[Bug c++/45635] [4.6 regression] Failed to bootstrap on Linux/ia64

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-15 06:56 ---
Thanks.  Though, both #c5 and #c6 patches are C++ FE patches and thus I can't
see how they could ever be related to a C testcase.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635

[Bug fortran/45676] Move array assignments out of loop

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

--- Comment #1 from ubizjak at gmail dot com  2010-09-15 06:40 ---
Related to PR42108 and PR45223.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45676

[Bug middle-end/45663] [4.6 regression] New test failures

[hjl dot tools at gmail dot com]

--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com  2010-09-15 05:45 ---
*** Bug 45675 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45663

[Bug middle-end/45675] [4.6 Regression] New guality test failures

[hjl dot tools at gmail dot com]

--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com  2010-09-15 05:45 ---


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 45663 ***


-- 

hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||DUPLICATE


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45675

[Bug fortran/45676] New: Move array assignments out of loop

[tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org]

Consider

program main
  integer :: a(100), b(100), c(100)
  a = 2
  do i=1,10
 b = a
 c = 1/b
 print *,c
  end do
end program main

The statements

b = a
c = 1/b

could be moved out of the loop.  (The second one still has the
problem that we currently don't know that print doesn't read
values).  Currently, this doesn't happen, as a dump shows:

:
  # ivtmp.13_40 = PHI <10(3), ivtmp.13_39(6)>
  MEM[(c_char * {ref-all})&b] = MEM[(c_char * {ref-all})&a];

:
  # ivtmp.24_8 = PHI 
  D.1598_11 = MEM[symbol: b, index: ivtmp.24_8, offset: 0B];
  D.1599_12 = 1 / D.1598_11;
  MEM[symbol: c, index: ivtmp.24_8, offset: 0B] = D.1599_12;
  ivtmp.24_45 = ivtmp.24_8 + 4;
  if (ivtmp.24_45 == 400)
goto ;
  else
goto ;

:
  dt_parm.2.common.filename = &"foo.f90"[1]{lb: 1 sz: 1};
  dt_parm.2.common.line = 7;
  dt_parm.2.common.flags = 128;
  dt_parm.2.common.unit = 6;
  _gfortran_st_write (&dt_parm.2);
  parm.3.dtype = 265;
  parm.3.dim[0].lbound = 1;
  parm.3.dim[0].ubound = 100;
  parm.3.dim[0].stride = 1;
  parm.3.data = &c[0];
  parm.3.offset = -1;
  _gfortran_transfer_array (&dt_parm.2, &parm.3, 4, 0);
  _gfortran_st_write_done (&dt_parm.2);
  ivtmp.13_39 = ivtmp.13_40 - 1;
  if (ivtmp.13_39 == 0)
goto ;
  else
goto ;

:
  return;

Not sure if this is better handled in the front or middle end, though.


-- 
   Summary: Move array assignments out of loop
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Keywords: missed-optimization
  Severity: enhancement
  Priority: P3
 Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45676

[Bug middle-end/45675] New: [4.6 Regression] New guality test failures

[hjl dot tools at gmail dot com]

On Linux/x86, revision 164252:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00546.html

caused:

FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c  -O2  line 42 a.j == 14
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c  -O2 -flto  line 42 a.j == 14
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c  -O2 -fwhopr  line 42 a.j == 14
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  line 42 a.j == 14
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c  -O3 -g  line 42 a.j == 14
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c  -Os  line 42 a.j == 14


-- 
   Summary: [4.6 Regression] New guality test failures
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45675

[Bug target/45670] Less efficient x86 addressing mode selection on 4.6, causes -Os size regression from 4.5

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-15 05:38 
---
> It is caused by revision 162618:
> 
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-07/msg00972.html

No, it isn't, this commit reverted an incorrect change done in revision 161907.


-- 

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=45670

[Bug bootstrap/45672] [4.6 Regression] Bootstrap failure for powerpc-apple-darwin9: 'rs6000_units_per_simd_word' defined but not used

[hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #2 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-15 05:37 ---
Subject: Bug 45672

Author: hjl
Date: Wed Sep 15 05:36:47 2010
New Revision: 164296

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164296
Log:
Correct XXX_units_per_simd_word return type.

2010-09-14  H.J. Lu  

PR bootstrap/45672
* config/mips/mips.c (mips_units_per_simd_word): Correct return
type.
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_units_per_simd_word): Likewise.
* config/sparc/sparc.c (sparc_units_per_simd_word): Likewise.

Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/config/mips/mips.c
trunk/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c
trunk/gcc/config/sparc/sparc.c


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45672

[Bug target/45670] Less efficient x86 addressing mode selection on 4.6, causes -Os size regression from 4.5

[hjl dot tools at gmail dot com]

--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com  2010-09-15 05:25 ---
It is caused by revision 162618:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-07/msg00972.html


-- 

hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
   ||org
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-15 05:25:27
   date||
   Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45670

[Bug fortran/45596] Implement simple static points-to analysis in Fortran FE

[tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #10 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-15 05:01 
---
One point:

As far as I can see, you are calling compute_spt_call on functions in
'naked' expressions, as in

a = f(x)

but you are not following array or substring references, as in

a(f(x)) = g(f(y))

where the dummy argument to f could be intent(out).


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45596

[Bug middle-end/44382] Slow integer multiply

[hjl dot tools at gmail dot com]

--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com  2010-09-15 04:29 ---
*** Bug 45671 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


-- 

hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot
   ||org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44382

[Bug tree-optimization/45671] Reassociate expressions for greater parallelism

[hjl dot tools at gmail dot com]

--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com  2010-09-15 04:29 ---


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 44382 ***


-- 

hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
  GCC build triplet|powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu |
   GCC host triplet|powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu |
 GCC target triplet|powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu |
 Resolution||DUPLICATE


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45671

[Bug c++/45635] [4.6 regression] Failed to bootstrap on Linux/ia64

[hjl dot tools at gmail dot com]

--- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com  2010-09-15 04:09 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Created an attachment (id=21792)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21792&action=view) [edit]
> gcc46-pr45635.patch
> 
> Alternatively, we can avoid computing the address of fn altogether on
> TARGET_VTABLE_USES_DESCRIPTORS targets.
> 

This one can bootstrap. But it caused

FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-2.c execution,  -O1 
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-2.c execution,  -Os 

But it doesn't trigger

Sep 14 11:06:05 gnu-11 kernel: 20040709-2.x7(8794): unaligned access to
0x6000f4ae, ip=0x40004e70

which

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635#c6

does.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635

[Bug middle-end/45230] gcc.c-torture/execute/strncmp-1.c ICEs with -fgraphite-identity

[t66667 at gmail dot com]

--- Comment #11 from t7 at gmail dot com  2010-09-15 00:23 ---
FYI, I applied these to gcc-trunk for testing purposes.
[PATCH 1/6] Factor out is_gimple_reg calls.
[PATCH 2/6] A function is affine when CHREC_RIGHT is invariant.
[PATCH 3/6] Fix chrec_contains_symbols_defined_in_loop.
[PATCH 4/6] Also handle ARRAY_REFs in instantiate_scev_r.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45230

[Bug middle-end/45230] gcc.c-torture/execute/strncmp-1.c ICEs with -fgraphite-identity

[t66667 at gmail dot com]

--- Comment #10 from t7 at gmail dot com  2010-09-15 00:17 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> ICEs are atill present for both strncmp-1.c and reduced testcase on
> x86_64-apple-darwin10 at r164287.
> 

You are right. I was suspicious about the pr45230 having no .c extension in the
file name (weird). So I renamed the file and test it again.
bash-4.1$ ./xmingw-trunk-w64-sjlj/bin/x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc  -w -Os -lm -m32
-fgraphite-identity -c pr45230.c 
pr45230.c: In function 'foo':
pr45230.c:2:1: internal compiler error: in rename_uses, at sese.c:534
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See  for instructions.

Did few more tests and found the g++ failed at -O1 not -Os for
qdrawhelper_mmx.ii
The gcc failed at -Os and not -O3 for pr45230.c

bash-4.1$ ./xmingw-trunk-w64-sjlj/bin/x86_64-w64-mingw32-g++ -O1
-fgraphite-identity -c qdrawhelper_mmx.ii 
qdrawhelper_mmx.ii: In function 'void comp_func_Source(uint*, const uint*, int,
uint) [with MM = QMMXIntrinsics, uint = unsigned int]':
qdrawhelper_mmx.ii:45806:41: internal compiler error: in rename_uses, at
sese.c:534
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See  for instructions.
bash-4.1$ ./xmingw-trunk-w64-sjlj/bin/x86_64-w64-mingw32-g++ -Os
-fgraphite-identity -c qdrawhelper_mmx.ii 
bash-4.1$ ./xmingw-trunk-w64-sjlj/bin/x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc  -w -O3 -lm -m32
-fgraphite-identity -c pr45230.c 
bash-4.1$ ./xmingw-trunk-w64-sjlj/bin/x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc  -w -O0 -lm -m32
-fgraphite-identity -c pr45230.c 
bash-4.1$ ./xmingw-trunk-w64-sjlj/bin/x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc  -w -Os -lm -m32
-fgraphite-identity -c pr45230.c 
pr45230.c: In function 'foo':
pr45230.c:2:1: internal compiler error: in rename_uses, at sese.c:534
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See  for instructions.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45230

[Bug middle-end/40386] wrong code generation for several SPEC CPU2000 benchmarks (lucas, mgrid, face, applu, apsi) with -O1 -fno-ira-share-spill-slots

[zsojka at seznam dot cz]

--- Comment #13 from zsojka at seznam dot cz  2010-09-15 00:05 ---
It seems all the testsuite failures caused by -fno-ira-share-spill-slots and
gone now, good!


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40386

[Bug fortran/45674] New: [OOP] Undefined references for extended types

[dietmar dot ebner at gmail dot com]

The testcase below leads to the following linker error on current trunk, gcc
4.5.0 and gcc 4.5.1: 
$gfortran fails.f90
/tmp/ccG09ce7.o: In function `__fails_test_MOD_bar':
fails.f90:(.text+0xe): undefined reference to `vtab$b_t.1500'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status

The patch at the end of the bug report seems to solve the problem for me but
it's mainly a wild guess. The issue seems to be closely related to 44065.

file fails.f90
===
module fails_mod
  implicit none 
  type :: a_t
 integer :: a
  end type
  type, extends(a_t) :: b_t
 integer :: b
  end type
contains
  subroutine foo(a)
class(a_t) :: a
  end subroutine foo
end module fails_mod

module fails_test
  implicit none
contains
  subroutine bar
use fails_mod
type(b_t) :: b
call foo(b)
  end subroutine bar
end module fails_test

end


Index: fortran/interface.c
===
--- fortran/interface.c (revision 164288)
+++ fortran/interface.c (working copy)
@@ -1428,10 +1428,12 @@
   && actual->ts.u.derived && actual->ts.u.derived->ts.is_iso_c)
 return 1;

-  if (formal->ts.type == BT_CLASS)
+  if (formal->ts.type == BT_CLASS) {
 /* Make sure the vtab symbol is present when
the module variables are generated.  */
 gfc_find_derived_vtab (formal->ts.u.derived);
+gfc_find_derived_vtab (actual->ts.u.derived);
+  }

   if (actual->ts.type == BT_PROCEDURE)
 {


-- 
   Summary: [OOP] Undefined references for extended types
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: dietmar dot ebner at gmail dot com
 GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
  GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45674

[Bug debug/45673] -fcompare-debug failure with minor difference in dumps

[zsojka at seznam dot cz]

--- Comment #1 from zsojka at seznam dot cz  2010-09-14 23:43 ---
Created an attachment (id=21797)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21797&action=view)
testcase, preprocessed ada-lang.c from GDB (licensed under GPLv2)

Reducing is very slow, after 4 hours of delta run I got to ~16000 lines. So I
am uploading the original testcase.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45673

[Bug debug/45673] New: -fcompare-debug failure with minor difference in dumps

[zsojka at seznam dot cz]

Command line:
$ gcc -O3 -fcompare-debug -march=amdfam10 ada-langn.i
or
$ gcc -O2 -fcompare-debug -finline-functions -fipa-cp-clone
-fkeep-inline-functions  ada-langn.i
(I am not able to reproduce it with these flags anymore)
or
$ gcc -O1 -fgcse -finline-small-functions -foptimize-sibling-calls -ftree-pre
-ftree-switch-conversion -ftree-vrp -fpartial-inlining -finline-functions
-fkeep-inline-functions -fcompare-debug ada-langn.i

The difference in dumps is small:
$ diff *gkd
107804c107804
< (const_int 32 [0x20])) [ MEM[(struct type *)0B].main_type+0
S8 A64])) ada-langn.i:15638# {*movdi_internal_rex64}
---
> (const_int 32 [0x20])) [ 0B->main_type+0 S8 A64])) 
> ada-langn.i:15638# {*movdi_internal_rex64}

"MEM[(struct type *)0B]." <=> "0B->"

Tested revision:
r164287 - fail
r164280 - fail
r164228 - fail


-- 
   Summary: -fcompare-debug failure with minor difference in dumps
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: zsojka at seznam dot cz
  GCC host triplet: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45673

[Bug middle-end/45230] gcc.c-torture/execute/strncmp-1.c ICEs with -fgraphite-identity

[howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu]

--- Comment #9 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu  2010-09-14 
23:27 ---
ICEs are atill present for both strncmp-1.c and reduced testcase on
x86_64-apple-darwin10 at r164287.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45230

[Bug middle-end/45230] gcc.c-torture/execute/strncmp-1.c ICEs with -fgraphite-identity

[t66667 at gmail dot com]

--- Comment #8 from t7 at gmail dot com  2010-09-14 22:55 ---
No idea, what is going on but I saved your testcase.c as pr45230 and it doesn't
produce the ICE, target gcc is x86_64-w64-mingw32.

bash-4.1$ ./xmingw-trunk-w64-sjlj/bin/x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc  -w -Os -lm -m32
-fgraphite-identity -c pr45230 
x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc: warning: pr45230: linker input file unused because
linking not done

bash-4.1$ ./xmingw-trunk-w64-sjlj/bin/x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc -r -nostdlib -O1
-fgraphite-identity -c pr45230 
x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc: warning: pr45230: linker input file unused because
linking not done
bash-4.1$ ./xmingw-trunk-w64-sjlj/bin/x86_64-w64-mingw32-g++ -r -nostdlib -O1
-fgraphite-identity -c qdrawhelper_mmx.ii 
qdrawhelper_mmx.ii: In function 'void comp_func_Source(uint*, const uint*, int,
uint) [with MM = QMMXIntrinsics, uint = unsigned int]':
qdrawhelper_mmx.ii:45806:41: internal compiler error: in rename_uses, at
sese.c:534
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See  for instructions.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45230

[Bug objc/32995] False warning when implementing an instance method called `dealloc'

[nicola at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #3 from nicola at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 22:52 ---
If you want to use dealloc for "compatibility" with Apple Cocoa / GNUstep Base,
then you also want the warnings that dealloc needs to include a call to [super
dealloc], so I wouldn't change the compiler ;-)

You could change your code though - if you're triyng to be compatible with
Cocoa / GNUstep, then you may as well define an NSObject root class and have a
dealloc method in it ;-)

If you still want to use Object, you can add a -dealloc method to Object by
using a category:

@interface Object (dealloc)
- (void) dealloc;
@end

(the add the implementation).  Then you can have the missing [super dealloc] in
your subclass, and the compiler won't generate any warnings.

Thanks


-- 

nicola at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||WONTFIX


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32995

[Bug objc/32530] @try/@throw/@catch/@finally usage without -fexeceptions compiles without warning/error

[nicola at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #1 from nicola at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 22:47 ---
GCC from trunk (will become 4.6.0) refuses to compile
@try/@catch/@throw/@synchronized expressions if -fobjc-exceptions is not used.

Thanks


-- 

nicola at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32530

[Bug bootstrap/45672] [4.6 Regression] Bootstrap failure for powerpc-apple-darwin9: 'rs6000_units_per_simd_word' defined but not used

[hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #1 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 22:41 ---
Subject: Bug 45672

Author: hjl
Date: Tue Sep 14 22:41:03 2010
New Revision: 164289

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164289
Log:
Define TARGET_VECTORIZE_UNITS_PER_SIMD_WORD for rs6000.

2010-09-14  H.J. Lu  

PR bootstrap/45672
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (TARGET_VECTORIZE_UNITS_PER_SIMD_WORD): New.

Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45672

[Bug preprocessor/45362] Dangling reference about saved cpp_macro for push/pop macro

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 22:35 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/#need

Since this is a bug in the preprocessor it is hard to get a preprocessed source
that causes a bug.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45362

[Bug bootstrap/45666] ICE: /mingw/include/winnt.h:3350:5: Segmentation fault

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 22:34 ---
This is the same issue as PR 45362, PR 45362 has a description of what is
happening though it does show when it happened.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 45362 ***


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||DUPLICATE


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45666

[Bug preprocessor/45362] Dangling reference about saved cpp_macro for push/pop macro

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 22:34 ---
*** Bug 45666 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45362

[Bug bootstrap/45672] New: [4.6 Regression] Bootstrap failure for powerpc-apple-darwin9: 'rs6000_units_per_simd_word' defined but not used

[dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr]

Bootstrapping revision 164287 on powerpc-apple-darwin9 fails with:

...

/opt/gcc/darwin_buildw/./prev-gcc/xgcc -B/opt/gcc/darwin_buildw/./prev-gcc/
-B/opt/gcc/gcc4.6w/powerpc-apple-darwin9/bin/
-B/opt/gcc/gcc4.6w/powerpc-apple-darwin9/bin/
-B/opt/gcc/gcc4.6w/powerpc-apple-darwin9/lib/ -isystem
/opt/gcc/gcc4.6w/powerpc-apple-darwin9/include -isystem
/opt/gcc/gcc4.6w/powerpc-apple-darwin9/sys-include-c   -g -O2
-mdynamic-no-pic -gtoggle -DIN_GCC   -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual
-Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-format-attribute -pedantic
-Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros -Wno-overlength-strings -Werror
-Wold-style-definition -Wc++-compat -fno-common  -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.
-I../../gcc-4.6-work/gcc -I../../gcc-4.6-work/gcc/.
-I../../gcc-4.6-work/gcc/../include -I../../gcc-4.6-work/gcc/../libcpp/include
-I/sw/include  -I../../gcc-4.6-work/gcc/../libdecnumber
-I../../gcc-4.6-work/gcc/../libdecnumber/dpd -I../libdecnumber  -I/sw/include
-DCLOOG_PPL_BACKEND\
../../gcc-4.6-work/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c -o rs6000.o
../../gcc-4.6-work/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c:3576:1: error:
'rs6000_units_per_simd_word' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors


-- 
   Summary: [4.6 Regression] Bootstrap failure for powerpc-apple-
darwin9: 'rs6000_units_per_simd_word' defined but not
used
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: bootstrap
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
 GCC build triplet: powerpc-apple-darwin9
  GCC host triplet: powerpc-apple-darwin9
GCC target triplet: powerpc-apple-darwin9


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45672

[Bug bootstrap/45666] ICE: /mingw/include/winnt.h:3350:5: Segmentation fault

[t66667 at gmail dot com]

--- Comment #2 from t7 at gmail dot com  2010-09-14 21:28 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> 
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 45362 ***
> 


-- 

t7 at gmail dot com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
 Resolution|DUPLICATE   |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45666

[Bug tree-optimization/45671] New: Reassociate expressions for greater parallelism

[pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot org]

The following testcase demonstrates where reassociation/regrouping of
expressions could result in greater parallelism for processors that have
multiple arithmetic execution units.

int myfunction (int a, int b, int c, int d, int e, int f, int g, int h) {
  int ret;

  ret = a + b + c + d + e + f + g + h;
  return ret;

}

Compiling with -O3 results in a series of dependent add instructions to
accumulate the sum.

add 4,3,4
add 4,4,5
add 4,4,6
add 4,4,7
add 4,4,8
add 4,4,9
add 4,4,10


If we regrouped to (a+b)+(c+d)+... we can do multiple adds in parallel on
different execution units.


-- 
   Summary: Reassociate expressions for greater parallelism
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: enhancement
  Priority: P3
 Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot org
 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=45671

[Bug middle-end/45663] [4.6 regression] New test failures

[pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #3 from pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 20:04 
---
Not sure I understand everything involved here, but isn't the test a little
suspect any time higher optimization levels and instruction scheduling are
enabled?


-- 

pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|4.6.0   |---


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45663

[Bug bootstrap/45445] [4.6 regression] ARM bootstrap failure: comparison failures after stage 3

[laurent at guerby dot net]

--- Comment #10 from laurent at guerby dot net  2010-09-14 20:04 ---
Ok will do.

Note: arm.c:arm_reload_in_hi() seems to have a few non deterministic calls to
gen_rtx_*, eg:

  emit_insn (gen_zero_extendqisi2 (gen_rtx_SUBREG (SImode, operands[0], 0),
   gen_rtx_MEM (QImode,
plus_constant (base,
   offset + 1;
  ... (and a few other calls like that)

Same for arm.c:arm_reload_out_hi()

I don't know if this is normal coding style.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45445

[Bug rtl-optimization/45670] New: Less efficient x86 addressing mode selection on 4.6, causes -Os size regression from 4.5

[sgunderson at bigfoot dot com]

Hi,

Given the following test C++ file:

class Class
{
public:
void func();

float *buf;
int size;
};

void Class::func()
{
for (int i = 0; i < size; ++i) {
buf[i] = 0;
}
}

4.6 (see below for exact version) will generate larger code (36 vs. 30 bytes)
than 4.5.1 (Debian 4.5.1-6) given -Os. The output is

 :
   0:   55  push   %ebp
   1:   31 c0   xor%eax,%eax
   3:   89 e5   mov%esp,%ebp
   5:   8b 4d 08mov0x8(%ebp),%ecx
   8:   53  push   %ebx
   9:   8b 59 04mov0x4(%ecx),%ebx
   c:   eb 10   jmp1e 
   e:   8d 14 85 00 00 00 00lea0x0(,%eax,4),%edx
  15:   40  inc%eax
  16:   03 11   add(%ecx),%edx
  18:   c7 02 00 00 00 00   movl   $0x0,(%edx)
  1e:   39 d8   cmp%ebx,%eax
  20:   7c ec   jl e 
  22:   5b  pop%ebx
  23:   5d  pop%ebp
  24:   c3  ret

Basically the problem is that the lea is large (due to the zero immediate
taking up 32 bits); 4.5 uses a variation where the address calculation takes
both a base and an index register, which has a shorter form not requiring to
store the zero. (The joys of x86; lea edx, [eax*4 + ecx] takes less space then
lea edx, [eax*4]...)

===

Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Debian 20100828-1'
--with-bugurl=file:///usr/share/doc/gcc-snapshot/README.Bugs
--enable-languages=c,ada,c++,fortran,objc,obj-c++
--prefix=/usr/lib/gcc-snapshot --enable-shared --enable-multiarch
--enable-linker-build-id --with-system-zlib --disable-nls --enable-clocale=gnu
--enable-libstdcxx-debug --enable-libstdcxx-time=yes --enable-plugin
--enable-gold --with-plugin-ld=ld.gold --enable-objc-gc --enable-targets=all
--with-arch-32=i586 --with-tune=generic --disable-werror --enable-checking=yes
--build=i486-linux-gnu --host=i486-linux-gnu --target=i486-linux-gnu
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.6.0 20100828 (experimental) [trunk revision 163616] (Debian
20100828-1)


-- 
   Summary: Less efficient x86 addressing mode selection on 4.6,
causes -Os size regression from 4.5
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: sgunderson at bigfoot dot com
 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=45670

[Bug bootstrap/45445] [4.6 regression] ARM bootstrap failure: comparison failures after stage 3

[mikpe at it dot uu dot se]

--- Comment #9 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se  2010-09-14 19:40 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> With 4.4.2 as base on gcc57 (and your PR45444 patch) I don't see the 
> comparison
> failure:
> 
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-09/msg01282.html

Please try --with-arch=armv5te --with-tune=xscale in the configure options.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45445

[Bug c++/45635] [4.6 regression] Failed to bootstrap on Linux/ia64

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 19:25 ---
Could you please also try the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635#c5 patch?  Thanks.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635

[Bug c++/45635] [4.6 regression] Failed to bootstrap on Linux/ia64

[hjl dot tools at gmail dot com]

--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com  2010-09-14 19:22 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Created an attachment (id=21793)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21793&action=view) [edit]
> Proposed patch
> 
> Hi,
> this patch should solve the problem (dive into ADDR_EXPR to get actual
> fndecl).I no longer have any ia-64 machine able to bootstrap, but will try to
> find one tonight. I would be very happy if someone did beat me on this ;)
> 

It seems to work.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635

[Bug bootstrap/45445] [4.6 regression] ARM bootstrap failure: comparison failures after stage 3

[laurent at guerby dot net]

--- Comment #8 from laurent at guerby dot net  2010-09-14 19:19 ---
With 4.4.2 as base on gcc57 (and your PR45444 patch) I don't see the comparison
failure:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-09/msg01282.html


-- 

laurent at guerby dot net changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||laurent at guerby dot net


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45445

[Bug tree-optimization/45633] [4.6 regression] internal compiler error: verify_stmts failed

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #9 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 18:43 ---
Created an attachment (id=21796)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21796&action=view)
gcc46-pr45633-3.patch

Patch that uses TER to expand PLUS_EXPR/POINTER_PLUS_EXPR as MINUS_EXPR if it
is really pointer subtraction.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45633

[Bug middle-end/45644] [4.6 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 is miscompiled

[jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #4 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 17:54 ---
The miscompiled file appears to be spxweightst.o, the miscompilation probably
happens when transforming a call to int soplex::DataSet::number(const
soplex::DataKey&) const [with DATA = soplex::SVSet::DLPSV]


-- 

jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot
   ||org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45644

[Bug tree-optimization/45633] [4.6 regression] internal compiler error: verify_stmts failed

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 17:15 ---
I've looked at the combiner with the second patch, but I'm afraid this isn't
fixable in the combiner easily.  While combiner is able for i3
(set (reg:V2DI res) (plus:V2DI (reg:V2DI temp) (mem:V2DI (symbol_ref:P t
, i2
(set (reg:V2DI temp) (minus:V2DI zero) (mem:V2DI (reg:V2DI a)))
and i1
(set (reg:V2DI zero) (const_vector:V2DI [0 0]))
to figure this is
(set (reg:V2DI res) (minus:V2DI (mem:V2DI (symbol_ref:P t)) (reg:V2DI a))
(plus repeating i1, as its result is not dead), this pattern doesn't match
as minus obviously isn't commutative and combiner doesn't try to make 3 insns
out of 3.  So I'd prefer if we could either apply the first patch, or try TER
on the PLUS_EXPR to see if the second operand isn't negation and expand it as
MINUS_EXPR, even when MINUS_EXPR isn't allowed on such arguments in GIMPLE.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45633

[Bug c/45669] strcpy_chk false positive

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 17:09 ---
This is intentional, considering this as a flexible array member is already way
too over what should be allowed.
Either use a true flexible array member, or use memcpy instead (which isn't
limited to field boundaries, only to object boundaries).


-- 

jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||INVALID


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45669

[Bug c/45669] New: strcpy_chk false positive

[eteran at alum dot rit dot edu]

Some constructs cause gcc to warn as always causing a buffer overflow
incorrectly. For example, this is a minimalistic version of a warning found in
wine-1.3.2:

--
#include 
#include 
#include 

struct T {
union {
struct {
char str[1];
} x;
} u;
};

int main() {
struct T *p = malloc(sizeof(char) * 100);
strcpy(p->u.x.str, "ABCD");
return 0;
}
--

This is a slightly obfuscated version of the struct hack and is clearly not a
buffer overflow. Yet compiling with: "gcc -O2 test.c -o test" results in:



In file included from /usr/include/string.h:640:0,
 from test.c:2:
In function 'strcpy',
inlined from 'main' at test.c:16:8:
/usr/include/bits/string3.h:107:3: warning: call to __builtin___strcpy_chk will
always overflow destination buffer


-- 
   Summary: strcpy_chk false positive
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: eteran at alum dot rit dot edu


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45669

[Bug rtl-optimization/45593] [4.5/4.6 regression] segfault with -Os

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 16:25 
---
Fixing.


-- 

ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC|ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot|
   |org |
 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed|2010-09-08 21:13:58 |2010-09-14 16:25:22
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45593

[Bug tree-optimization/45633] [4.6 regression] internal compiler error: verify_stmts failed

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 16:20 ---
Created an attachment (id=21795)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21795&action=view)
gcc46-pr45633-2.patch

Another fix, this one keeps disallowing such MINUS_EXPR.  Unfortunately the
generated code is worse, apparently no RTL pass is able to do that
tmp1 = -b
r = a + tmp1
into
r = a - b
transformation for vector modes.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45633

[Bug tree-optimization/45633] [4.6 regression] internal compiler error: verify_stmts failed

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 16:18 ---
Created an attachment (id=21794)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21794&action=view)
gcc46-pr45633-1.patch

The s[i] = -s[i]; line is also unnecessary in the testcase.

One possible patch attached, allows also MINUS_EXPR with vector pointer on
lhs/rhs1 and vector sizetype on rhs2.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45633

[Bug c++/45635] [4.6 regression] Failed to bootstrap on Linux/ia64

[hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #6 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 16:13 ---
Created an attachment (id=21793)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21793&action=view)
Proposed patch

Hi,
this patch should solve the problem (dive into ADDR_EXPR to get actual
fndecl).I no longer have any ia-64 machine able to bootstrap, but will try to
find one tonight. I would be very happy if someone did beat me on this ;)

Honza


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635

[Bug c++/45665] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected class 'type', have 'exceptional' (error_mark) in grokdeclarator, at cp/decl.c:8797 on invalid code

[hjl dot tools at gmail dot com]

--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com  2010-09-14 16:02 ---
It is caused by revision 159939:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-05/msg00996.html


-- 

hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jason at redhat dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45665

[Bug middle-end/45312] [4.4 Regression] GCC 4.4.4 miscompiles the Linux kernel

[vmakarov at redhat dot com]

--- Comment #23 from vmakarov at redhat dot com  2010-09-14 15:46 ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> Fixed everywhere but on 4.3 branch.
> 
> Maybe commit the patch there too?
> 

I think there is a smaller probability that this bug occurs in gcc4.3 because
it is based on the old RA.  IRA uses hard registers more effectively and
frequently than the old RA and therefore it stresses the reload pass more and
as the result reload bugs occur more frequently with IRA.

But if it is present in gcc4.3, the patch should be applied too.  Even more I
guess that the patch is pretty safe and could be applied to gcc4.3 in any case.

If you want you could apply it to gcc4.3-branch.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45312

[Bug tree-optimization/45633] [4.6 regression] internal compiler error: verify_stmts failed

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 15:24 ---
Simplified testcase that ICEs the same way on x86_64-linux (-O3) and i686-linux
(-O3 -msse2):

int s[4];
unsigned char *t[4];

void
foo (void)
{
  int i;
  for (i = 0; i < 4; i++)
{
  s[i] = -s[i];
  t[i] -= s[i];
}
}


-- 

jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
  GCC build triplet|i686-pc-cygwin  |
   GCC host triplet|i686-pc-cygwin  |
 GCC target triplet|i686-pc-cygwin  |
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-14 15:24:04
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45633

[Bug c++/45668] New: Request warning for mismatched declaration/definition attributes (instead of chances for an indirect error)

[tbptbp at gmail dot com]

As g++ now may, or may not, produce an indirect error on mismatched attributes
between a forward declaration and later definition, and that is incredibly
confusing to the end-user (aka me), i hereby humbly ask for a warning in such
condition; a hint at the problematic declaration would be a plus.

But, really, anything but that cryptic mismatched prototype error one may get
when *using* such ill-formed type would be great. 

Executive summary for PR 45642
class foo;
class bar {
void foobar(foo &);
};
class __attribute((aligned(16))) foo {};
// if unlucky, an error about void bar::foobar(foo &)
// not matching void bar::foobar(foo &)
// when the culprit is foo's attributes.
void bar::foobar(foo &) {}


-- 
   Summary: Request warning for mismatched declaration/definition
attributes (instead of chances for an indirect error)
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: enhancement
  Priority: P3
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tbptbp at gmail dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45668

[Bug middle-end/45644] [4.6 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 is miscompiled

[jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #3 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 15:02 ---
I can reproduce the problem and it does not happen with -fno-ipa-sra => mine.


-- 

jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-14 15:02:30
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45644

[Bug c++/45635] [4.6 regression] Failed to bootstrap on Linux/ia64

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 14:47 ---
Created an attachment (id=21792)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21792&action=view)
gcc46-pr45635.patch

Alternatively, we can avoid computing the address of fn altogether on
TARGET_VTABLE_USES_DESCRIPTORS targets.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635

[Bug target/45616] internal compiler error: in note_invalid_constants, at config/arm/arm.c:11243

[ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #6 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 14:29 ---
Technically, this is ICE on invalid code, but a more user-friendly error would
be better.  As it happens, one has been added to trunk, as of 16th June.

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-06/msg01501.html

I will backport it to 4.5, unless Mr Brook wants to.


-- 

ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||pbrook at gcc dot gnu dot
   ||org
 Status|WAITING |NEW
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Keywords|ice-on-valid-code   |ice-on-invalid-code
  Known to fail||4.5.1
  Known to work||4.6.0
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-14 14:29:06
   date||
   Target Milestone|--- |4.5.3


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45616

[Bug target/45070] Miscompiled c++ class with packed attribute on ARM with -Os optimizations (Qt 4.6.2)

[rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #19 from rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 14:05 
---
Fixed in all maintained releases.


-- 

rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED
   Target Milestone|--- |4.4.5


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45070

[Bug c++/45635] [4.6 regression] Failed to bootstrap on Linux/ia64

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 14:00 ---
Created an attachment (id=21791)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21791&action=view)
gcc46-pr45635.patch

Fix.


-- 

jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

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


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635

[Bug fortran/45505] [4.6 Regression] gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90

[jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #6 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 13:55 ---
Jakub, I have not understood whether you think the warning emitted
when compiling the c code from comment #4 has the correct line number
or not.  I see it attributed to the line with the return statement
which I think is correct.

Nevertheless, SRA currently does not set locations of gimple
statements it generates and is quite confused when it comes to tree
locations.  I was already looking into the latter problem and added
setting gimple statement locations appropriately because it fitted in
well.  The patch
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-09/msg01175.html) has just
been approved and I am going to commit it in a few moments but it does
not change the line the Fortran warning is reported at.  It is
probably because the gimple return statement, which is where I get the
location for the newly generated load, has a location corresponding to
the end of the function.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45505

[Bug lto/45667] [4.6 Regression] ICE: verify_stmts failed: type mismatch in address expression with -flto

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45667

[Bug lto/45667] [4.6 Regression] ICE: verify_stmts failed: type mismatch in address expression with -flto

[zsojka at seznam dot cz]

--- Comment #1 from zsojka at seznam dot cz  2010-09-14 13:22 ---
Created an attachment (id=21790)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21790&action=view)
reduced testcase, packed

- header.h -
struct A;
typedef void (A::*Am1) (void *);
typedef void (A::*Am2) ();

struct B
{
  Am2 am2;
};

struct A
{
  A ();
  struct B b;
  struct C *c;
  struct D *d;
  void foo (Am1);
  void bar (void *);
};

struct C
{
};

- file1.C -
#include "header.h"
A::A ()
{
  foo (&A::bar);
}
---
- file2.C -
#include "header.h"
struct D
{
};
void A::bar (void *)
{
}
void A::foo (Am1)
{
}
---

$ gcc file[12].C -flto -nostdlib -r


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45667

[Bug lto/45667] New: [4.6 Regression] ICE: verify_stmts failed: type mismatch in address expression with -flto

[zsojka at seznam dot cz]

Compiler output:
$ gcc file[12].C -flto -nostdlib -r
In file included from :1:0:
file1.C: In member function '__base_ctor ':
file1.C:2:1: error: type mismatch in address expression
void A:: (struct A *, void *) *

void A:: (struct A *, void *)

D.2073.__pfn = bar;

file1.C:2:1: internal compiler error: verify_stmts failed
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See  for instructions.
lto-wrapper:
/mnt/svn/gcc-trunk/binary-164228-lto-fortran-checking-yes-rtl-df/bin/gcc
returned 1 exit status
collect2: lto-wrapper returned 1 exit status

Tested revisions:
r164228 - crash
r163636 - crash
r161659 - OK
4.5 r163761 - OK


-- 
   Summary: [4.6 Regression] ICE: verify_stmts failed: type mismatch
in address expression with -flto
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: lto
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: zsojka at seznam dot cz
  GCC host triplet: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45667

[Bug fortran/45659] LTO / function pointers with iso_c_binding

[Joost dot VandeVondele at pci dot uzh dot ch]

--- Comment #5 from Joost dot VandeVondele at pci dot uzh dot ch  
2010-09-14 13:07 ---
A slight variation leads to an lto1 ICE:

declaring build eri as: 'extern void (*build_eri)(void);'

leads to:

> gcc -c -flto test_c.c ; gfortran -c -flto test.f90 ; rm all.a ; ar -r all.a 
> test_c.o test.o ; gfortran -fuse-linker-plugin -flto -O3 all.a
ar: creating all.a
lto1: internal compiler error: in lto_varpool_replace_node, at lto-symtab.c:292
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See  for instructions.
lto-wrapper: gfortran returned 1 exit status
/data03/vondele/binutils-2.20.1/build/bin/ld: fatal error: lto-wrapper failed
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45659

[Bug libstdc++/45403] python pretty printer for std::string requires GDB 7.1

[redi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #4 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 12:47 ---
looks sensible, I'll do that


-- 

redi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |redi at gcc dot gnu dot org
   |dot org |
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-14 12:47:11
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45403

[Bug libstdc++/45403] python pretty printer for std::string requires GDB 7.1

[pluto at agmk dot net]

--- Comment #3 from pluto at agmk dot net  2010-09-14 12:04 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> It's nothing to do with unordered_map, it's std::string, and it fails because
> lazy_string was added in GDB 7.1
> 
> we can probably do something like
> 
> if (gdb.VERSION == '7.0'):
> return '"' + self.val['_M_dataplus']['_M_p'].string (length = len)
> + '"'
> return self.val['_M_dataplus']['_M_p'].lazy_string (length = len)

this change isn't perfect because the gdb.VERSION may be decorated
with vendor strings. can we get something like this in lbistdc++:

-return self.val['_M_dataplus']['_M_p'].lazy_string (length = len)
+if hasattr(self.val['_M_dataplus']['_M_p'], "lazy_string"):
+return self.val['_M_dataplus']['_M_p'].lazy_string (length = len)
+return self.val['_M_dataplus']['_M_p'].string (length = len)


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45403

[Bug testsuite/45664] All ifunc tests fail on Solaris 2

[ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE]

--- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE  2010-09-14 
11:40 ---
Subject: Re:  All ifunc tests fail on Solaris 2

> --- Comment #3 from nathan at codesourcery dot com  2010-09-14 10:23 
> ---

> yes, I'm testing a patch that checks the glibc version number -- I'm 
> reluctant 
> to try a more dynamic test as the whole point of these tests is to make sure 
> it 
> actually works, and disabling them in the face of failure seems unwise :)

If it requires support from GNU ld and/or the glibc ld.so, check for
that and disable the support on other platforms.

Rainer


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45664

[Bug c++/45645] pr44972.C fails with error: �__assert_fail� was not declared in this scope

[jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #8 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 11:53 ---
Sorry, I messed up when I tried to remove includes from the testcase.  Thanks
for fixing it.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45645

[Bug middle-end/45663] [4.6 regression] New test failures

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 11:26 ---
Created an attachment (id=21789)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21789&action=view)
gcc46-pr45663.patch

A sign extension insn for the first bar call is scheduled before the a.j++
insns
with the debug_insn for a$j.  While at the call itself the vars already have
expected values, at the first insn on the same line as the first bar call (the
sign extension) a.j is still 13, not 14.

I think we could fix this up by adjusting the testcase (with current trunk it
gives no failures on both x86_64-linux and i686-linux), though haven't tested
other targets.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45663

[Bug c++/45665] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected class 'type', have 'exceptional' (error_mark) in grokdeclarator, at cp/decl.c:8797 on invalid code

[paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com]

--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com  2010-09-14 10:46 
---
Seems simple


-- 

paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |paolo dot carlini at oracle
   |dot org |dot com
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-14 10:46:27
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45665

[Bug target/45407] internal compiler error gcc 4.5.1

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #12 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 10:30 
---
Reasonable workaround.


-- 

ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||WONTFIX


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45407

[Bug target/45363] [4.5 Regression] libgcc fails to configure: cc1: internal compiler error: Illegal instruction: 4

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 10:30 
---
Reasonable workaround.


-- 

ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||WONTFIX


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45363

[Bug target/45277] make bootstrap fails at:checking whether the GNU Fortran compiler is working... no

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #9 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 10:30 
---
Reasonable workaround.


-- 

ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||WONTFIX


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45277

[Bug target/45363] [4.5 Regression] libgcc fails to configure: cc1: internal compiler error: Illegal instruction: 4

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 10:26 
---
Subject: Bug 45363

Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Sep 14 10:26:40 2010
New Revision: 164277

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164277
Log:
PR target/45277
PR target/45363
PR target/45407
* doc/install.texi (sparc*-*-*): New section.
(sparc-sun-solaris2*): Mention MPC alongside GMP and MPFR.

Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/doc/install.texi


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45363

[Bug target/45277] make bootstrap fails at:checking whether the GNU Fortran compiler is working... no

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #8 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 10:26 
---
Subject: Bug 45277

Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Sep 14 10:26:40 2010
New Revision: 164277

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164277
Log:
PR target/45277
PR target/45363
PR target/45407
* doc/install.texi (sparc*-*-*): New section.
(sparc-sun-solaris2*): Mention MPC alongside GMP and MPFR.

Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/doc/install.texi


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45277

[Bug target/45407] internal compiler error gcc 4.5.1

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 10:26 
---
Subject: Bug 45407

Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Sep 14 10:26:40 2010
New Revision: 164277

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164277
Log:
PR target/45277
PR target/45363
PR target/45407
* doc/install.texi (sparc*-*-*): New section.
(sparc-sun-solaris2*): Mention MPC alongside GMP and MPFR.

Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/doc/install.texi


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45407

[Bug testsuite/45664] All ifunc tests fail on Solaris 2

[nathan at codesourcery dot com]

--- Comment #3 from nathan at codesourcery dot com  2010-09-14 10:23 ---
Subject: Re:  All ifunc tests fail on Solaris 2

On 09/14/10 11:19, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 10:19 
> ---
> They also fail on old glibc systems.  Nathan, you need to add some
> dg-effective-target machinery and check availability of runtime support.

yes, I'm testing a patch that checks the glibc version number -- I'm reluctant 
to try a more dynamic test as the whole point of these tests is to make sure it 
actually works, and disabling them in the face of failure seems unwise :)

nathan


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45664

[Bug debug/45660] [4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE in dwarf2out_finish

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |4.5.2


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45660

[Bug tree-optimization/45661] sincos opportunity missed

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 10:21 ---
Confirmed.


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Severity|normal  |enhancement
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-14 10:21:41
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45661

[Bug middle-end/45662] [4.6 regression] New x86 test failures

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 10:20 ---
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 |2010-09-14 10:20:55
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45662

[Bug middle-end/45663] [4.6 regression] New test failures

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 10:20 ---
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 |2010-09-14 10:20:40
   date||
   Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45663

[Bug testsuite/45664] All ifunc tests fail on Solaris 2

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 10:19 ---
They also fail on old glibc systems.  Nathan, you need to add some
dg-effective-target machinery and check availability of runtime support.


-- 

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 |2010-09-14 10:19:38
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45664

[Bug c++/45665] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected class 'type', have 'exceptional' (error_mark) in grokdeclarator, at cp/decl.c:8797 on invalid code

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |4.4.5


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45665

[Bug tree-optimization/45470] [4.6 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed: BB 2 can not throw but has an EH edge with -ftree-vectorize -fnon-call-exceptions

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 10:17 
---
Fixed.


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45470

[Bug middle-end/45567] [4.5/4.6 Regression] __builtin_popcountl ICEs with -ftree-ter

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 10:14 ---
Fixed.


-- 

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=45567

[Bug middle-end/45567] [4.5/4.6 Regression] __builtin_popcountl ICEs with -ftree-ter

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 10:12 ---
Subject: Bug 45567

Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 14 10:12:21 2010
New Revision: 164275

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164275
Log:
PR middle-end/45567
* builtins.c (expand_builtin_interclass_mathfn, expand_builtin_cexpi,
expand_builtin_powi): Remove subtarget argument, pass NULL_RTX instead.
(expand_builtin): Adjust caller.
(expand_builtin_unop): Only use subtarget if it has the right mode.

* gcc.dg/pr45567.c: New test.

Added:
branches/gcc-4_5-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr45567.c
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_5-branch/gcc/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_5-branch/gcc/builtins.c
branches/gcc-4_5-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45567

[Bug middle-end/45567] [4.5/4.6 Regression] __builtin_popcountl ICEs with -ftree-ter

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 10:11 ---
Subject: Bug 45567

Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 14 10:11:11 2010
New Revision: 164274

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164274
Log:
PR middle-end/45567
* builtins.c (expand_builtin_interclass_mathfn, expand_builtin_cexpi,
expand_builtin_powi): Remove subtarget argument, pass NULL_RTX instead.
(expand_builtin): Adjust caller.
(expand_builtin_unop): Only use subtarget if it has the right mode.

* gcc.dg/pr45567.c: New test.

Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr45567.c
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/builtins.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45567

[Bug tree-optimization/45661] sincos opportunity missed

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 09:59 ---
Not sure how far loop fusion is currently in graphite...


-- 

jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||spop at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45661

[Bug debug/45660] [4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE in dwarf2out_finish

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 09:51 ---
Fixed.


-- 

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=45660

[Bug debug/45660] [4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE in dwarf2out_finish

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 09:49 ---
Subject: Bug 45660

Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 14 09:49:13 2010
New Revision: 164272

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164272
Log:
PR debug/45660
* dwarf2out.c (gen_decl_die): Call gen_type_die for origin before
gen_type_die for function/method return type.

* g++.dg/debug/pr45660.C: New test.

Added:
branches/gcc-4_5-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/debug/pr45660.C
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_5-branch/gcc/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_5-branch/gcc/dwarf2out.c
branches/gcc-4_5-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45660

[Bug debug/45660] [4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE in dwarf2out_finish

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 09:48 ---
Subject: Bug 45660

Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 14 09:48:04 2010
New Revision: 164271

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164271
Log:
PR debug/45660
* dwarf2out.c (gen_decl_die): Call gen_type_die for origin before
gen_type_die for function/method return type.

* g++.dg/debug/pr45660.C: New test.

Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/debug/pr45660.C
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/dwarf2out.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45660

[Bug preprocessor/45362] Dangling reference about saved cpp_macro for push/pop macro

[manu at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #2 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 09:32 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/#need


-- 

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=45362

[Bug tree-optimization/45470] [4.6 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed: BB 2 can not throw but has an EH edge with -ftree-vectorize -fnon-call-exceptions

[irar at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #10 from irar at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 09:21 ---
Subject: Bug 45470

Author: irar
Date: Tue Sep 14 09:21:15 2010
New Revision: 164270

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164270
Log:

PR tree-optimization/45470
* tree-vect-data-refs.c (vect_analyze_data_refs): Fail if a statement
can throw an exception.
* tree-vect-stmts.c (vectorizable_call): Likewise.


Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/vect/pr45470-a.cc
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/vect/pr45470-b.cc
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c
trunk/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45470

[Bug target/18145] Do not emit __do_copy_data or __do_clear_bss if .data or .bss is empty.

[abnikant dot singh at atmel dot com]

--- Comment #3 from abnikant dot singh at atmel dot com  2010-09-14 08:17 
---
Created an attachment (id=21788)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21788&action=view)
attached patch solves this problem


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18145

[Bug fortran/45277] make bootstrap fails at:checking whether the GNU Fortran compiler is working... no

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 

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|WAITING |ASSIGNED
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-14 08:04:53
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45277

[Bug target/45363] [4.5 Regression] libgcc fails to configure: cc1: internal compiler error: Illegal instruction: 4

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 

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|WAITING |ASSIGNED
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-14 08:03:48
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45363

[Bug c/45407] internal compiler error gcc 4.5.1

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 

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|WAITING |ASSIGNED
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-14 08:03:21
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45407

[Bug target/42070] FAIL: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation, -O3 -g -fprofile-use

[bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #4 from bonzini at gnu dot org  2010-09-14 07:41 ---
Subject: Bug 42070

Author: bonzini
Date: Tue Sep 14 07:40:44 2010
New Revision: 164269

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164269
Log:
2010-09-10  Jack Howarth 

PR target/42070
* gcc/testsuite/lib/profopt.exp: Prune warnings on execname2 compile.
* gcc/testsuite/lib/prune.exp: Prune "can't add line info" warnings.


Modified:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/lib/profopt.exp
trunk/gcc/testsuite/lib/prune.exp


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42070

[Bug target/44749] mep-elf fails to build

[dj at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #3 from dj at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-14 07:27 ---
Subject: Bug 44749

Author: dj
Date: Tue Sep 14 07:26:54 2010
New Revision: 164268

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164268
Log:
PR target/44749
* config/mep/mep-protos.h (mep_save_register_info,
mep_reinit_regs, mep_init_regs): Declare.

* config/mep/mep.c: Move all target definitions to the end of the
file to avoid the need for duplicate declarations.
(mep_save_register_info, mep_reinit_regs, mep_init_regs): New.
(mep_reorg_erepeat): Remove unused variables.
(mep_expand_builtin): Likewise.

* config/mep/mep-pragma.c: Don't include rtl.h.
(INVALID_REGNUM): New.
(mep_pragma_coprocessor_which): Call mep-specific rtl-layer bridge
functions.
(mep_pragma_coprocessor_subclass): Rename "class" to "rclass".
Avoid enum/integer math.

Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/config/mep/mep-pragma.c
trunk/gcc/config/mep/mep-protos.h
trunk/gcc/config/mep/mep.c


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44749

[Bug tree-optimization/18065] usual arithmetic conversion not applying correctly

[abnikant dot singh at atmel dot com]

--- Comment #35 from abnikant dot singh at atmel dot com  2010-09-14 07:13 
---
In the head c-common.c is placed in gcc/c-family/c-common.c


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18065

[Bug tree-optimization/18065] usual arithmetic conversion not applying correctly

[abnikant dot singh at atmel dot com]

--- Comment #34 from abnikant dot singh at atmel dot com  2010-09-14 07:06 
---
Yeah, this is happening because of the type promotion in gcc/c-common.c in the
function c_promoting_integer_type_p. See this:

/* Nonzero if the type T promotes to int.  This is (nearly) the
   integral promotions defined in ISO C99 6.3.1.1/2.  */

bool
c_promoting_integer_type_p (const_tree t)
{
  switch (TREE_CODE (t))
{
case INTEGER_TYPE:
  return (TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (t) == char_type_node
  || TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (t) == signed_char_type_node
  || TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (t) == unsigned_char_type_node
  || TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (t) == short_integer_type_node
  || TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (t) == short_unsigned_type_node
  || TYPE_PRECISION (t) < TYPE_PRECISION (integer_type_node));

case ENUMERAL_TYPE:
  /* ??? Technically all enumerations not larger than an int
 promote to an int.  But this is used along code paths
 that only want to notice a size change.  */
  return TYPE_PRECISION (t) < TYPE_PRECISION (integer_type_node);

case BOOLEAN_TYPE:
  return 1;

default:
  return 0;
}
}

So by commenting the case INTEGER_TYPE, we will get the call to _divmodqi4, but
I don't think this is the right thing to do.


-- 

abnikant dot singh at atmel dot com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||abnikant dot singh at atmel
   ||dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18065