[Bug middle-end/41889] [4.5 Regression] ICE from '-O2 -fno-omit-frame-pointer -ftracer -fsched2-use-superblocks'
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 08:29 --- I want to say this was introduced by PR 40838. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41889
[Bug c/41945] [4.5 regression] tree_check failed
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 08:33 --- Front-end issue: #3 0x000bd447 in fold_offsetof_1 (expr=0x42ff22c0, stop_ref=0x0) at /Users/apinski/src/change/gcc/gcc/c-common.c:8403 8403HOST_WIDE_INT index = int_cst_value (t); -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Component|middle-end |c Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-11-06 08:33:28 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41945
[Bug c/41945] [4.5 regression] tree_check failed
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 08:33 --- Yes it is a dup of bug 41935. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 41935 *** -- 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=41945
[Bug middle-end/41935] ICE : tree check: expected integer_cst, have nop_expr in int_cst_value, at tree.c:8301
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 08:33 --- *** Bug 41945 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jengelh at medozas dot de http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41935
[Bug libstdc++/41949] std::endl documentation contains bad link
--- Comment #2 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 08:38 --- Subject: Bug 41949 Author: redi Date: Fri Nov 6 08:38:02 2009 New Revision: 153961 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153961 Log: 2009-11-06 Jonathan Wakely PR libstdc++/41949 * include/std/ostream: Adjust link. Modified: trunk/libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/std/ostream -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41949
[Bug c/41935] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE : tree check: expected integer_cst, have nop_expr in int_cst_value, at tree.c:8301
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Severity|normal |critical Component|middle-end |c Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Summary|ICE : tree check: expected |[4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE : |integer_cst, have nop_expr |tree check: expected |in int_cst_value, at|integer_cst, have nop_expr |tree.c:8301 |in int_cst_value, at ||tree.c:8301 Target Milestone|--- |4.4.3 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41935
[Bug middle-end/41930] [4.5 regression] cc1 SEGV compiling maxval_r16.c
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Component|target |middle-end Keywords||build, ice-on-valid-code Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41930
[Bug c/41935] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE : tree check: expected integer_cst, have nop_expr in int_cst_value, at tree.c:8301
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 08:46 --- Subject: Bug 41935 Author: jakub Date: Fri Nov 6 08:46:45 2009 New Revision: 153962 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153962 Log: PR middle-end/41935 * c-common.c (fold_offsetof_1) : Don't crash for VLAs or non-constant index, allow index one past the last element and allow exceeding array bound in arrays that might be used as flexible array members. * gcc.dg/pr41935.c: New test. * c-c++-common/pr41935.c: New test. * c-c++-common/builtin-offsetof.c (f0): Allow index one past the last element. * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr41935.c: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/pr41935.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr41935.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr41935.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/c-common.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/builtin-offsetof.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41935
[Bug libstdc++/41949] std::endl documentation contains bad link
--- Comment #3 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 08:48 --- Fixed for 4.5.0 -- redi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Keywords||documentation Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41949
[Bug c++/41874] Incorrect "dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules" warning
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 09:09 ---
4.5 also fails and I cannot figure why if I do:
#include
struct APInt {
int i;
};
int main() {
APInt I;
void *d;
char Data[sizeof(APInt)];
new((void*)Data)APInt();
d = Data;
*(APInt*)d = I;
}
GCC does not warn.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail||4.5.0
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-11-06 09:09:42
date||
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41874
[Bug c++/41874] Incorrect "dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules" warning
--- Comment #2 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-11-06 09:16 ---
Subject: Re: Incorrect "dereferencing type-punned pointer
will break strict-aliasing rules" warning
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 09:09
> ---
> 4.5 also fails and I cannot figure why if I do:
"fails"?
> #include
> struct APInt {
> int i;
> };
> int main() {
> APInt I;
> void *d;
> char Data[sizeof(APInt)];
> new((void*)Data)APInt();
> d = Data;
> *(APInt*)d = I;
> }
>
> GCC does not warn.
Of course not - the code is perfectly valid (apart from Data
not having suitable alignment for APInt, but that's unrelated
to aliasing issues).
Richard.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41874
[Bug c++/41874] Incorrect "dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules" warning
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 09:18 --- > > --- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 09:09 > > --- > > 4.5 also fails Fails in that it warns still. The first example warns with 4.5, while adding an extra variable and doing a cast to void* causes GCC not to warn. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41874
[Bug c++/41874] Incorrect "dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules" warning
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 09:20 --- Btw, this warning is emitted from the frontend which only warns if it sees the address of an object casted, not random pointers (because of the many false positives). The frontend code also has no idea of the concept of a dynamic type. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41874
[Bug c/41935] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE : tree check: expected integer_cst, have nop_expr in int_cst_value, at tree.c:8301
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 09:22 --- Fixed. On the 4.4 branch by http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153944 - partial reversion of the patch that introduced this problem. -- jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41935
[Bug target/41950] Unaligned writes (?) to __m128
--- Comment #5 from phresnel at gmail dot com 2009-11-06 09:24 --- (In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #1) > > I guess win32 doesn't know about aligned commons? Try updating to 4.4.2. > > You can also use -fno-common as a workaround. > Unfortunately, this does not work for at least testcase 0), __attribute__((nocommon)) does not to work either. I will try out 4.5. asap (I am in relocation mode, i.e. only have access to my work-pc at the moment, so updating is a bit clumsy here). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41950
[Bug target/41950] Unaligned writes (?) to __m128
--- Comment #6 from phresnel at gmail dot com 2009-11-06 09:32 --- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #3) > > (In reply to comment #1) > > > I guess win32 doesn't know about aligned commons? Try updating to 4.4.2. > > > > You can also use -fno-common as a workaround. > > > > Unfortunately, this does not work for at least testcase 0), > __attribute__((nocommon)) does not to work either. > > I will try out 4.5. asap (I am in relocation mode, i.e. only have access to my > work-pc at the moment, so updating is a bit clumsy here). > Self-reply: If all else fails, use _mm_alloc(size,align). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41950
[Bug c++/41905] [4.5 Regression] ICE with __attribute__((noreturn))
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 09:32 --- Confirmed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-11-06 09:32:52 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41905
[Bug c++/41920] Invalid 'unused parameter' warning for parameters used in lambdas
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 09:35 --- Confirmed. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 GCC host triplet|i686-pc-cygwin | GCC target triplet|arm-unknown-elf | Keywords||diagnostic Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-11-06 09:35:27 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41920
[Bug middle-end/41952] False uninitialized variable warning
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 10:01 --- Patches should go to gcc-patches, you need to add the testcase and you should use auto_var_in_fn_p instead of !is_global_var. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Keywords||diagnostic, missed- ||optimization Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-11-06 10:01:05 date|| Summary|False uninitialized variable|False uninitialized variable |warning |warning http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41952
[Bug middle-end/41953] False negative -- uninit warning
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 10:02 --- Yes, the original implementation for uninitialized memory use was very limited. Now it's even more limited. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Keywords||diagnostic Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-11-06 10:02:19 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41953
[Bug tree-optimization/41488] IVOpts cannot coalesce multiple induction variables
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 10:04 --- *** Bug 41954 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||xinliangli at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41488
[Bug middle-end/41954] Missing IV recognition
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 10:04 --- + /* ev_fn0 = analyze_scalar_evolution (loop, arg); */ should be removed. Patches should be sent to gcc-patches. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 41488 *** -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41954
[Bug middle-end/41955] ICE compiling today's linux kernel git snapshot
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 10:05 --- Please attach preprocessed source. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41955
[Bug middle-end/41956] Segmentation fault when called by mpicc
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 10:06 --- hm, works for me. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41956
[Bug middle-end/41964] Regarding gcc: Internal error: Killed (program cc1)
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 10:09 --- GCC 3.4 is no longer maintained. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||WONTFIX http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41964
[Bug middle-end/41963] [4.5 Regression] 177.mesa in SPEC CPU 2K is miscompiled
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-06 10:10 --- Confirmed. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-11-06 10:10:10 date|| Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41963
[Bug c++/41966] New: g++ produces spurious alignment errors for prototypes
[This is a copy of a bug that I posted a year ago on ubuntu's launchpad. Nothing happened there, and now I am still observing the same problem with gcc 4.4.1 on a newly upgraded ubuntu 9.10] Compiling the following with g++ void toto1(double*const __attribute__((aligned(16))) X); void toto2(double* const (&X)[1]); produdes g++ -c -o test.o test.cc test.cc:2: error: alignment of array elements is greater than element size Observe the `2' in the error message, the error is reported for toto2. (For toto1 an error would be acceptable, I think). But even worse, if we take void toto0(double* const (&X)[1]); void toto1(double*const __attribute__((aligned(16))) X); void toto2(double* const (&X)[1]); All three prototypes compile flawlessly. -- Summary: g++ produces spurious alignment errors for prototypes Product: gcc Version: 4.4.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: jens dot gustedt at loria dot fr GCC build triplet: i486-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: i486-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: i486-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41966
