[Bug c++/53650] [4.7/4.8 Regression] large array causes huge memory use
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53650 Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 06:18:41 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) It is caused by revision 180944: Specifically, the Don't use build_aggr_init for aggregate initialization of arrays. part.
[Bug c++/53646] Surprising effects of cxx11 vs cxx98 ABI compatibility
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53646 --- Comment #17 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 06:32:19 UTC --- I don't see the general problem. C++98 and C++11 code should be ABI-compatible in general; the incompatibility in this case is a bug.
[Bug c++/53658] internal compiler error -- segmentation fault
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53658 --- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf markus at trippelsdorf dot de 2012-06-14 07:04:54 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) Reduced: % cat test.ii struct A; template typename using Foo = const A; template typename Item Foo Item; ^^ If one adds bar() to the last line above, then clang++ and Intel's icpc compile it without problems, while gcc still crashes.
[Bug fortran/53667] New: Cray pointer: Wrong result with optimizations
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53667
Bug #: 53667
Summary: Cray pointer: Wrong result with optimizations
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: bur...@gcc.gnu.org
Cf. thread at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2012-06/msg00077.html
For the program at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2012-06/txt4.txt, GCC
generates (original dump) the code:
object_holder_init (object_holder);
set_vals (object_holder);
print_vals (object_holder);
When using -O2, the latter becomes (optimized dump):
object_holder_init (object_holder);
print_vals (object_holder);
object_holder ={v} {CLOBBER};
Both set_vals and print_vals contains code of the form:
subroutine set_vals(oh)
implicit none
integer*8, intent(inout):: oh
integer*8 :: obj(3)
pointer(pobj, obj)
pobj = oh
which translates into:
set_vals (integer(kind=8) restrict oh)
{
integer(kind=8) pobj;
integer(kind=8) obj[3] [value-expr: *(integer(kind=8)[3] *) pobj];
pobj = *oh;
If one marks print_val's dummy argument oh as target (and, hence, removes
the restrict), GCC inlines set_val and the result is correct.
The program also works (at any optimization level) with
-fno-inline-small-functions. Or if all functions are inlined via
-fwhole-program.
It also works if one has a Cray-pointer dummy argument at:
subroutine print_vals(pobj)
integer*8 :: obj(3)
pointer(pobj, obj)
...
call free(pobj)
* * *
Related issue: Currently, gfortran calls
*oh = _gfortran_malloc (C.1885);
...
_gfortran_free ((integer(kind=8) *) oh);
(Cf. iresolve.c.) If one looks into libgfortran/intrinsics/malloc.c, it uses
the trivial implementation. But then a simple BUILT_IN_MALLOC / BUILT_IN_FREE
would do!
[Bug c++/53658] internal compiler error -- segmentation fault
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53658 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2012-06-14 CC||dodji at gcc dot gnu.org, ||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 07:44:59 UTC --- Seems this ICEs since template alias support has been checked in: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181118 Before that it has been rejected.
[Bug bootstrap/50229] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Can't cross compile for i686-apple-darwin10 from x86_64-redhat_linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50229 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #12 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:09:31 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug target/49826] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Symbols are not decorated with attribute stdcall and -mrtd
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49826 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:10:32 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug c++/53524] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bogus and unsuppressible enum comparison warning
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53524 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #24 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:10:57 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug libstdc++/53218] [4.7 regression] cmake segfaults on sparcv9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53218 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:12:23 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug ada/51483] [4.7/4.8 regression] cstand.adb:Register_Float_Type makes invalid assumptions about FP representation
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51483 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #12 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:13:02 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug c++/52637] [4.7 regression] ICE producing debug info for c++11 code using local class as template argument
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52637 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:14:18 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug middle-end/51939] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE: in compute_affine_dependence, at tree-data-ref.c:4103 with -fcheck-data-deps
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51939 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:15:11 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug lto/53604] ld reports errors using lto after upgrading from gcc-4.6.2 to gcc-4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53604 --- Comment #10 from Paul Scruby paul.scruby at ghco dot co.uk 2012-06-14 08:16:28 UTC --- I released that I needed to add Yuri's patch to gcc-4.7.1.RC-20120606 as it had not made it into the trunk. However, this still made no difference and I still had the same linking problem. I'll try to hack together a standalone example today that I can attach to the report to see if someone can reproduce it.
[Bug bootstrap/52947] [4.7/4.8 Regression] bootstrap fails due to wrong include search path composition
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52947 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:16:20 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug debug/48150] [4.7/4.8 Regression] gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48150 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #10 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:17:30 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug lto/50008] [4.7/4.8 Regression] type mismatch in array reference, verify_gimple failed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50008 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:18:23 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug c++/53494] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE with invalid initializer list
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53494 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #23 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:18:38 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug libgcj/50421] [4.7/4.8 Regression] GC Warning: Out of Memory! Returning NIL!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50421 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:19:29 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug testsuite/51097] [4.7/4.8 Regression] a lot of FAIL: gcc.dg/vect on i686 avx build 181167 to 181177
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51097 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:20:20 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug tree-optimization/52631] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] VN does not use simplified expression for lookup
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52631 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #8 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:21:25 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug rtl-optimization/49847] [4.7/4.8 Regression] NULL deref in fold_rtx (prev_insn_cc0 == NULL)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49847 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #19 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:21:52 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug middle-end/21953] [4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Many tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1 tests fail on Tru64 UNIX V5.1B
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21953 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #18 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:22:57 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug tree-optimization/49498] [4.7/4.8 Regression]: gcc.dg/uninit-pred-8_b.c bogus warning line 20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49498 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #15 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:24:19 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug middle-end/49319] [4.7/4.8 regression] g++.dg/abi/thunk5.C FAILs on Tru64 UNIX
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49319 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:26:38 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug target/50678] [4.7/4.8 Regression] FAIL: c52104y on x86_64-apple-darwin10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50678 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #62 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:27:29 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug middle-end/52285] [4.7/4.8 Regression] libgcrypt _gcry_burn_stack slowdown
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52285 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #8 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:29:16 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug c++/51214] [4.7 Regression] [C++11] name lookup issue with c++11 enums
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51214 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:30:23 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug middle-end/53204] [4.7 regression] ICE during final link of large codebase with -O2 -finline-functions -flto, adding -flto-partition=none fixes the problem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53204 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:31:19 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug other/50925] [4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression][avr] ICE at spill_failure, at reload1.c:2118
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50925 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #23 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:31:44 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug middle-end/52372] [4.7/4.8 regression] gcc.target/mips/mips16-attributes{,-4}.c SEGV in dwf_regno
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52372 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:34:43 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug tree-optimization/52868] [4.7/4.8 Regression] 4.6 is faster on Atom
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52868 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:35:35 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug fortran/53667] Cray pointer: Wrong result with optimizations
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53667 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:36:33 UTC --- Looks like undefined code to me. The storage is not large enough.
[Bug c++/53666] -std=c++0x cause cc1plus to eat up RAM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53666 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:37:34 UTC --- Sounds similar to PR53650. Closing as dup as you do not give a testcase making this report more-or-less useless. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 53650 ***
[Bug c++/53650] [4.7/4.8 Regression] large array causes huge memory use
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53650 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||slbyan at gmail dot com --- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:37:34 UTC --- *** Bug 53666 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug target/53621] [SH] Frame pointers not generated with -fno-omit-frame-pointer on GCC 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53621 --- Comment #19 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:38:37 UTC --- Author: chrbr Date: Thu Jun 14 08:38:22 2012 New Revision: 188598 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188598 Log: PR target/53621 * config/sh/sh.c (sh_option_override): Don't force flag_omit_frame_pointer and maccumulate_outgoing_args. * config/sh/sh.opt (maccumulate-outgoing-args): Init as Var. * gcc.dg/stack-usage-1.c: Force -fomit-frame-pointer on SH. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/config/sh/sh.c trunk/gcc/config/sh/sh.opt trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/stack-usage-1.c
[Bug target/43052] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Inline memcmp is *much* slower than glibc's, no longer expanded inline
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43052 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #21 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:36:17 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug rtl-optimization/50557] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Register pressure increase after reassociation (x86, 32 bits)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50557 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #14 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:39:46 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug tree-optimization/53663] 4.7 inconsistent inline handling of bool within union
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53663 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2012-06-14 Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:40:43 UTC --- The testcase does not compile for me, it has errors: /space/rguenther/install/gcc-4.7.0/bin/gcc t.c -Wall -Wextra -o t -O1 t.c:4:11: error: expected ':', ',', ';', '}' or '__attribute__' before '=' token t.c: In function 'main': t.c:15:11: error: invalid initializer t.c:16:11: error: invalid initializer t.c:17:11: error: invalid initializer t.c:19:6: error: 'union u' has no member named 'i' t.c:22:6: error: 'union u' has no member named 'b' t.c:24:11: error: 'union u' has no member named 'b' t.c:26:14: error: 'union u' has no member named 'b' t.c:27:1: warning: control reaches end of non-void function [-Wreturn-type]
[Bug debug/51570] [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr45003-[23].c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51570 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #9 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:41:26 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug rtl-optimization/53589] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE in maybe_record_trace_start with asm goto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53589 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:42:18 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug target/52630] [4.7 regression] ICE when compiling ppl-0.12 testsuite
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52630 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:42:44 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug target/53621] [SH] Frame pointers not generated with -fno-omit-frame-pointer on GCC 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53621 --- Comment #20 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:43:26 UTC --- Author: chrbr Date: Thu Jun 14 08:43:20 2012 New Revision: 188599 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188599 Log: PR target/53621 * config/sh/sh.c (sh_option_override): Don't force flag_omit_frame_pointer and maccumulate_outgoing_args. * config/sh/sh.opt (maccumulate-outgoing-args): Init as Var. * gcc.dg/stack-usage-1.c: Force -fomit-frame-pointer on SH. Modified: branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/config/sh/sh.c branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/config/sh/sh.opt branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/stack-usage-1.c
[Bug java/50045] [4.7/4.8 regression] ICE in gcc/java/lang.c:427 with -fdump-tree-all
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50045 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:43:25 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2012-06-14 CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:44:49 UTC --- Can you list the known broken revisions? I'm not sure what to best do, but eventually fixing it even when that breaks the ABI on release branches might be the best thing after all ...
[Bug c++/52841] [4.7 Regression] error: type 'Solvable' is not a base type for type 'Resolvable'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52841 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #18 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:44:41 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug c++/53039] [4.7/4.8 Regression] including functional breaks std::is_convertible with template-pack expansion
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53039 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #13 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:47:08 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug ada/52123] [4.7/4.8 Regression] gcc bootstrap with ada fails on mingw target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52123 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:48:19 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug fortran/53379] [4.7/4.8 Regression] No backtrace generated for array bounds violation
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53379 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #9 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:48:45 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug rtl-optimization/52250] [4.7 Regression] ICE: in sel_remove_bb, at sel-sched-ir.c:5213 with -fsel-sched-pipelining -fsel-sched-pipelining-outer-loops -fselective-scheduling2 and other flags
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52250 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #11 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:49:35 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug tree-optimization/45685] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] missed conditional move opportunity in loop
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45685 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.7.1 |4.7.2 --- Comment #22 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:50:56 UTC --- GCC 4.7.1 is being released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug target/53621] [SH] Frame pointers not generated with -fno-omit-frame-pointer on GCC 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53621 --- Comment #21 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:55:41 UTC --- Author: chrbr Date: Thu Jun 14 08:55:36 2012 New Revision: 188601 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188601 Log: PR target/53621 * config/sh/sh.c (sh_option_override): Don't force flag_omit_frame_pointer and maccumulate_outgoing_args. * config/sh/sh.opt (maccumulate-outgoing-args): Init as Var. * gcc.dg/stack-usage-1.c: Force -fomit-frame-pointer on SH. Modified: branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/config/sh/sh.c branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/config/sh/sh.opt branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/stack-usage-1.c
[Bug target/53621] [SH] Frame pointers not generated with -fno-omit-frame-pointer on GCC 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53621 chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Version|4.7.0 |4.8.0 Resolution||FIXED Known to fail||4.6.3 --- Comment #22 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 08:57:48 UTC --- fixed in 4.6, 4.7, 4.8
[Bug tree-optimization/53663] 4.7 inconsistent inline handling of bool within union
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53663
--- Comment #3 from brendan.jones.it at gmail dot com 2012-06-14 09:00:37 UTC
---
Sorry - wrong file
/* -*- Mode: C ; c-basic-offset: 4 -*- */
/* gcc test.c -Wall -Wextra -o test -O1 ./test ; echo $?
should print 0, prints 10
gcc known to be affected:
Target: x86_64-redhat-linux
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man
--infodir=/usr/share/info --with-bugurl=http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla
--enable-bootstrap --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix
--enable-checking=release --disable-build-with-cxx
--disable-build-poststage1-with-cxx --with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit
--disable-libunwind-exceptions --enable-gnu-unique-object
--enable-linker-build-id --with-linker-hash-style=gnu
--enable-languages=c,c++,objc,obj-c++,java,fortran,ada,go,lto --enable-plugin
--enable-initfini-array --enable-java-awt=gtk --disable-dssi
--with-java-home=/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.5.0-gcj-1.5.0.0/jre
--enable-libgcj-multifile --enable-java-maintainer-mode
--with-ecj-jar=/usr/share/java/eclipse-ecj.jar --disable-libjava-multilib
--with-ppl --with-cloog --with-tune=generic --with-arch_32=i686
--build=x86_64-redhat-linux
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.7.0 20120507 (Red Hat 4.7.0-5) (GCC)
*/
union u
{
int i;
_Bool b;
};
void f(union u * vp, union u v)
{
*vp = v;
}
int main()
{
union u v;
union u v1;
union u v2;
v.i = 10;
f(v1, v);
v.b = 0;
f(v2, v);
return v2.b;
}
[Bug middle-end/53667] Cray pointer: Wrong result with optimizations
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53667 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org Component|fortran |middle-end Resolution|INVALID | --- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 09:07:25 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) Looks like undefined code to me. The storage is not large enough. I disagree: oh is 64 bits which should be enough to store a pointer - as is the Cray pointer pobj. And obj, the Cray pointee, is with 3*8 bytes large enough to store three 8-byte values. My guess had been that the ME should be able to see that the assignments modify object_holder - thus I assigned the PR to the middle-end. Note: As Cray pointers are a (Fortran 77) vendor extension, there is no specification. Thus, it is impossible to tell whether the code is valid or not. Additionally, TARGET (which removes the restrict) does not exist in Fortran 77. The program successfully runs with ifort, openf95, pathf95, but it fails with PGI and Cray at the print line (illegal instruction) - even without optimization. Thus, if it is not trivially fixable, one can really consider to close it as WONTFIX. [Or to apply in the Fortran FE as mitigating bugfix something like http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2012-06/msg00082.html, which marks the integer variables as TARGET in the most common cases. One should probably additionally handle oh = malloc(...) and free(oh).] The same issue also occurs with -O1 if one replaces the main program by manually inlining set_vals: integer*8 :: object_holder integer*8 :: obj(3) pointer(pobj, obj) call object_holder_init(object_holder) pobj = object_holder obj(1) = 900 obj(2) = 800 obj(3) = 700 call print_vals(object_holder)
[Bug fortran/53668] New: Do some Cray-pointer fixes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53668 Bug #: 53668 Summary: Do some Cray-pointer fixes Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: diagnostic, missed-optimization Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org ReportedBy: bur...@gcc.gnu.org Based on PR 53667. a) Currently, FREE() and MALLOC() call via iresolve.c the libgfortran/intrinsic/malloc.c's functions. One should call the builtins instead - the library doesn't do anything different. b) Passing an integer to a Cray pointer dummy should print a warning - both when the explicit interface is known as well as via gsym. Cray prints an error: 'The type of the actual argument, INTEGER, does not match Cray pointer, the type of the dummy argument.' But probably printing a warning is better - as the tricks in PR 53667 show: Better to have an integer to a Cray pointer dummy than an integer dummy with an address, which is only later converted to a Cray pointer. ! Compile with: -fcray-pointer use iso_c_binding implicit none integer(c_intptr_t) :: intptr call f(intptr) end !contains subroutine f(p) pointer (p, i) integer :: i end subroutine f !end
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||4.7.0, 4.7.1, 4.8.0 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 09:15:02 UTC --- I'm not sure if G++ uses an invisible register for it on the 4,7 branch, but the move-ctor is definitely non-trivial on the 4.7 branch and trunk. It's trivial on the 4.6 branch.
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 09:17:51 UTC --- it was also non-trivial in 4.5.0, but not 4.5.1+
[Bug other/32998] -frecord-gcc-switches issues
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32998 philomath philomath868 at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||philomath868 at gmail dot ||com --- Comment #16 from philomath philomath868 at gmail dot com 2012-06-14 09:11:25 UTC --- The wording in the manual is incorrect. this option does not record the command line that was used to invoke the compiler, but the options that where in affect while compiling. two simple examples: ~ $ gcc -fno-omit-frame-pointer -o tst tst.c -frecord-gcc-switches -fomit-frame-pointer ~ $ objdump -s --section=.GCC.command.line tst tst: file format elf64-x86-64 Contents of section .GCC.command.line: 7473742e 63002d6d 74756e65 3d67656e tst.c.-mtune=gen 0010 65726963 002d6d61 7263683d 7838362d eric.-march=x86- 0020 3634002d 7374643d 63393900 2d667265 64.-std=c99.-fre 0030 636f7264 2d676363 2d737769 74636865 cord-gcc-switche 0040 73002d66 6f6d6974 2d667261 6d652d70 s.-fomit-frame-p 0050 6f696e74 657200 ointer. ~ $ gcc -o tst tst.c -march=native -frecord-gcc-switches ~ $ objdump -s --section=.GCC.command.line tst tst: file format elf64-x86-64 Contents of section .GCC.command.line: 7473742e 63002d6d 61726368 3d636f72 tst.c.-march=cor 0010 65693700 2d6d6378 3136002d 6d736 --- Comment #17 from philomath philomath868 at gmail dot com 2012-06-14 09:20:56 UTC --- Sorry, the previous comment was interrupted while posting. here is it again. The wording in the manual is incorrect. this option does not record the command line that was used to invoke the compiler, but the options that where in affect while compiling. two simple examples: ~ $ gcc -fno-omit-frame-pointer -o tst tst.c -frecord-gcc-switches -fomit-frame-pointer ~ $ objdump -s --section=.GCC.command.line tst tst: file format elf64-x86-64 Contents of section .GCC.command.line: 7473742e 63002d6d 74756e65 3d67656e tst.c.-mtune=gen 0010 65726963 002d6d61 7263683d 7838362d eric.-march=x86- 0020 3634002d 7374643d 63393900 2d667265 64.-std=c99.-fre 0030 636f7264 2d676363 2d737769 74636865 cord-gcc-switche 0040 73002d66 6f6d6974 2d667261 6d652d70 s.-fomit-frame-p 0050 6f696e74 657200 ointer. ~ $ gcc -o tst tst.c -march=native -frecord-gcc-switches ~ $ objdump -s --section=.GCC.command.line tst tst: file format elf64-x86-64 Contents of section .GCC.command.line: 7473742e 63002d6d 61726368 3d636f72 tst.c.-march=cor 0010 65693700 2d6d6378 3136002d 6d736168 ei7.-mcx16.-msah 0020 66002d6d 6e6f2d6d 6f766265 002d6d6e f.-mno-movbe.-mn 0030 6f2d6165 73002d6d 6e6f2d70 636c6d75 o-aes.-mno-pclmu 0040 6c002d6d 706f7063 6e74002d 6d6e6f2d l.-mpopcnt.-mno- 0050 61626d00 2d6d6e6f 2d6c7770 002d6d6e abm.-mno-lwp.-mn 0060 6f2d666d 61002d6d 6e6f2d66 6d613400 o-fma.-mno-fma4. 0070 2d6d6e6f 2d786f70 002d6d6e 6f2d626d -mno-xop.-mno-bm 0080 69002d6d 6e6f2d62 6d693200 2d6d6e6f i.-mno-bmi2.-mno 0090 2d74626d 002d6d6e 6f2d6176 78002d6d -tbm.-mno-avx.-m 00a0 6e6f2d61 76783200 2d6d7373 65342e32 no-avx2.-msse4.2 00b0 002d6d73 7365342e 31002d6d 6e6f2d6c .-msse4.1.-mno-l 00c0 7a636e74 002d2d70 6172616d 206c312d zcnt.--param l1- 00d0 63616368 652d7369 7a653d33 32002d2d cache-size=32.-- 00e0 70617261 6d206c31 2d636163 68652d6c param l1-cache-l 00f0 696e652d 73697a65 3d363400 2d2d7061 ine-size=64.--pa 0100 72616d20 6c322d63 61636865 2d73697a ram l2-cache-siz 0110 653d3330 3732002d 6d74756e 653d636f e=3072.-mtune=co 0120 72656937 002d7374 643d6339 39002d66 rei7.-std=c99.-f 0130 7265636f 72642d67 63632d73 77697463 record-gcc-switc 0140 68657300 hes.
[Bug target/52941] SH Target: Add support for movco.l / movli.l atomics on SH4A
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941 --- Comment #12 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2012-06-14 09:26:33 UTC --- Probably, you should update libjava/sysdep/sh/locks.h as well.
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression][C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.5.1, 4.6.0 Target Milestone|--- |4.7.2 Summary|[C++11] pair(pair) move |[4.7/4.8 Regression][C++11] |constructor is non-trivial |pair(pair) move ||constructor is non-trivial Known to fail||4.5.0 --- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 09:39:58 UTC --- Thanks.
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.5.1, 4.6.0
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.2
Summary|[C++11] pair(pair) move |[4.7/4.8 Regression][C++11]
|constructor is non-trivial |pair(pair) move
||constructor is non-trivial
Known to fail||4.5.0
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|4.5.1, 4.6.0|
Target Milestone|4.7.2 |---
Summary|[4.7/4.8 Regression][C++11] |[C++11] pair(pair) move
|pair(pair) move |constructor is non-trivial
|constructor is non-trivial |
Known to fail|4.5.0 |
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14
09:39:58 UTC ---
Thanks.
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-06-14
09:40:44 UTC ---
The issue is related to LWG2005, and can be summarized with the following
testcase, which should not trigger the static_assert.
In short, if we want std::pair' move constructor defaulted, we have to use
std::is_constructible, not std::is_convertible, to constrain container::insert.
If people agree with my assessment - I don't see what else we could possibly do
on the library side - I can try again moving the latter to use
std::is_constructible, should mostly work.
/
#include type_traits
#include utility
struct move_only
{
move_only(const move_only) = delete;
move_only(move_only) = default;
};
templatetypename _T1, typename _T2
struct pair
{
pair(pair) = default;
templateclass _U1, class _U2
pair(pair_U1, _U2 __p)
: first(std::forward_U1(__p.first)),
second(std::forward_U2(__p.second)) { }
_T1 first;
_T2 second;
};
typedef pairmove_only, move_only Pair;
typedef pairconst move_only, move_only CPair;
static_assert(std::is_convertiblePair, CPair::value, Error);
//static_assert(std::is_constructibleCPair, Pair::value, Error);
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-06-14 09:43:04 UTC --- Let's add Jason in CC for this one too, just in case he can see something in the front-end area too.
[Bug c++/53039] [4.7/4.8 Regression] including functional breaks std::is_convertible with template-pack expansion
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53039 --- Comment #14 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-06-14 10:03:07 UTC --- Thus, is it possible that a different approach at fixing PR46394, among those already envisaged, could work for this one? Maybe Dodji can look again into it? He has already analyzed in detail the involved code, AFAICS.
[Bug rtl-optimization/53652] *andn* isn't used for vectorization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53652
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14
10:23:31 UTC ---
Such a def_insn_and_split isn't going to work well, because the hw supported
alternative (xor with all ones vector) needs the vector constant loaded into
memory, which is much preferrable to be done before loop, and nothing post
combine is going to move it before the loop again.
The combiner can already look at the REG_EQUAL note:
(insn 25 21 27 3 (set (reg:V4DI 90 [ vect_var_.18 ])
(xor:V4DI (mem:V4DI (plus:DI (reg:DI 78 [ ivtmp.28 ])
(symbol_ref:DI (c) var_decl 0x7f09fb364280 c)) [2
MEM[symbol: c, index: ivtmp.28_16, offset: 0B]+0 S32 A256])
(reg:V4DI 94))) v2.c:10 1587 {*xorv4di3}
(expr_list:REG_EQUAL (not:V4DI (mem:V4DI (plus:DI (symbol_ref:DI (c)
var_decl 0x7f09fb364280 c)
(reg:DI 78 [ ivtmp.28 ])) [2 MEM[symbol: c, index:
ivtmp.28_16, offset: 0B]+0 S32 A256]))
(nil)))
(insn 27 25 28 3 (set (reg:V4DI 93 [ vect_var_.19 ])
(and:V4DI (reg:V4DI 90 [ vect_var_.18 ])
(mem:V4DI (plus:DI (reg:DI 78 [ ivtmp.28 ])
(symbol_ref:DI (b) var_decl 0x7f09fb3641e0 b)) [2
MEM[symbol: b, index: ivtmp.28_16, offset: 0B]+0 S32 A256]))) v2.c:10 1585
{*andv4di3}
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:V4DI 90 [ vect_var_.18 ])
(nil)))
but doesn't use that. The additional complication here is that both the XOR
(and REG_EQUAL not note) and the other AND operand are both MEMs, while andn on
x86_64/i?86 only supports one of the operands as MEM. The combiner would then
need to split that into a load followed by andn (in place of the 3 insns (one
load before the loop, xor and and).
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.5.1, 4.6.1 Target Milestone|--- |4.7.2 Summary|[C++11] pair(pair) move |[4.7/4.8 Regression] |constructor is non-trivial |[C++11] pair(pair) move ||constructor is non-trivial Known to fail||4.5.0
[Bug rtl-optimization/53669] New: suboptimal small switch - 3-way jump with only 1 comparison
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53669
Bug #: 53669
Summary: suboptimal small switch - 3-way jump with only 1
comparison
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: vermaelen.wou...@gmail.com
Hi,
The program below generates sub-optimal code for small (+dense) switch
statements (small enough so that they are not implemented via jump-tables). The
function foo() is the smallest example I could come up with that shows the
problem. The function bar() shows the same problem in a slightly more realistic
context.
The function foo() also shows a missed opportunity for jump-threading(?),
should I file a separate bug report for this?
Tested on linux x86_64 with SVN revision thrunk@188550. Below I show the code
generated with -Os, but -O2 and -O3 show the same missed optimization.
Wouter
---8-8-888---
void f0();
void f1();
void f2();
void f3();
// Toy example to demonstrate the problem
void foo(int x) {
switch (x) {
case 0: f0(); break;
case 1: f1(); break;
default: f2(); break;
}
}
// This is the code generated by 'g++-thrunk@188550 -Os'
// _Z3fooi: testl %edi, %edi -- 1
// je .L5
// decl%edi-- 2 comparisons
// jne .L7
// jmp .L6 -- why not immediately jump to _Z2f1v?
// .L5: jmp _Z2f0v
// .L6: jmp _Z2f1v
// .L7: jmp _Z2f2v
// This generates optimal(?) code
void my_foo(int x) {
asm goto (
cmpl $1,%[x]; // only 1 comparison
je %l[l1];
jb %l[l0];
:: [x] r (x)
:: l0, l1
);
l2:f2(); return;
l0:f0(); return;
l1:f1(); return;
}
// Bigger example in a slightly more realistic context:
// e.g. a main loop that handles 4 elements per iteration and a switch
// like this after that loop to handle the remaining elements.
void bar(int x) {
switch (x 3) {
case 0: f0(); break;
case 1: f1(); break;
case 2: f2(); break;
case 3: f3(); break;
}
}
// This is the code generated by 'g++-thrunk@188550 -Os'
// _Z3bari: andl$3, %edi
// cmpl$2, %edi-- 1
// je .L11
// cmpl$3, %edi-- 2
// je .L12
// decl%edi-- 3 comparisons
// je .L10
// jmp _Z2f0v
// .L10:jmp _Z2f1v
// .L11:jmp _Z2f2v
// .L12:jmp _Z2f3v
// This generates optimal(?) code
void my_bar(int x) {
asm goto (
andl $3, %[x]; // implicit comparison with 0
je %l[l0];
cmpl $2, %[x]; // 1 explicit comparison
je %l[l2];
jb %l[l1];
:: [x] r (x)
:: l0, l1, l2
);
l3:f3(); return;
l0:f0(); return;
l1:f1(); return;
l2:f2(); return;
}
[Bug rtl-optimization/53669] suboptimal small switch - 3-way jump with only 1 comparison
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53669 Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se --- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2012-06-14 11:13:32 UTC --- Related to PR52802?
[Bug c++/51033] generic vector subscript and shuffle support was not added to C++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51033
--- Comment #26 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-06-14 11:22:26 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #23)
(In reply to comment #21)
What does it mean exercise the backend a lot? Do you mean it takes a lot
of
time?
I think so.
I haven't looked at the tests, but I think it is not a problem to run
compile-only tests with both gcc and g++.
compile-time tests are not always sufficient.
The __builtin_shuffle tests are spread in:
gcc.dg{,/torture}
gcc.target/{i386,powerpc}
gcc.c-torture/{compile,execute}
I assume the tests in gcc.dg can move to c-c++-common. The target tests should
stay in target. Not sure about gcc.c-torture.
But one interesting thing to test is if the front-end passes the arguments as
constants and thus the backend can use specialized code instead of the slow
generic one. And this kind of test seems necessarily target-specific. Bah, I
guess I shouldn't ask for too much and moving the gcc.dg tests would be
enough.
Patch posted for comments here :
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-06/msg00903.html
[Bug lto/53604] ld reports errors using lto after upgrading from gcc-4.6.2 to gcc-4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53604 --- Comment #11 from Paul Scruby paul.scruby at ghco dot co.uk 2012-06-14 11:46:32 UTC --- I've written half a dozen test harnesses this morning to tried to recreate this bug unsuccessfully. My team writes very low-latency code so they do quite a lot of 'abusive' (but legal) partial specialization tricks force some optimizations and branch predications on certain paths. I suspect that some of this nastiness is creating bloat which is not playing ball in LTO land. Unfortunately, these lto bugs are really hard to recreate and I have to finish some work on other projects, but I will try to pick this up and get implement this test harness when I get a chance. For the time being we'll stick with gcc-4.6.2 which is working really nicely for us... Thanks for all your help, Paul
[Bug c++/53455] boost::python segfault
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53455 --- Comment #11 from Niall Douglas s_gccbugzilla at nedprod dot com 2012-06-14 11:49:01 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) maybe related: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/6919 Had similar crash issue. Though in my case (which may well be different from the OP) rebuilding boost with new flags fixed it. If OP posts crashtest.cpp source, I'll be happy to run it through. Here's how I rebuilt the f17 rpms: # cat ~/.rpmrc optflags: x86_64 -O2 -g -std=c++11 -fno-strict-aliasing # rpmbuild --rebuild boost-1.48.0-11.fc17.src.rpm With respect to the Boost bugtracker, if this is an aliasing bug then it's a bug in Boost. Strict aliasing isn't an optional part of the ISO standard. They shouldn't have closed that issue because -fno-strict-aliasing fixes the bug on 4.7. Equally, it could still be that GCC 4.7 is performing an unsafe strict aliasing optimisation which it didn't do in 4.6. Weirdly the Boost bugtracker thinks the bug fixed in GCC 4.7, whereas this bug is about a 4.7 regression from 4.6. Niall
[Bug c++/53670] New: GCC internal compiler error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53670 Bug #: 53670 Summary: GCC internal compiler error Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.1.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org ReportedBy: satyaprakash.pra...@gmail.com llvm/llvm/tools/clang/lib/Frontend/InitHeaderSearch.cpp: In member function 'voidunnamed::InitHeaderSearch::AddMinGWCPlusPlusIncludePaths(llvm::StringRef, llvm::StringRef, llvm::StringRef)': llvm/llvm/tools/clang/lib/Frontend/InitHeaderSearch.cpp:197:1: error: unrecognizable insn: (insn 318 317 46 2 llvm/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/Twine.h:181 (set (reg:DI 23 xmm2) (plus:DI (reg:DI 23 xmm2) (mem/u/c/i:DI (symbol_ref/u:DI (*.LC22) [flags 0x2]) [0 S8 A64]))) -1 (expr_list:REG_EQUIV (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 7 sp) (mem/u/c/i:DI (symbol_ref/u:DI (*.LC22) [flags 0x2]) [0 S8 A64])) (nil))) llvm/llvm/tools/clang/lib/Frontend/InitHeaderSearch.cpp:197:1: internal compiler error: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2103 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. Please let me what additional information you require from my end.
[Bug target/53425] No warnings are given for -mno-sse
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53425 jon_y jon_y at users dot sourceforge.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ktietz70 at googlemail dot ||com --- Comment #3 from jon_y jon_y at users dot sourceforge.net 2012-06-14 12:37:03 UTC --- Hi, I've been notified that this test fails on mingw-w64. Unfortunately, I am not familiar enough on Win64 ABI to comment on this. Kai, any ideas?
[Bug c++/53670] GCC internal compiler error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53670 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 12:39:21 UTC --- 4.1.2 is no longer maintained or supported, I suggest you try a more recent release.
[Bug c++/53455] boost::python segfault
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53455
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14
12:51:08 UTC ---
Maybe someone should look at fixing these warnings in Boost.Python, or ensure
-fno-strict-aliasing is used
g++ -ftemplate-depth-128 -O3 -finline-functions -Wno-inline -Wall -m64
-pthread -fPIC -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -DBOOST_PYTHON_SOURCE -DNDEBUG -I.
-I/apps/infra/3rd-party/gcc-4.4-64/python-2.6.5/include/python2.6 -c -o
bin.v2/libs/python/build/gcc-4.7.0/release/threading-multi/object/enum.o
libs/python/src/object/enum.cpp
libs/python/src/object/enum.cpp: In function 'boost::python::api::object
boost::python::objects::{anonymous}::new_enum_type(const char*, const char*)':
libs/python/src/object/enum.cpp:150:11: warning: dereferencing type-punned
pointer will break strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
g++ -ftemplate-depth-128 -O3 -finline-functions -Wno-inline -Wall -m64
-pthread -fPIC -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -DBOOST_PYTHON_SOURCE -DNDEBUG -I.
-I/apps/infra/3rd-party/gcc-4.4-64/python-2.6.5/include/python2.6 -c -o
bin.v2/libs/python/build/gcc-4.7.0/release/threading-multi/object/class.o
libs/python/src/object/class.cpp
libs/python/src/object/class.cpp: In function 'PyObject*
boost::python::objects::static_data()':
libs/python/src/object/class.cpp:211:11: warning: dereferencing type-punned
pointer will break strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
libs/python/src/object/class.cpp: In function 'boost::python::type_handle
boost::python::objects::class_metatype()':
libs/python/src/object/class.cpp:319:11: warning: dereferencing type-punned
pointer will break strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
libs/python/src/object/class.cpp: In function 'boost::python::type_handle
boost::python::objects::class_type()':
libs/python/src/object/class.cpp:473:11: warning: dereferencing type-punned
pointer will break strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
gcc.compile.c++
bin.v2/libs/python/build/gcc-4.7.0/release/threading-multi/object/life_support.o
g++ -ftemplate-depth-128 -O3 -finline-functions -Wno-inline -Wall -m64
-pthread -fPIC -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -DBOOST_PYTHON_SOURCE -DNDEBUG -I.
-I/apps/infra/3rd-party/gcc-4.4-64/python-2.6.5/include/python2.6 -c -o
bin.v2/libs/python/build/gcc-4.7.0/release/threading-multi/object/life_support.o
libs/python/src/object/life_support.cpp
libs/python/src/object/life_support.cpp: In function 'PyObject*
boost::python::objects::make_nurse_and_patient(PyObject*, PyObject*)':
libs/python/src/object/life_support.cpp:94:9: warning: dereferencing
type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
libs/python/src/object/life_support.cpp:96:9: warning: dereferencing
type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
gcc.compile.c++
bin.v2/libs/python/build/gcc-4.7.0/release/threading-multi/object/function.o
g++ -ftemplate-depth-128 -O3 -finline-functions -Wno-inline -Wall -m64
-pthread -fPIC -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -DBOOST_PYTHON_SOURCE -DNDEBUG -I.
-I/apps/infra/3rd-party/gcc-4.4-64/python-2.6.5/include/python2.6 -c -o
bin.v2/libs/python/build/gcc-4.7.0/release/threading-multi/object/function.o
libs/python/src/object/function.cpp
libs/python/src/object/function.cpp: In constructor
'boost::python::objects::function::function(const
boost::python::objects::py_function, const boost::python::detail::keyword*,
unsigned int)':
libs/python/src/object/function.cpp:108:9: warning: dereferencing type-punned
pointer will break strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
libs/python/src/object/function.cpp:110:9: warning: dereferencing type-punned
pointer will break strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
[Bug c++/53670] GCC internal compiler error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53670 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2012-06-14 Ever Confirmed|0 |1
[Bug c++/52841] [4.7 Regression] error: type 'Solvable' is not a base type for type 'Resolvable'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52841 --- Comment #19 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 12:55:19 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Jun 14 12:55:11 2012 New Revision: 188613 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188613 Log: 2012-06-14 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de Backport from mainline 2012-06-06 Fabien Chene fab...@gcc.gnu.org PR c++/52841 * parser.c (cp_parser_alias_declaration): Return earlier if an error occured. * g++.dg/cpp0x/pr52841.C: New testcase. Added: branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/pr52841.C Modified: branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/cp/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/cp/parser.c branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug c++/52841] [4.7 Regression] error: type 'Solvable' is not a base type for type 'Resolvable'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52841 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #19 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 12:55:19 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Jun 14 12:55:11 2012 New Revision: 188613 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188613 Log: 2012-06-14 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de Backport from mainline 2012-06-06 Fabien Chene fab...@gcc.gnu.org PR c++/52841 * parser.c (cp_parser_alias_declaration): Return earlier if an error occured. * g++.dg/cpp0x/pr52841.C: New testcase. Added: branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/pr52841.C Modified: branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/cp/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/cp/parser.c branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog --- Comment #20 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 12:55:42 UTC --- Fixed.
[Bug c++/52841] [4.7 Regression] error: type 'Solvable' is not a base type for type 'Resolvable'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52841 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #20 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 12:55:42 UTC --- Fixed.
[Bug fortran/53597] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] F95/F2003 constraint no longer triggers: un-SAVED default-initialized module variable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53597 --- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 13:00:55 UTC --- Author: burnus Date: Thu Jun 14 13:00:50 2012 New Revision: 188614 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188614 Log: 2012-06-14 Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de PR fortran/53597 * decl.c (match_attr_spec): Only mark module variables as SAVE_IMPLICIT for Fortran 2008 and later. 2012-06-14 Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de PR fortran/53597 * gfortran.dg/save_4.f90: New. Added: branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/save_4.f90 Modified: branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/fortran/decl.c branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug middle-end/53616] [4.8 Regression] 416.gamess in SPEC CPU 2006 miscompiled
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53616 --- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 13:02:12 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Jun 14 13:02:06 2012 New Revision: 188615 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188615 Log: 2012-06-14 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de Backport from mainline 2012-06-11 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de PR c++/53616 * mangle.c (write_array_type): Use double-ints for array domain arithmetic. * g++.dg/ext/pr53605.C: New testcase. Added: branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/pr53605.C Modified: branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/cp/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/cp/mangle.c branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug c++/53605] [4.7 Regression] Compiler ICEs in size_binop_loc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53605 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #8 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 13:02:46 UTC --- Fixed.
[Bug fortran/50619] Surprising interaction between -finit-real=NAN and the associate construct
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50619 --- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 13:04:57 UTC --- Author: burnus Date: Thu Jun 14 13:04:43 2012 New Revision: 188617 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188617 Log: 2012-06-14 Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de Backport from mainline 2012-06-04 Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de PR fortran/50619 * resolve.c (build_default_init_expr): Don't initialize ASSOCIATE names. 2012-06-14 Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de Backport from mainline 2012-06-04 Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de PR fortran/50619 * gfortran.dg/init_flag_10.f90: New. Added: branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/init_flag_10.f90 Modified: branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/fortran/resolve.c branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug fortran/50619] Surprising interaction between -finit-real=NAN and the associate construct
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50619 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #9 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 13:06:54 UTC --- FIXED on all affected branches: On the (4.8) trunk and the 4.6 and the 4.7 branches. (Note that the patch came too late for the 4.7.1 release.)
[Bug fortran/53597] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] F95/F2003 constraint no longer triggers: un-SAVED default-initialized module variable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53597 --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 13:11:32 UTC --- Author: burnus Date: Thu Jun 14 13:11:27 2012 New Revision: 188618 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=188618 Log: 2012-06-14 Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de PR fortran/53597 * decl.c (match_attr_spec): Only mark module variables as SAVE_IMPLICIT for Fortran 2008 and later. 2012-06-14 Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de PR fortran/53597 * gfortran.dg/save_4.f90: New. Added: branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/save_4.f90 Modified: branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/fortran/decl.c branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug fortran/53597] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] F95/F2003 constraint no longer triggers: un-SAVED default-initialized module variable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53597 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 13:13:11 UTC --- FIXED on the (4.8) trunk and on the 4.6 and 4.7 branches. (The commit came too late for 4.7.1.)
[Bug c++/53455] boost::python segfault
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53455 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 13:15:30 UTC --- I think this is a duplicate of PR 53657, the crash happens returning a std::pair and goes away if the move ctor is trivial *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 53657 ***
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||org.gnu.gcc.bugtracker at ||sotecware dot net --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 13:15:30 UTC --- *** Bug 53455 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug c++/53455] boost::python segfault
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53455 --- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 13:21:59 UTC --- (In reply to comment #0) I tried boost as delivered with fedora 17, a home-compiled version with -std=c++11 and a home-compiled version without c++11. The c++11 flag on the _library_ does not seem to influence the problem, although the value change is inside the library. However, when turning off c++11 for the testing program (going to attach the .ii too), it works fine. Are you sure you built boost with -std=c++11 correctly? If I build libboost_python.so with -std=c++11 and then compile crashtest.cpp with -std=c++11 it works fine, likewise building both with -std=c++98. It only crashes when mixing c++98 library with c++11 code, or vice versa (which is consistent with PR 53657)
[Bug c++/53455] boost::python segfault
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53455
--- Comment #15 from Niall Douglas s_gccbugzilla at nedprod dot com
2012-06-14 13:24:58 UTC ---
Agreed, but it is highly unlikely to happen anytime soon unless a new sponsor
turns up. BPL needs a fair bit of post-bitrot work as it is.
Niall
(In reply to comment #12)
Maybe someone should look at fixing these warnings in Boost.Python, or ensure
-fno-strict-aliasing is used
g++ -ftemplate-depth-128 -O3 -finline-functions -Wno-inline -Wall -m64
-pthread -fPIC -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -DBOOST_PYTHON_SOURCE -DNDEBUG -I.
-I/apps/infra/3rd-party/gcc-4.4-64/python-2.6.5/include/python2.6 -c -o
bin.v2/libs/python/build/gcc-4.7.0/release/threading-multi/object/enum.o
libs/python/src/object/enum.cpp
libs/python/src/object/enum.cpp: In function 'boost::python::api::object
boost::python::objects::{anonymous}::new_enum_type(const char*, const char*)':
libs/python/src/object/enum.cpp:150:11: warning: dereferencing type-punned
pointer will break strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
g++ -ftemplate-depth-128 -O3 -finline-functions -Wno-inline -Wall -m64
-pthread -fPIC -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -DBOOST_PYTHON_SOURCE -DNDEBUG -I.
-I/apps/infra/3rd-party/gcc-4.4-64/python-2.6.5/include/python2.6 -c -o
bin.v2/libs/python/build/gcc-4.7.0/release/threading-multi/object/class.o
libs/python/src/object/class.cpp
libs/python/src/object/class.cpp: In function 'PyObject*
boost::python::objects::static_data()':
libs/python/src/object/class.cpp:211:11: warning: dereferencing type-punned
pointer will break strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
libs/python/src/object/class.cpp: In function 'boost::python::type_handle
boost::python::objects::class_metatype()':
libs/python/src/object/class.cpp:319:11: warning: dereferencing type-punned
pointer will break strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
libs/python/src/object/class.cpp: In function 'boost::python::type_handle
boost::python::objects::class_type()':
libs/python/src/object/class.cpp:473:11: warning: dereferencing type-punned
pointer will break strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
gcc.compile.c++
bin.v2/libs/python/build/gcc-4.7.0/release/threading-multi/object/life_support.o
g++ -ftemplate-depth-128 -O3 -finline-functions -Wno-inline -Wall -m64
-pthread -fPIC -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -DBOOST_PYTHON_SOURCE -DNDEBUG -I.
-I/apps/infra/3rd-party/gcc-4.4-64/python-2.6.5/include/python2.6 -c -o
bin.v2/libs/python/build/gcc-4.7.0/release/threading-multi/object/life_support.o
libs/python/src/object/life_support.cpp
libs/python/src/object/life_support.cpp: In function 'PyObject*
boost::python::objects::make_nurse_and_patient(PyObject*, PyObject*)':
libs/python/src/object/life_support.cpp:94:9: warning: dereferencing
type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
libs/python/src/object/life_support.cpp:96:9: warning: dereferencing
type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
gcc.compile.c++
bin.v2/libs/python/build/gcc-4.7.0/release/threading-multi/object/function.o
g++ -ftemplate-depth-128 -O3 -finline-functions -Wno-inline -Wall -m64
-pthread -fPIC -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -DBOOST_PYTHON_SOURCE -DNDEBUG -I.
-I/apps/infra/3rd-party/gcc-4.4-64/python-2.6.5/include/python2.6 -c -o
bin.v2/libs/python/build/gcc-4.7.0/release/threading-multi/object/function.o
libs/python/src/object/function.cpp
libs/python/src/object/function.cpp: In constructor
'boost::python::objects::function::function(const
boost::python::objects::py_function, const boost::python::detail::keyword*,
unsigned int)':
libs/python/src/object/function.cpp:108:9: warning: dereferencing type-punned
pointer will break strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
libs/python/src/object/function.cpp:110:9: warning: dereferencing type-punned
pointer will break strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
[Bug c++/53455] boost::python segfault
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53455 --- Comment #16 from Jonas Wielicki org.gnu.gcc.bugtracker at sotecware dot net 2012-06-14 13:26:53 UTC --- I think I built it correctly with std=c++11, but is there a way to verify this properly in the built library?
[Bug tree-optimization/51581] Integer division by constant is not vectorized
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51581 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #27617|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 13:31:57 UTC --- Created attachment 27618 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27618 gcc48-pr51581.patch Updated patch.
[Bug c++/53455] boost::python segfault
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53455 --- Comment #17 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 14:00:50 UTC --- (In reply to comment #16) I think I built it correctly with std=c++11, but is there a way to verify this properly in the built library? crashtest.cpp doesn't crash ;)
[Bug debug/53671] New: [4.8 Regression] Many guality test failures
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53671 Bug #: 53671 Summary: [4.8 Regression] Many guality test failures Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: debug AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org ReportedBy: hjl.to...@gmail.com CC: aol...@gcc.gnu.org On Fedora 15/ia32, revision 188535 gave FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/drap.c -O1 line 21 a == 5 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/drap.c -O1 line 22 b == 6 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/drap.c -O2 line 21 a == 5 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/drap.c -O2 line 22 b == 6 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/drap.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none line 21 a == 5 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/drap.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none line 22 b == 6 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/drap.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects line 21 a == 5 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/drap.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects line 22 b == 6 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/drap.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer line 21 a == 5 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/drap.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer line 22 b == 6 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/drap.c -O3 -g line 21 a == 5 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/drap.c -O3 -g line 22 b == 6 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/drap.c -Os line 21 a == 5 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/drap.c -Os line 22 b == 6 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/nrv-1.c -Os line 20 a2.i[0] == 42 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O1 line 12 arg1 == 1 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O1 line 12 arg2 == 2 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O1 line 12 arg3 == 3 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O1 line 12 arg4 == 4 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O1 line 12 arg5 == 5 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O1 line 12 arg6 == 6 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O1 line 12 arg7 == 30 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O1 line 14 arg1 == 1 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O1 line 14 arg2 == 2 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O1 line 14 arg3 == 3 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O1 line 14 arg4 == 4 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O1 line 14 arg5 == 5 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O1 line 14 arg6 == 6 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O1 line 14 arg7 == 30 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 line 12 arg1 == 1 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 line 12 arg2 == 2 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 line 12 arg3 == 3 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 line 12 arg4 == 4 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 line 12 arg5 == 5 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 line 12 arg6 == 6 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 line 12 arg7 == 30 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 line 14 arg1 == 1 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 line 14 arg2 == 2 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 line 14 arg3 == 3 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 line 14 arg4 == 4 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 line 14 arg5 == 5 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 line 14 arg6 == 6 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 line 14 arg7 == 30 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none line 12 arg1 == 1 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none line 12 arg2 == 2 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none line 12 arg3 == 3 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none line 12 arg4 == 4 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none line 12 arg5 == 5 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none line 12 arg6 == 6 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none line 12 arg7 == 30 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none line 14 arg1 == 1 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none line 14 arg2 == 2 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none line 14 arg3 == 3 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none line 14 arg4 == 4 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none line 14 arg5 == 5 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none line 14 arg6 == 6 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none line 14 arg7 == 30 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects line 12 arg4 == 4 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects line 12 arg5 == 5 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects line 12 arg6 == 6 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr36728-1.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects line 12 arg7 == 30
optimizations are deleting my adds
Hi, I have a small problem. I am making a new pass for my gcc, and some of my adds are deleted by optimization passes. here is the code i add : t = builtin_decl_explicit (BUILT_IN_ACC_SETUPARGUMENT); g = gimple_build_call(t, 3, build1(ADDR_EXPR, integer_ptr_type_node, length), build_int_cst(integer_type_node,TREE_INT_CST_LOW(TYPE_SIZE_UNIT (TREE_TYPE (tmp_result, offset ); gsi_insert_before (gsi, g, GSI_SAME_STMT); you see, the variable length wich is actually length.0 - gimple_omp_for_final() is renamed by ssa pass in length_1(D) But, here is an ADDR_EXPR of length, and the optimization don't rename it, so it points to the wrong variable because length.0 is not used anymore after the optimizations. I want to know if there is a way to prevent the compiler from optimizing this code with a flag in my code for example ? Thanks in advance ! -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/optimizations-are-deleting-my-adds-tp34012207p34012207.html Sent from the gcc - bugs mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
[Bug c++/53670] GCC internal compiler error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53670 --- Comment #2 from Prakash satyaprakash.prasad at gmail dot com 2012-06-14 14:21:27 UTC --- Thanks for the quick update. But our organization is heavily using GCC 4.1.2. I have the source code downloaded, build and deployed locally in one of our boxes. If you can provide the code fix I would fix it accordingly my side. Thanks in advance.
[Bug c++/53670] GCC internal compiler error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53670 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 14:32:28 UTC --- There have been thousands of changes made in the five years since 4.1.2, noone knows if any of them fixes your issue, or even if it has been fixed, and I doubt anyone will spent their time investigating a problem in an old, unmaintained release.
[Bug rtl-optimization/53533] [4.7/4.8 regression] vectorization causes loop unrolling test slowdown as measured by Adobe's C++Benchmark
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53533 Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |rth at gcc dot gnu.org |gnu.org | --- Comment #14 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 14:38:43 UTC --- Mine, at least for a 4.8 solution.
[Bug debug/53671] [4.8 Regression] Many guality test failures
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53671 --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-06-14 14:41:43 UTC --- It is caused by revision 188531.
[Bug c++/53455] boost::python segfault
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53455 --- Comment #18 from Niall Douglas s_gccbugzilla at nedprod dot com 2012-06-14 15:15:30 UTC --- (In reply to comment #17) (In reply to comment #16) I think I built it correctly with std=c++11, but is there a way to verify this properly in the built library? crashtest.cpp doesn't crash ;) I think he means something like a magic weak symbol emitted to indicate a binary was built with C++11. If there isn't such a magic symbol yet, there should be. Niall
[Bug c++/53455] boost::python segfault
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53455 --- Comment #19 from Jonas Wielicki org.gnu.gcc.bugtracker at sotecware dot net 2012-06-14 15:21:07 UTC --- Right, because otherwise I would not consider that as a safe verification that this is indeed a duplicate of the referenced bug. And I like safe verifications.
