarator): Likewise. (cp_parser_class_specifier): Clear parser->in_function_body. (cp_parser_constructor_declarator_p): Use parser->in_function_body instead of at_function_scope_p. (cp_parser_function_body_after_declarator): Set parser->in_function_body. PR c++/29886 * g++.dg/expr/cast8.C: New test. Added: branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/expr/cast8.C Modified: branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/cp/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/cp/parser.c branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29886
[Bug c++/29990] Linking fails because __ZdlPv can't be a weak definition
--- Comment #1 from yves at gnu-darwin dot org 2006-11-27 04:30 --- Created an attachment (id=12699) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12699&action=view) NSFramework_PopplerKit.mi -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29990
[Bug c++/29990] New: Linking fails because __ZdlPv can't be a weak definition
Configured with: ../gcc-4.1.1/configure --prefix=/opt/local --enable-languages=c,c++,java,objc,obj-c++,fortran --libdir=/opt/local/lib/gcc41 --includedir=/opt/local/include/gcc41 --infodir=/opt/local/share/info --mandir=/opt/local/share/man --with-local-prefix=/opt/local --with-system-zlib --disable-nls --program-suffix=-dp-4.1 --with-gxx-include-dir=/opt/local/include/gcc41/c++/ --with-gmp=/opt/local --with-mpfr=/opt/local --with-as=/opt/local/bin/odas --with-ld=/opt/local/bin/odld --with-ar=/opt/local/bin/odar --disable-multilib Triggered by : g++-dp-4.1 -Wl,-noall_load -read_only_relocs warning -fgnu-runtime -single_module -dynamic -dynamiclib -current_version 0.0.1 -install_name PopplerKit.framework/PopplerKit -L/opt/local/GNUstep/System/Library/Libraries/poppler/lib -lpoppler -L/opt/local/GNUstep/System/Library/Libraries/poppler/lib -lpoppler -L/opt/local/lib/gcc41 -lstdc++ -flat_namespace -undefined warning -o PopplerKit.framework/Versions/1.0/./libPopplerKit.dylib.0.0.1 shared_obj/NSFramework_PopplerKit.o shared_obj/CountingRef.o shared_obj/NSBitmapImageRep+LRUCache.o shared_obj/NSString+PopplerKitAdditions.o shared_obj/PopplerCairoImageRenderer.o shared_obj/PopplerDirectBufferedRenderer.o shared_obj/PopplerDocument.o shared_obj/PopplerDocument+Rendering.o shared_obj/PopplerFontManager.o shared_obj/PopplerPage.o shared_obj/PopplerTextHit.o shared_obj/PopplerTextSearch.o shared_obj/PopplerSplashRenderer.o shared_obj/PopplerCachingRenderer.o shared_obj/PopplerKitFunctions.o bindings/shared_obj/subproject.o MissingKit/shared_obj/subproject.o -L/Users/Shared/dports/build/_Users_Shared_src_darwinports_dev_gnustep_etoile-dev/work/etoile/Etoile/Build -L/opt/local/GNUstep/Local/Library/Libraries/ -L/opt/local/GNUstep/System/Library/Libraries/ ; (cd ./PopplerKit.framework/Versions/1.0/.; rm -f libPopplerKit.dylib; if [ "libPopplerKit.dylib.0" != "libPopplerKit.dylib.0.0.1" ]; then rm -f libPopplerKit.dylib.0; ln -s libPopplerKit.dylib.0.0.1 libPopplerKit.dylib.0; fi; ln -s libPopplerKit.dylib.0.0.1 libPopplerKit.dylib) || rm -f ./PopplerKit.framework/Versions/1.0/./libPopplerKit.dylib.0.0.1 ; \ (cd ./PopplerKit.framework/Versions/1.0/.; \ rm -f PopplerKit; \ ln -s libPopplerKit.dylib PopplerKit) \ /opt/local/bin/odld: bindings/shared_obj/subproject.o undefined symbol 744 (__ZdlPv) can't be a weak definition /opt/local/bin/odlibtool: internal link edit command failed I think this is a bug because this problem only happens when crossing Darwin/objc and __ZdlPv is a libstdc++ internal I'm not really sure which .i to include though -- Summary: Linking fails because __ZdlPv can't be a weak definition Product: gcc Version: 4.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: yves at gnu-darwin dot org GCC build triplet: powerpc-apple-darwin8.7.0 GCC host triplet: powerpc-apple-darwin8.7.0 GCC target triplet: powerpc-apple-darwin8.7.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29990
[Bug c++/29886] [4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] Cast misinterpreted as variable declaration
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-27 03:46 --- Fixed in 4.3.0. -- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 regression]|[4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] |Cast misinterpreted as |Cast misinterpreted as |variable declaration|variable declaration http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29886
[Bug c++/29886] [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 regression] Cast misinterpreted as variable declaration
--- Comment #2 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-27 03:39 --- Subject: Bug 29886 Author: mmitchel Date: Mon Nov 27 03:38:57 2006 New Revision: 119242 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=119242 Log: PR c++/29886 * parser.c (cp_parser): Add in_function_body. (cp_parser_new): Initialize it. (cp_parser_primary_expression): Use parser->in_function_body instead of at_function_scope_p. (cp_parser_asm_definition): Likewise. (cp_parser_direct_declarator): Likewise. (cp_parser_class_specifier): Clear parser->in_function_body. (cp_parser_constructor_declarator_p): Use parser->in_function_body instead of at_function_scope_p. (cp_parser_function_body_after_declarator): Set parser->in_function_body. PR c++/29886 * g++.dg/expr/cast8.C: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/expr/cast8.C Modified: trunk/gcc/cp/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/cp/parser.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29886
[Bug middle-end/27590] [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] ICE when compiling catalina.jar from tomcat 5.0.30
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-27 02:58 --- Fixed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|4.1.2 |4.2.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27590
[Bug c++/29927] template instantiation with function type
--- Comment #6 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2006-11-27 02:00 ---
Excellent, this is exactly the quote that settles this. For
reference, 14.3.1/3 comes with a (as usual non-normative) example:
[Example:
template struct A {
static T t;
};
typedef int function();
A a; // ill-formed: would declare
// A::t
// as a static member function
--end example]
So both gcc and icc are wrong.
W.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29927
[Bug rtl-optimization/29840] [4.3 Regression] build/genconditions ../../gcc/gcc/config/pa/pa.md > tmp-condmd.c: /bin/sh: 13354 Memory fault(coredump)
--- Comment #19 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-11-27 00:28 --- Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] build/genconditions ../../gcc/gcc/config/pa/pa.md > tmp-condmd.c: /bin/sh: 13354 MO > Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] build/genconditions > ../../gcc/gcc/config/pa/pa.md > tmp-condmd.c: /bin/sh: 13354 Memory > fault(coredump) > > Just adding DF_HARD_REGS is not enough. At least this bit: > > - if (use) > + if (use && !HARD_REGISTER_P (use->reg)) > > is also necessary. The proposed patch with the initialization of regno moved forward gets us a lot further into the bootstrap. It now fails with an ICE building the fortran library: /test/gnu/gcc/objdir/./gcc/xgcc -B/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/./gcc/ -B/opt/gnu64/gcc/g cc-4.3.0/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/bin/ -B/opt/gnu64/gcc/gcc-4.3.0/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11 /lib/ -isystem /opt/gnu64/gcc/gcc-4.3.0/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/include -isystem /op t/gnu64/gcc/gcc-4.3.0/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/sys-include -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../. ./../gcc/libgfortran -I. -iquote../../../gcc/libgfortran/io -I../../../gcc/libgf ortran/../gcc -I../../../gcc/libgfortran/../gcc/config -I../.././gcc -D_GNU_SOUR CE -std=gnu99 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wold-style-definit ion -Wextra -Wwrite-strings -ftree-vectorize -funroll-loops -O2 -g -O2 -c ../../ ../gcc/libgfortran/generated/matmul_i4.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/matmul_i4.o ../../../gcc/libgfortran/generated/matmul_i4.c: In function 'matmul_i4': ../../../gcc/libgfortran/generated/matmul_i4.c:337: internal compiler error: Seg mentation fault Dave -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29840
[Bug libfortran/29568] implement unformatted files with subrecords (Intel style)
--- Comment #24 from jvdelisle at verizon dot net 2006-11-26 22:27 --- Subject: Re: implement unformatted files with subrecords (Intel style) I have reviewed the patch and I have one minor comment. I suggest that the continued flag be placed in with the unit flags similar to has_recl. Only for consistency. I am in the process of testing still. Jerry -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29568
[Bug middle-end/28116] [4.1 Regression] ICE when building konverter with gcc-4.1 with -O3 [RSO]
--- Comment #13 from chris_clayton at f1internet dot com 2006-11-26 21:22 --- (In reply to comment #12) > Usually you wait until a patch is available or 4.1.2 is released (supposed the > problem is fixed there). You can try testing the ad-hoc fix in PR29809 > comment > #4. > OK, I've updated to the 20061124 snapshot. Without the patch at PR29809, I get the ICE building avifile-0.7.45 and konverter-0.92-beta1. With the patch, both builds complete. From my, admittedly minimal, testing, konverter seems to be working OK. Unfortunately, I don't have the hardware to test the sample application from the avifile package. Hope this helps. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28116
[Bug libfortran/29568] implement unformatted files with subrecords (Intel style)
--- Comment #23 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 20:43 --- Created an attachment (id=12697) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12697&action=view) Test case Here's a test case for reading and writing with a restricted subrecord length. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29568
[Bug libfortran/29568] implement unformatted files with subrecords (Intel style)
--- Comment #22 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 20:39 --- Created an attachment (id=12696) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12696&action=view) Serious attempt Hi folks, here is a serious attempt at the patch. Jerry, if you could give it a spin, I'd be grateful. At least it passes write_check3.f90. I'm currently regression-testing this. Thomas -- tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #12691|0 |1 is obsolete|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29568
[Bug tree-optimization/29984] SPE GCC segfaults with MAX_EXPR
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 20:03 ---
Here is the patch which I am testing:
Index: tree-ssa-reassoc.c
===
--- tree-ssa-reassoc.c (revision 119229)
+++ tree-ssa-reassoc.c (working copy)
@@ -417,8 +417,8 @@ eliminate_duplicate_pair (enum tree_code
operand_entry_t last)
{
- /* If we have two of the same op, and the opcode is & or |, we can
- eliminate one of them.
+ /* If we have two of the same op, and the opcode is & |, min, or max,
+ we can eliminate one of them.
If we have two of the same op, and the opcode is ^, we can
eliminate both of them. */
@@ -426,13 +426,15 @@ eliminate_duplicate_pair (enum tree_code
{
switch (opcode)
{
+ case MAX_EXPR:
+ case MIN_EXPR:
case BIT_IOR_EXPR:
case BIT_AND_EXPR:
if (dump_file && (dump_flags & TDF_DETAILS))
{
fprintf (dump_file, "Equivalence: ");
print_generic_expr (dump_file, curr->op, 0);
- fprintf (dump_file, " [&|] ");
+ fprintf (dump_file, " [&|minmax] ");
print_generic_expr (dump_file, last->op, 0);
fprintf (dump_file, " -> ");
print_generic_stmt (dump_file, last->op, 0);
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |tree-optimization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29984
[Bug libgcj/29151] [win32] Runtime.exec(String[] cmdarray, String[] envp) -> envp doesn't work
--- Comment #3 from membar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 19:53 --- Subject: Bug 29151 Author: membar Date: Sun Nov 26 19:53:11 2006 New Revision: 119230 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=119230 Log: PR libgcj/29151: * java/lang/natWin32Process.cc (startProcess): Unconditionally create a UNICODE environment for CreateProcess call. Modified: branches/gcc-4_2-branch/libjava/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_2-branch/libjava/java/lang/natWin32Process.cc -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29151
[Bug target/29984] SPE GCC segfaults with MAX_EXPR
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 19:51 --- I have a fix by not never producing MAX_EXPR or MIN_EXPR in reassoc. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Keywords||ice-on-valid-code http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29984
[Bug c/19978] overflow in expression of constants should not cause multiple warnings
--- Comment #4 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 19:27 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > The problem is that we reset TREE_OVERFLOW:
>
> It would seem it overflows incremented, and underflow's decremented,
> only a terminal non-zero count would represent an over/underflow for
> addition/subtraction, (as an intermediate over/underflow is not observable)?
>
No. 1 - INT_MAX is not underflow or overflow.
For example:
int
f2 (void)
{
return INT_MAX + 1 - 1;
}
gives also two "integer overflow in expression" warnings.
Actually, I think the problem is that somewhere TREE_OVERFLOW() is set whenever
TREE_CONSTANT_OVERFLOW() is 1. After the first warning is emitted,
TREE_OVERFLOW() is set to 0 but TREE_CONSTANT_OVERFLOW() remains 1. When the
next part of the expression is handled TREE_OVERFLOW() is set again because
TREE_CONSTANT_OVERFLOW is still 1, so the warning is emitted a second time.
For example:
return INT_MAX + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1;
generates 6 warnings. Is this the desired behaviour?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19978
[Bug middle-end/29965] OpenMP vs always throw in a loop
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 19:16 --- That's actually ICE on invalid, you can't throw out of a parallel region. OpenMP 2.5, section 2.4 says: "A throw executed inside a parallel region must cause execution to resume within the same parallel region, and it must be caught by the same thread that threw the exception." -- jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |ice-on-invalid-code http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29965
[Bug c++/14329] [tree-ssa] badly formatted warnings for SRA replacements used uninitialized
--- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 18:25 --- The problem with RTH's patch was the use of t which shadowed the variable in the function which is used for setting the locus. I am testing the corrected patch now. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14329
[Bug tree-optimization/29122] ICE with -ipa-cp and -m64 (tail calls)
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 18:15 --- Fixed. -- pinskia 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=29122
[Bug fortran/29982] [4.1/4.2 only] ICE in write() with gfortran 4.1.2 (and 4.2 and 4.3...)
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 18:08 --- Subject: Bug 29982 Author: pinskia Date: Sun Nov 26 18:08:14 2006 New Revision: 119227 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=119227 Log: 2006-11-25 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR fortran/29982 * trans-expr.c (gfc_conv_expr_reference): Strip off NOP_EXPRs. 2006-11-25 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR fortran/29982 * gfortran.fortran-torture/compile/parameter_3.f90: New testcase. Added: branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.fortran-torture/compile/parameter_3.f90 - copied unchanged from r119218, trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.fortran-torture/compile/parameter_3.f90 Modified: branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29982
[Bug libgomp/29987] libgomp.c++/ctor-9.C failure
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 14:38 --- > Is this a known bug or do we need to report it to Sun? Since the Sun toolchain doesn't use the assembler by default, it is very likely unknown to them. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29987
[Bug libgomp/29986] testsuite failures
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 14:35 --- > Is this a known bug or do we need to report it to Sun? I quickly skimmed through Sun linker patches but didn't find anything. The problem is of course that all works flawlessly with the Sun toolchain in default mode (i.e. without going through the .s file) so you need to use either GCC or the "convoluted" mode to demonstrate the problem. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29986
[Bug middle-end/25620] Missed optimization with power
--- Comment #13 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-11-26 14:30 --- Subject: Bug number PR25620 A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker. The mailing list url for the patch is http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg01758.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25620
[Bug c++/18821] Please add warning if bits thrown away in integral conversions
-- manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18821
[Bug libgomp/29987] libgomp.c++/ctor-9.C failure
--- Comment #1 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 14:03 --- Is this a known bug or do we need to report it to Sun? If known, is there a patch we can recommend in the Solaris-specific installation docs? -- ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-11-26 14:03:47 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29987
[Bug libgomp/29986] testsuite failures
--- Comment #1 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 14:02 --- Is this a known bug or do we need to report it to Sun? If known, is there a patch we can recommend in the Solaris-specific installation docs? -- ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-11-26 14:02:53 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29986
[Bug c++/18821] Please add warning if bits thrown away in integral conversions
--- Comment #5 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 13:59 --- For reference: Author: manu Date: Fri Nov 24 01:50:33 2006 New Revision: 119143 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=119143 Log: 2006-11-24 Manuel Lopez-Ibanez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR c/2707 PR c++/26167 * c-common.c (conversion_warning): New. (convert_and_check): Call conversion_warning unless there is an overflow warning. * doc/invoke.texi (-Wconversion): Update description. testsuite/ * gcc.dg/Wconversion-integer.c: New. Supersedes Wconversion-negative-constants.c * gcc.dg/Wconversion-real.c: New. * gcc.dg/Wconversion-real-integer.c: New. * gcc.dg/Wconversion-negative-constants.c: Deleted. * g++.dg/warn/Wconversion1.C: Modified. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Wconversion-integer.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Wconversion-real-integer.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Wconversion-real.c Removed: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Wconversion-negative-constants.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/c-common.c trunk/gcc/doc/invoke.texi trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wconversion1.C -- manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18821
[Bug c++/18821] Please add warning if bits thrown away in integral conversions
--- Comment #4 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 13:57 --- This will be fixed by the new Wconversion option. Actually, it has been fixed already for gcc version 4.3.0 20061124 (experimental). [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ local/bin/g++ -c -Wconversion pr18821.C pr18821.C: In function int main(): pr18821.C:8: warning: conversion to short unsigned int from long unsigned int may alter its value I hope this makes you happy! It is a shame that I missed this bug in the Changelog. Should I modify the Changelog or what is done is done ? -- manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18821
[Bug middle-end/29887] wrong-code for errno handling on overflow/underflow
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 13:56 --- The problem is that we believe we can handle all errno checking/setting via the expand_errno_check() routine which is not true for overflow/underflow but only for invalid arguments that result in a NaN. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29887
[Bug middle-end/29887] wrong-code for errno handling on overflow/underflow
--- Comment #1 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 13:38 --- Hi, Richard. I don't understand completely what you mean. Is the problem in the builtin exp() ? Should it check its argument for large numbers? -- manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29887
[Bug libstdc++/29989] missed #undef min/max in
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-11-26 13:38 --- As a matter of fact, I think that the undefs in stl_algobase.h are legacy stuff, and should go away. In my opinion, we should always error in such cases, because nobody knows whether the user means his own max / min macro, or the facility provided by the library, when he writes max / min after . This bug is actually a duplicate of 23273, but I'm keeping it open for now in order to solicitate feedback about the above point... -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29989
[Bug middle-end/28116] [4.1 Regression] ICE when building konverter with gcc-4.1 with -O3 [RSO]
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 13:09 --- Usually you wait until a patch is available or 4.1.2 is released (supposed the problem is fixed there). You can try testing the ad-hoc fix in PR29809 comment #4. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28116
[Bug middle-end/28116] [4.1 Regression] ICE when building konverter with gcc-4.1 with -O3 [RSO]
--- Comment #11 from chris_clayton at f1internet dot com 2006-11-26 12:54 --- I'm the reporter of 29809, which is a duplicate of this bug. I'm not familiar with the workflow here, so do I simply wait for 4.1.2 or is there likely to be patch to test before 4.1.2 is released? Is the patch at comment 4 of bug 29809 worth testing - the author seemed to think it was too simple to be true :)? Thanks -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28116
[Bug fortran/29892] substring out of bounds: Missing variable name for variables with parameter attribute
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 12:34
---
Fixed for array bounds checking on mainline. I'll backport the patch to 4.2 in
some time.
We still need to figure something out for the substrings case (see comment #0):
> Secondly, gfc_conv_substring_expr (tested by adding the following to
> gfc_conv_substring_expr:
> printf("ERROR: gfc_conv_substring_expr: NO NAME"
> "(in file '%s', at line %d)\n", expr->where.lb->file->filename,
> expr->where.lb->linenum); ):
>
> Several matches of this kind:
> - gfortran.dg/char_cshift_1.f90
> a(i1, i2, i3) = 'ab'(i1:i1) // 'cde'(i2:i2) // 'fghi'(i3:i3)
> => Unsolvable as no name exists
>
> Solvable case: gfortran.dg/pr29067.f:
> character(len=16),parameter :: s = "", s2 = "1234567890123456"
> print *, s(9:16)
> print *, s2(9:16)
> The problem is that s and s2 have the parameter type
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29892
[Bug target/29114] ICE when cross-compiling glibc for hppa on a 64bit host
--- Comment #14 from vapier at gentoo dot org 2006-11-26 12:33 --- sorry for the delay ... i just updated my local tree and proposed patch works great, thanks :) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29114
[Bug libstdc++/29989] New: missed #undef min/max in
testcase: #define max(a,b) quirk #include output: /usr/include/c++/4.1.2/limits:293:22: error: macro "max" requires 2 arguments, but only 1 given /usr/include/c++/4.1.2/limits:323:23: error: macro "max" requires 2 arguments, but only 1 given /usr/include/c++/4.1.2/limits:377:23: error: macro "max" requires 2 arguments, but only 1 given /usr/include/c++/4.1.2/limits:428:30: error: macro "max" requires 2 arguments, but only 1 given /usr/include/c++/4.1.2/limits:479:32: error: macro "max" requires 2 arguments, but only 1 given /usr/include/c++/4.1.2/limits:530:26: error: macro "max" requires 2 arguments, but only 1 given /usr/include/c++/4.1.2/limits:581:24: error: macro "max" requires 2 arguments, but only 1 given /usr/include/c++/4.1.2/limits:632:33: error: macro "max" requires 2 arguments, but only 1 given /usr/include/c++/4.1.2/limits:683:22: error: macro "max" requires 2 arguments, but only 1 given /usr/include/c++/4.1.2/limits:734:31: error: macro "max" requires 2 arguments, but only 1 given /usr/include/c++/4.1.2/limits:785:23: error: macro "max" requires 2 arguments, but only 1 given /usr/include/c++/4.1.2/limits:836:32: error: macro "max" requires 2 arguments, but only 1 given /usr/include/c++/4.1.2/limits:887:28: error: macro "max" requires 2 arguments, but only 1 given /usr/include/c++/4.1.2/limits:938:37: error: macro "max" requires 2 arguments, but only 1 given /usr/include/c++/4.1.2/limits:989:24: error: macro "max" requires 2 arguments, but only 1 given /usr/include/c++/4.1.2/limits:1046:25: error: macro "max" requires 2 arguments, but only 1 given /usr/include/c++/4.1.2/limits:1103:30: error: macro "max" requires 2 arguments, but only 1 given i think requires the same protection as -- Summary: missed #undef min/max in Product: gcc Version: 4.1.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: pluto at agmk dot net http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29989
[Bug fortran/29892] substring out of bounds: Missing variable name for variables with parameter attribute
--- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 12:26 --- Subject: Bug 29892 Author: fxcoudert Date: Sun Nov 26 12:25:50 2006 New Revision: 119223 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=119223 Log: PR fortran/29892 * trans-intrinsic.c (gfc_conv_intrinsic_bound): Use a locus in the call to gfc_trans_runtime_check. * trans-array.c (gfc_trans_array_bound_check): Try harder to find the variable or function name for the runtime error message. (gfc_trans_dummy_array_bias): Use a locus in the call to gfc_trans_runtime_check Modified: trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29892
[Bug libstdc++/29988] More stl_tree.h enhancements: improving operator=
-- pcarlini at suse dot de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-11-26 10:17:26 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29988
[Bug libstdc++/29988] New: More stl_tree.h enhancements: improving operator=
>From Ion again: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2006-11/msg00114.html -- Summary: More stl_tree.h enhancements: improving operator= Product: gcc Version: 4.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: pcarlini at suse dot de http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29988
[Bug libstdc++/29385] stl_tree.h clean-ups and enhancements
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-11-26 10:05 --- Done. -- pcarlini at suse dot de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29385
[Bug libstdc++/29385] stl_tree.h clean-ups and enhancements
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 10:04 --- Subject: Bug 29385 Author: paolo Date: Sun Nov 26 10:04:25 2006 New Revision: 119221 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=119221 Log: 2006-11-26 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR libstdc++/29385 (2nd part, based on an idea by Ion Gaztanaga) * include/bits/stl_tree.h (_Rb_tree<>::_M_equal_range): Add. (equal_range(const key_type&)): Use it. 2006-11-26 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * testsuite/23_containers/multiset/operations/1.cc: New. * testsuite/23_containers/set/operations/1.cc: Likewise. * testsuite/23_containers/multimap/operations/1.cc: Likewise. * testsuite/23_containers/map/operations/1.cc: Likewise. Added: trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/map/operations/ trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/map/operations/1.cc trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/multimap/operations/ trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/multimap/operations/1.cc trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/multiset/operations/ trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/multiset/operations/1.cc trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/set/operations/ trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/set/operations/1.cc Modified: trunk/libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_tree.h -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29385
[Bug tree-optimization/29122] ICE with -ipa-cp and -m64 (tail calls)
--- Comment #9 from razya at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 10:00 --- Subject: Bug 29122 Author: razya Date: Sun Nov 26 10:00:18 2006 New Revision: 119220 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=119220 Log: 2006-11-26 Razya Ladklesky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR tree-optimization/29122 * tree-inline.c (tree_function_versioning): Update DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME for the new version. Assign NULL to DECL_RTL of the new version. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-inline.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29122
[Bug libgomp/29987] New: libgomp.c++/ctor-9.C failure
This failure with Sun as/ld http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-11/msg00764.html is of the form: ld: fatal: relocation error: R_SPARC_HI22: file /var/tmp//cc8eBELF.o: symbol base: relocation illegal for TLS symbol It's a bug in Sun as, it doesn't switch section between .tbss and .bss: hikaru% cat v.s .section".tbss",#alloc,#write,#tls .align 4 .type threadbase, #tls_object .size threadbase, 4 threadbase: .skip 4 .local base .common base,4,4 hikaru% as -o v.o v.s hikaru% objdump --syms v.o v.o: file format elf32-sparc SYMBOL TABLE: ld .tbss .tbss 0004 l .tbss 0004 base l .tbss 0004 threadbase hikaru% cat v.s .section".tdata",#alloc,#write,#tls .align 4 .type threadbase, #tls_object .size threadbase, 4 threadbase: .skip 4 .local base .common base,4,4 hikaru% as -o v.o v.s hikaru% objdump --syms v.o v.o: file format elf32-sparc SYMBOL TABLE: ld .bss .bss ld .tdata .tdata l O .bss 0004 base l .tdata 0004 threadbase -- Summary: libgomp.c++/ctor-9.C failure Product: gcc Version: 4.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libgomp AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: sparc-sun-solaris2.10 GCC host triplet: sparc-sun-solaris2.10 GCC target triplet: sparc-sun-solaris2.10 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29987
[Bug rtl-optimization/29840] [4.3 Regression] build/genconditions ../../gcc/gcc/config/pa/pa.md > tmp-condmd.c: /bin/sh: 13354 Memory fault(coredump)
--- Comment #18 from stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com 2006-11-26 09:19 --- Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] build/genconditions ../../gcc/gcc/config/pa/pa.md > tmp-condmd.c: /bin/sh: 13354 Memory fault(coredump) Just adding DF_HARD_REGS is not enough. At least this bit: - if (use) + if (use && !HARD_REGISTER_P (use->reg)) is also necessary. You can reproduce the problem with a cross-compiler BTW. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29840
[Bug libgomp/29986] New: testsuite failures
All the testsuite failures (except libgomp.c++/ctor-9.C) with Sun as/ld
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-11/msg00764.html
are of the form:
ld: fatal: relocation error: R_SPARC_TLS_LE_HIX22: file /var/tmp//ccuoqyTO.o:
symbol : bad symbol type SECT: symbol type must be TLS
It's a Sun ld problem (GNU ld silently groks the same object file), which can
be reproduced with the Sun toolchain:
hikaru% cc -V
cc: Sun C 5.8 Patch 121015-03 2006/10/18
usage: cc [ options] files. Use 'cc -flags' for details
hikaru% cat t.c
static __thread int i = 1;
int main(void)
{
return i;
}
hikaru% cc -S t.c -O
hikaru% cc -o t t.s
ld: fatal: relocation error: R_SPARC_TLS_IE_HI22: file t.o: symbol :
bad symbol type SECT: symbol type must be TLS
hikaru% cc -o t t.c -O
hikaru%
--
Summary: testsuite failures
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgomp
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: sparc-sun-solaris2.10
GCC host triplet: sparc-sun-solaris2.10
GCC target triplet: sparc-sun-solaris2.10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29986
[Bug rtl-optimization/29840] [4.3 Regression] build/genconditions ../../gcc/gcc/config/pa/pa.md > tmp-condmd.c: /bin/sh: 13354 Memory fault(coredump)
--- Comment #17 from paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch 2006-11-26 09:05 --- Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] build/genconditions ../../gcc/gcc/config/pa/pa.md > tmp-condmd.c: /bin/sh: 13354 Memory fault(coredump) I wonder if it is enough to just add DF_HARD_REGS in the df_init call? Paolo -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29840
[Bug tree-optimization/14541] [tree-ssa] built-in math functions are not fully optimized at tree level
--- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 08:15 --- *** Bug 29985 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ubizjak at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14541
[Bug tree-optimization/29985] sin (x) / cos (x) is not always folded to tan (x)
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 08:15 --- Actually I think it is better to mark this as a dup of bug 14541 which is all about combining expressions for math builtins. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 14541 *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29985
[Bug target/29984] SPE GCC segfaults with MAX_EXPR
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 08:05 ---
Here is a short testcase:
int f(int a, int b)
{
int i;
int c = a>=b?a:b;
for(i = 0;i<1000;i++) ; // Needed otherwise Jump threading gets in the way
int d = c>=a?c:a;
return d;
}
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29984
[Bug tree-optimization/29985] sin (x) / cos (x) is not always folded to tan (x)
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-26 08:01 --- This comes down to a tree combiner really. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||15459 Severity|normal |enhancement Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 GCC build triplet|i686-pc-linux-gnu | GCC host triplet|i686-pc-linux-gnu | GCC target triplet|i686-pc-linux-gnu | Keywords||missed-optimization Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-11-26 08:01:12 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29985
