[Bug middle-end/54520] [4.8 Regression] ice in merge_latch_edges with -O3

[markus at trippelsdorf dot de]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54520

Markus Trippelsdorf  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf  
2012-09-08 06:16:03 UTC ---
Started with r190918:

bb722af402cd2c6e372f64e33f465bff2228b975 is the first bad commit
commit bb722af402cd2c6e372f64e33f465bff2228b975
Author: rguenth 
Date:   Tue Sep 4 09:28:58 2012 +

2012-09-04  Richard Guenther  

PR tree-optimization/54458
* tree-ssa-threadupdate.c (thread_through_loop_header): If we
turn the loop into one with multiple latches mark it so.

[Bug bootstrap/54419] [4.8 Regression] Compiling libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/random.cc fails on platforms not knowing rdrand

[howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54419

--- Comment #52 from Jack Howarth  2012-09-08 
00:25:38 UTC ---
Regression test results as
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2012-09/msg00623.html.

[Bug libstdc++/54523] New: srand() initializing seed for random() function

[jm3dev at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54523

 Bug #: 54523
   Summary: srand() initializing seed for random() function
Classification: Unclassified
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.4.6
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: libstdc++
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: jm3...@gmail.com


DESCRIPTION: This problem arises if you mix the use of this two ways of
generating random numbers: the srand()/rand() way and the srandom()/random()
function family. The issue is that srand() is somehow initializing the seed for
random() function, but it should be initialized *only* with srandom(). The
expected behavior is random() generator not modifying its seed until done by
srandom(), the current behavior is srand() changing that seed.

IMPACT: As happened to me with a scientific code, it could imply a portability
problem as this is working properly (from my humble point of view) in other
implementations of the library. I detected (and just reported) also the problem
in GNU implementation of glibc 2.12 with C.

HOW TO REPRODUCE: This is a short test program, rndtest.cpp:

 START SOURCE CODE 
// Test random()
#include 
#include 

using namespace std;

int main() {

  int i;

  srand((unsigned)time(NULL));

  for (i=1;i<11;i++) {
cout << (random() / (double)0x7fff) << endl;
  }
}
 SOURCE CODE END 

This is what you get with libstdc++-devel-4.4.6:

$ g++ -O0 -g -Wall rndtest.cpp -o rndtest
$ ./rndtest 
0.735861
0.130081
0.954666
0.622049
0.423014
0.0441652
0.855401
0.895524
0.178504
0.758294
$ ./rndtest 
0.599818
0.550412
0.763289
0.448671
0.365695
0.772274
0.224044
0.700837
0.492885
0.85191

This is the expected (what you get in the mentioned other implementation of
cstdlib):

> ./rndtest
0.840188
0.394383
0.783099
0.79844
0.911647
0.197551
0.335223
0.76823
0.25
0.55397
> ./rndtest
0.840188
0.394383
0.783099
0.79844
0.911647
0.197551
0.335223
0.76823
0.25
0.55397

Many thanks.

[Bug c++/54506] Defaulted move constructors and move assignment operators are erroneously defined as deleted

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54506

Jonathan Wakely  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
   Last reconfirmed||2012-09-07
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely  2012-09-07 
23:16:29 UTC ---
How are you calling g++? What version are you using? What is the diagnostic you
get?

[Bug c++/54521] g++ fails to call explicit constructors in the second step of copy initialization

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54521

Jonathan Wakely  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
   Last reconfirmed||2012-09-07
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely  2012-09-07 
23:10:27 UTC ---
Works fine with 4.6.3, 4.7.2 20120716 (prerelease) and 
4.8.0 20120716 (experimental)

As requested when submitting the bug, please provide the information requested
at http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/ including the command line and output of gcc -v

[Bug fortran/54514] g0 output format has too few digits when writing reals

[clivegpage at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54514

Clive Page  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED

--- Comment #2 from Clive Page  2012-09-07 
22:42:00 UTC ---
Thanks, Tobias.  Now I've read the manual more carefully, I think you are
right, and the G0.d does not mean d decimal places, but (d-1).   I have no idea
whether this was the intention of those who drafted this bit of the standard,
as it seems odd, but that's the way it is.

I'm sorry to have troubled you, I'll see if I can close this as a bug.  I
didn't have access to another compiler that supported g0 formats (and I did try
two others).

Regards

[Bug target/54516] [4.8 regression] ICE in reload_cse_simplify_operands, at postreload.c:403 with -O1 -march=armv7-a -mthumb

[rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54516

Richard Earnshaw  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Version|4.7.2   |4.8.0

--- Comment #2 from Richard Earnshaw  2012-09-07 
21:55:17 UTC ---
Nothing to do with gcc-4.7

[Bug target/54516] [4.8 regression] ICE in reload_cse_simplify_operands, at postreload.c:403 with -O1 -march=armv7-a -mthumb

[rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54516

Richard Earnshaw  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed||2012-09-07
 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot   |rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org
   |gnu.org |
Summary|ICE in  |[4.8 regression] ICE in
   |reload_cse_simplify_operand |reload_cse_simplify_operand
   |s, at postreload.c:403 with |s, at postreload.c:403 with
   |-O1 -march=armv7-a -mthumb  |-O1 -march=armv7-a -mthumb
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #1 from Richard Earnshaw  2012-09-07 
21:54:15 UTC ---
Confirmed.

[Bug fortran/54522] Using "g77 -O -fno-automatic", reassignment of a variable in an if statement in a function triggers a compiler bug.

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54522

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  2012-09-07 
21:40:04 UTC ---
g77 is no longer supported.  It is over 6 years old now.

[Bug c++/54325] C++11 uniform initialization syntax for argument-less abstract base class constructor fails

[drtwox at tpg dot com.au]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54325

drtwox at tpg dot com.au changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||drtwox at tpg dot com.au

--- Comment #1 from drtwox at tpg dot com.au 2012-09-07 21:34:57 UTC ---
The failing example can be simplified somewhat.

class base
{
protected:
base()
{}
};

class derived : public base
{
public:
derived()
: base{} // <-- Note the c++11 curly brace syntax
{}
};

int main()
{
derived d1;
return 0;
}

Output:
$ g++-4.7 -std=c++11 -Wall -Wextra -pedantic curly.cpp -o curly
curly.cpp: In constructor ‘derived::derived()’:
curly.cpp:4:13: error: ‘base::base()’ is protected
curly.cpp:19:24: error: within this context

Replace g++4.7 with g++4.6 or clang++3.1 and it compiles without warnings or
errors.

[Bug fortran/54522] New: Using "g77 -O -fno-automatic", reassignment of a variable in an if statement in a function triggers a compiler bug.

[aap1 at psu dot edu]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54522

 Bug #: 54522
   Summary: Using "g77 -O -fno-automatic", reassignment of a
variable in an if statement in a function triggers a
compiler bug.
Classification: Unclassified
   Product: gcc
   Version: 3.4.6
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: a...@psu.edu


C g77 bug found 9/7/2012.
C When command "g77 -c -O -fno-automatic reasssignment_bug.for" is
C used on the included code, the following is produced:
C
C   reassignment_bug.for: In function `dum':
C   In file included from reassignment_bug.for:0:
C   reassignment_bug.for:7: internal compiler error: in gen_reg_rtx, at
C   emit-rtl.c:819
C   Please submit a full bug report,
C   with preprocessed source if appropriate.
C   See http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla> for instructions.
C
C The code is non-sensical but valid and should not crash the compiler.
C The logic was found in a larger more complex piece of code where the
C cause was hard to find.
C
C Compiler version from "g77 -v":
C Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/3.4.6/specs
C Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man
C --infodir=/usr/share/info --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix
C --disable-checking --with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit
C --disable-libunwind-exceptions --enable-languages=c,c++,f77
C --disable-libgcj --host=x86_64-redhat-linux
C Thread model: posix
C gcc version 3.4.6 20060404 (Red Hat 3.4.6-19.el6)
C
  FUNCTION DUM(A)
  B=A
  IF (B.EQ.1) B=A
  DUM=B
  RETURN
  END

[Bug middle-end/54520] [4.8 Regression] ice in merge_latch_edges with -O3

[markus at trippelsdorf dot de]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54520

Markus Trippelsdorf  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||markus at trippelsdorf dot
   ||de

--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf  
2012-09-07 21:17:46 UTC ---
markus@x4 tmp % < test.i
char *a;
void
fn1 ()
{
char *p = a;
while (p && *p != '\0')
{
while (*p == '\t')
*p++ = '\0';
if (*p != '\0')
p = 0;
}
}
markus@x4 tmp % gcc -c -O3 test.i
test.i: In function ‘fn1’:
test.i:3:1: internal compiler error: in merge_latch_edges, at cfgloop.c:678
 fn1 ()
 ^

[Bug c++/54521] New: g++ fails to call explicit constructors in the second step of copy initialization

[tsoae at mail dot ru]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54521

 Bug #: 54521
   Summary: g++ fails to call explicit constructors in the second
step of copy initialization
Classification: Unclassified
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: ts...@mail.ru


g++ fails to compile the following code

struct X
{
X(int) {}
explicit X(X const &) {}
};

int main()
{
X x = 1; // error: no matching function for call to 'X::X(X)'
}

The second step of a copy initialization (see 8.5/16/6/2) is a
direct-initialization where explicit constructors shall be considered as
candidate functions.

[Bug fortran/54208] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] compilation error for ubound construct in PARAMETER statements

[mikael at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54208

--- Comment #5 from Mikael Morin  2012-09-07 
20:37:45 UTC ---
Author: mikael
Date: Fri Sep  7 20:37:41 2012
New Revision: 191083

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191083
Log:
fortran/
PR fortran/54208
* simplify.c (simplify_bound_dim): Resolve array spec before
proceeding with simplification.

testsuite/
PR fortran/54208
* gfortran.dg/bound_simplification_3.f90: New test.


Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/bound_simplification_3.f90
Modified:
trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/fortran/simplify.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog

[Bug middle-end/54520] [4.8 Regression] ice in merge_latch_edges with -O3

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54520

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0

[Bug c/54520] New: ice in merge_latch_edges with -O3

[dcb314 at hotmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54520

 Bug #: 54520
   Summary: ice in merge_latch_edges with -O3
Classification: Unclassified
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: dcb...@hotmail.com


Created attachment 28151
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28151
C source code

I just tried to compile the package source-highlight-3.1.6-3
on gcc-4.8 trunk dated 20120905 on an AMD x86_64 box.

The compiler said

readtags.c: In function 'parseTagLine':
readtags.c:292:13: internal compiler error: in merge_latch_edges, at
cfgloop.c:678
 static void parseTagLine (tagFile *file, tagEntry *const entry)
 ^
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See  for instructions.

Preprocessed source code attached. Flag -O3 required.

[Bug c/54149] write introduction incorrect wrt the C11 memory model

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54149

Aldy Hernandez  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
   Last reconfirmed||2012-09-07
 CC||amacleod at redhat dot com
 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot   |aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
   |gnu.org |
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez  2012-09-07 
19:45:29 UTC ---
This looks like a data race introduced by LIM.  Ughh, I thought I had this pass
all fixed... I'll take a look.

[Bug middle-end/52640] [4.8 Regression] performance bottleneck: gcc/tree.c;value_member

[stevenb.gcc at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52640

--- Comment #16 from stevenb.gcc at gmail dot com  2012-09-07 19:07:27 UTC ---
> Any progress on the "real" solution?  If not, can you install the branch fix 
> on
> trunk?  Thx.

I think I already mentioned before that the branch fix is the only
real fix I can think of. The problem has been aggravated by the
visibility machinery, it depends on having a pending-externs list.

[Bug testsuite/54184] [4.8 Regression] gcc.dg/pr52558-1.c failure

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54184

Aldy Hernandez  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED

--- Comment #10 from Aldy Hernandez  2012-09-07 
18:23:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> What about gcc.dg/pr52558-2.c and gcc.dg/tm/reg-promotion.c not handled by the
> patch posted at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-09/msg00390.html?

I have pending patches for these too:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-09/msg00485.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-09/msg00487.html

Thanks for reporting this.

I will now close this PR, as the original problem reported has been fixed and
committed.

[Bug fortran/54514] g0 output format has too few digits when writing reals

[burnus at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54514

Tobias Burnus  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus  2012-09-07 
16:30:49 UTC ---
Pre-remark: I haven't checked the standard. My gut feeling is that Clive is
right, but on the other hand gfortran and ifort agree on the output.


For the following program

print '(f0.4,"  ",g0.4)', 0.123456789, 0.123456789
print '(f0.4,"  ",g0.4)',  1.23456789,  1.23456789
print '(f0.4,"  ",g0.4)',  12.3456789,  12.3456789
print '(f0.4,"  ",g0.4)',  123.456789,  123.456789
print '(f0.4,"  ",g0.4)',  1234.56789,  1234.56789
print '(f0.4,"  ",g0.4)',  12345.6789,  12345.6789
end


gfortran 4.8 and ifort 12.1 print:

.1235  .1235
1.2346  1.235
12.3457  12.35
123.4568  123.5
1234.5679  1235.
12345.6787  .1235E+05


(If it is a bug, is should be in libgfortran/io/write_float.def's
output_float_FMT_G_.)


I think gfortran and ifort 12.1's output is correct, namely, your example g0.4
doesn't match f0.4 but f0.3:


Looking at the table in F2008, 10.7.5.2.2 (for rounding mode == DOWN, i.e. "r =
0", which makes the equations easier), I see

Magnitude of Internal Value Equivalent Conversion
 1 <= N < 10F(w-n).(d-1), n('b')

where "n is 4 for Gw.d" and "b" is blank. Note the ".(d-1)".


Do you now concur that gfortran's/ifort's output is correct? If not, can you
explain, using the standard, why you think it should be different?

[Bug testsuite/54184] [4.8 Regression] gcc.dg/pr52558-1.c failure

[aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54184

--- Comment #9 from Aldy Hernandez  2012-09-07 
16:00:18 UTC ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Fri Sep  7 16:00:07 2012
New Revision: 191079

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191079
Log:
PR testsuite/54184
* gcc.dg/pr52558-1.c: Delete.
* gcc.dg/simulate-thread/speculative-store-2.c: New.

Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/simulate-thread/speculative-store-2.c
Removed:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr52558-1.c
Modified:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog

[Bug middle-end/54515] cc1plus sigsegv -O2 anonymous namespace

[markus at trippelsdorf dot de]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54515

--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf  
2012-09-07 15:23:04 UTC ---
The following patch fixes the issue for me:

diff --git a/gcc/tree-sra.c b/gcc/tree-sra.c
index aafaa15..2bb92e9 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-sra.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-sra.c
@@ -984,7 +984,8 @@ static void
 disqualify_base_of_expr (tree t, const char *reason)
 {
   t = get_base_address (t);
-  if (sra_mode == SRA_MODE_EARLY_IPA
+  if (t
+  && sra_mode == SRA_MODE_EARLY_IPA
   && TREE_CODE (t) == MEM_REF)
 t = get_ssa_base_param (TREE_OPERAND (t, 0));

[Bug c++/54518] A problem using -O2 with g++4.5.0 and g++4.6.0 (see titi.cc)

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54518

Jonathan Wakely  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||wrong-code
  Known to work||4.6.2
  Known to fail||4.4.3, 4.5.2, 4.6.1

--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely  2012-09-07 
15:22:22 UTC ---
works fine with 4.6.2 and later, so the problem seems to be fixed in all
current releases

[Bug debug/54519] New: [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Debug info quality regression due to (pointless) partial inlining

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54519

 Bug #: 54519
   Summary: [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Debug info quality regression
due to (pointless) partial inlining
Classification: Unclassified
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: ja...@gcc.gnu.org
CC: aol...@gcc.gnu.org, hubi...@gcc.gnu.org,
jan.kratoch...@redhat.com


extern void bar (int);

static int
foo (int x, int y)
{
  if (x)
{
  bar (x);
  bar (x);
  bar (x);
  bar (x);
  bar (x);
}
  return y;
}

#ifndef INL
void *p = (void *) foo;
#else
int
baz1 (int x, int y)
{
  return foo (x, y);
}

int
baz2 (int x, int y)
{
  return foo (x, y);
}
#endif

at -g -O2 results in partial inlining (even when without -DINL it has no
callers at all, can that be changed?), and immediately inlining it back.  In
4.7 (before
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=188981
change) in debuginfo we actually end up with terribly confusing
DW_TAG_inlined_subroutine of the same abstract origin as the current function,
r188981 improves that slightly, so it is actually DW_TAG_lexical_block instead.
But still, for one of the parameters we end up with unnecessary another
location list for it (it would be nice if we could merge them) and more
importantly, for the second parameter we end up with another DW_TAG_variable
with abstract origin of its origin, but actually no location list at all.
This is the main reason why this PR is filed.
The VAR_DECL is created by copy_arguments_for_versioning, with copy_decl_to_var
there, just in case the var would be used as local temporary.  It isn't used in
this case, so it ends up with no location at all (we want to use the location
of the outer argument in that case), if it was used as a local temporary, we'd
still want to use the outer parameter location before it is initialized.

And completely another case is when foo.part.N isn't inlined back, -g -O2 -DINL
shows that case.  Then y still doesn't have any location info.

Either we could make inlining smarter about the case where fnsplitted function
is being inlined back into the main body (essentially try to remap the inline
fn parameter or these special outer block vars back to the outer function's
parameters or variables), or perhaps at least add a debug source stmt at the
beginning of the foo.part.* which would say that the special var created by
copy_arguments_for_versioning lives in the caller's parameter (like we do for
say IPA cp).

[Bug driver/54504] Link failed when I move the GCC to another directory

[progmei at 163 dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54504

--- Comment #11 from progmei  2012-09-07 14:16:15 UTC 
---
It's OK now. And I just have some qusetions.
If I can build the cross compiler support both soft/hard float big/little
endian, and how to compile it.
where can I get the related document on how to compile the cross gcc?
Thank you!

[Bug bootstrap/54419] [4.8 Regression] Compiling libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/random.cc fails on platforms not knowing rdrand

[howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54419

--- Comment #51 from Jack Howarth  2012-09-07 
13:50:08 UTC ---
Final patch, hopefully, posted at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-09/msg00465.html.

[Bug gcov-profile/54487] [4.8 Regression] profiledbootstrap broken by r190952

[tejohnson at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54487

--- Comment #15 from tejohnson at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-07 13:49:54 UTC ---
Author: tejohnson
Date: Fri Sep  7 13:49:47 2012
New Revision: 191074

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191074
Log:
This fixes part of the issue described in PR gcov-profile/54487 where
there were warnings about mismatches due to slight differences in the
merged histograms in different object files. This can happen due to
the truncating integer division in the merge routine, which could result
in slightly different histograms when summaries are merged in different
orders.

2012-09-07  Teresa Johnson  

PR gcov-profile/54487
* libgcc/libgcov.c (gcov_exit): Avoid warning on histogram
differences.

Modified:
trunk/libgcc/ChangeLog
trunk/libgcc/libgcov.c

[Bug driver/54504] Link failed when I move the GCC to another directory

[progmei at 163 dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54504

--- Comment #10 from progmei  2012-09-07 13:30:13 UTC 
---
It's OK now. And I just have some qusetions.
If I can build the cross compiler support both soft/hard float big/little
endian? And how to compile this.
where can I get the related document on how to compile the cross gcc?
Thank you!


At 2012-09-07 16:49:14,"pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" 
wrote:
>http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54504
>
>Andrew Pinski  changed:
>
>   What|Removed |Added
>
> Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
> Resolution||WORKSFORME
>
>--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski  2012-09-07 
>08:49:14 UTC ---
>>/repo/yuhuamei/mips-linux-eglibc-gnu/mips-linux/bin/ld: cannot find
>> /repo/yuhuamei/mips-linux-eglibc-gnu/sysroot/lib/libc.so.6 inside
>> /repo/yuhuamei/mips-linux-eglibc-gnu/sysroot
>
>How are you configuring glibc?  I think that is the problem here.
>You should only configure glibc with --prefix=/usr .  And then install like:
>make install install_root=${MY_PREFIX}/sysroot .
>
>-- 
>Configure bugmail: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
>--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
>You reported the bug.

[Bug lto/53572] Some public symbols don't get to serialized LTO

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53572

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED
   Target Milestone|--- |4.7.2

--- Comment #13 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
13:06:14 UTC ---
Fixed.

[Bug lto/53572] Some public symbols don't get to serialized LTO

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53572

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED
   Target Milestone|--- |4.7.2

--- Comment #12 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
13:05:22 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Sep  7 13:05:18 2012
New Revision: 191073

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191073
Log:
2012-09-07  Richard Guenther  

Backport from mainline
2012-06-26  Jan Hubicka  

PR lto/53572
* cgraph.h (varpool_can_remove_if_no_refs): Fix handling of
used symbols.

Modified:
branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/cgraph.h

--- Comment #13 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
13:06:14 UTC ---
Fixed.

[Bug lto/53572] Some public symbols don't get to serialized LTO

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53572

--- Comment #12 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
13:05:22 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Sep  7 13:05:18 2012
New Revision: 191073

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191073
Log:
2012-09-07  Richard Guenther  

Backport from mainline
2012-06-26  Jan Hubicka  

PR lto/53572
* cgraph.h (varpool_can_remove_if_no_refs): Fix handling of
used symbols.

Modified:
branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/cgraph.h

[Bug tree-optimization/53922] [4.6 Regression] VRP: semantic conflict between range_includes_zero_p and value_inside_range

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53922

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Known to work||4.7.2
Summary|[4.6/4.7 Regression] VRP:   |[4.6 Regression] VRP:
   |semantic conflict between   |semantic conflict between
   |range_includes_zero_p and   |range_includes_zero_p and
   |value_inside_range  |value_inside_range

--- Comment #10 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
13:05:53 UTC ---
And 4.7.

[Bug tree-optimization/53922] [4.6/4.7 Regression] VRP: semantic conflict between range_includes_zero_p and value_inside_range

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53922

--- Comment #9 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
13:04:42 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Sep  7 13:04:38 2012
New Revision: 191072

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191072
Log:
2012-09-07  Richard Guenther  

Backport from mainline
2012-07-13  Richard Guenther  

PR tree-optimization/53922
* tree-vrp.c (value_inside_range): Change prototype to take
min/max instead of value-range.
(range_includes_zero_p): Likewise.  Return the result from
value_inside_range.
(extract_range_from_binary_expr_1): Adjust to handle dont-know
return value from range_includes_zero_p.
(extract_range_from_unary_expr_1): Likewise.
(compare_range_with_value): Likewise.
(vrp_meet_1): Likewise.

* gcc.dg/torture/pr53922.c: New testcase.

Added:
branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr53922.c
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/tree-vrp.c

[Bug c++/54518] A problem using -O2 with g++4.5.0 and g++4.6.0 (see titi.cc)

[thierry.visonneau at cea dot fr]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54518

--- Comment #3 from thierry.visonneau at cea dot fr 2012-09-07 12:38:11 UTC ---
Created attachment 28150
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28150
titi.g++450-O2.s

[Bug c++/54518] A problem using -O2 with g++4.5.0 and g++4.6.0 (see titi.cc)

[thierry.visonneau at cea dot fr]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54518

--- Comment #2 from thierry.visonneau at cea dot fr 2012-09-07 12:37:06 UTC ---
Created attachment 28149
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28149
titi.g++440-O2.s

[Bug c++/54518] A problem using -O2 with g++4.5.0 and g++4.6.0 (see titi.cc)

[thierry.visonneau at cea dot fr]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54518

--- Comment #1 from thierry.visonneau at cea dot fr 2012-09-07 12:36:23 UTC ---
Created attachment 28148
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28148
test.list

[Bug c++/54518] New: A problem using -O2 with g++4.5.0 and g++4.6.0 (see titi.cc)

[thierry.visonneau at cea dot fr]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54518

 Bug #: 54518
   Summary: A problem using -O2 with g++4.5.0 and g++4.6.0 (see
titi.cc)
Classification: Unclassified
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: thierry.visonn...@cea.fr


Created attachment 28147
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28147
titi.cc

A problem using -O2 with g++4.5.0 and g++4.6.0

Using -O2 option with g++4.5.0 and g++4.6.0, the attached file titi.cc is
crashing.
It seems that the correct behavior is to obtain the following output :
titi : I=

Please find "test.list" attached that summarizes our tests, and also the
assembly code obtained with g++4.5.0 -O2 and g++4.6.0 -O2 :
- titi.g++440-O2.s
- titi.g++450-O2.s
< movsbl1(%rsp),%edi
>   xorl%edi, %edi

Thanks,
Best regards

[Bug fortran/54208] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] compilation error for ubound construct in PARAMETER statements

[mikael at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54208

Mikael Morin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #4 from Mikael Morin  2012-09-07 
12:34:48 UTC ---
Another try:

Index: simplify.c
===
--- simplify.c(révision 190976)
+++ simplify.c(copie de travail)
@@ -3255,6 +3255,9 @@ simplify_bound_dim (gfc_expr *array, gfc_expr *kin
   gcc_assert (array->expr_type == EXPR_VARIABLE);
   gcc_assert (as);

+  if (gfc_resolve_array_spec (as, 0) == FAILURE)
+return NULL;
+
   /* The last dimension of an assumed-size array is special.  */
   if ((!coarray && d == as->rank && as->type == AS_ASSUMED_SIZE && !upper)
   || (coarray && d == as->rank + as->corank

[Bug target/54517] New: wrong inlining of builtin_shuffle on ARM/big-endian

[christophe.lyon at st dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54517

 Bug #: 54517
   Summary: wrong inlining of builtin_shuffle on ARM/big-endian
Classification: Unclassified
   Product: gcc
   Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: target
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: christophe.l...@st.com


Created attachment 28146
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28146
testcase

As exposed by the attached sample code, GCC for ARM/big-endian produces
incorrect code when inlining functions performing builtin_shuffle.

Compile the attached program at -O2 with GCC configured for
armeb-none-linux-gnueabi) and execute it with qemu-armeb, it should be OK.

Then edit the source code such that NOINLINE now expands into the empty string:
#define NOINLINE, re-compile & execute: the code aborts.

[Bug middle-end/53476] [4.8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/attr-weakref-1.c

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53476

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P1

[Bug c++/53475] [4.8 Regression] Section type conflict errors in libstdc++ testsuite

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53475

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Target||arm-none-eabi,
   ||powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu
   Priority|P3  |P1

[Bug middle-end/53420] [4.8 Regression] ICE in iterative_hash_expr, at tree.c:7039

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53420

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED

--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
12:02:04 UTC ---
Assuming fixed.

[Bug target/53359] [4.8 regression] undefined reference to `__gnu_cxx::__numeric_traits_integer::__min'

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53359

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P1

[Bug middle-end/54515] cc1plus sigsegv -O2 anonymous namespace

[markus at trippelsdorf dot de]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54515

--- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf  
2012-09-07 11:59:45 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Created attachment 28145 [details]
> preprocessed file as written by the sigsegv handler
> 
> Just saw a second sigsegv. This might be related to the bug (including same
> project files), but it might also be another bug.
> This compilation succeeds with -O0 and -O1, it crashes with -O3, -O2 and -Os.
> In this case there is no anonymous namespace involved.

It's the same issue.

[Bug target/53346] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Bad vectorization in the proc cptrf2 of rnflow.f90

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53346

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
   Priority|P3  |P2
  Component|tree-optimization   |target
 AssignedTo|rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org  |unassigned at gcc dot
   ||gnu.org

--- Comment #20 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
11:58:31 UTC ---
This turned into a target bug about cmov.

[Bug middle-end/54515] cc1plus sigsegv -O2 anonymous namespace

[markus at trippelsdorf dot de]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54515

Markus Trippelsdorf  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||markus at trippelsdorf dot
   ||de

--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf  
2012-09-07 11:56:34 UTC ---
gcc-4.7 and 4.8 are also affected.

markus@x4 tmp % cat test.ii
template < typename T > T h2le (T)
{
T a;
unsigned short &b = a;
short c = 0;
unsigned char (&d)[2] = reinterpret_cast < unsigned char (&)[2] > (c);
unsigned char (&e)[2] = reinterpret_cast < unsigned char (&)[2] > (b);
e[0] = d[0];
return a;
}

void
bar ()
{
h2le ((unsigned short) 0);
}

markus@x4 tmp % gdb /var/tmp/foo/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-bin/4.8.0/g++
Reading symbols from
/var/tmp/foo/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-bin/4.8.0/g++...done.
(gdb) run -c -O2 -std=c++0x test.ii
Starting program: /var/tmp/foo/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-bin/4.8.0/g++ -c -O2
-std=c++0x test.ii
warning: no loadable sections found in added symbol-file system-supplied DSO at
0x77ffa000
[New process 18282]
process 18282 is executing new program:
/var/tmp/foo/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.8.0/cc1plus

Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to process 18282]
0x008b5803 in disqualify_base_of_expr(tree_node*, char const*) () at
../../gcc/gcc/tree-sra.c:987
987 ../../gcc/gcc/tree-sra.c: No such file or directory.
(gdb) bt
#0  0x008b5803 in disqualify_base_of_expr(tree_node*, char const*) ()
at ../../gcc/gcc/tree-sra.c:987
#1  0x008b6eb5 in build_access_from_expr_1(tree_node*,
gimple_statement_d*, bool) () at ../../gcc/gcc/tree-sra.c:1025
#2  0x008b74ab in scan_function() () at ../../gcc/gcc/tree-sra.c:1119
#3  0x008bb622 in ipa_early_sra() () at ../../gcc/gcc/tree-sra.c:4814
#4  0x007ca012 in execute_one_pass(opt_pass*) () at
../../gcc/gcc/passes.c:2158
#5  0x007ca385 in execute_pass_list(opt_pass*) () at
../../gcc/gcc/passes.c:2213
#6  0x007ca397 in execute_pass_list(opt_pass*) () at
../../gcc/gcc/passes.c:2214
#7  0x007c95fd in do_per_function_toporder(void (*)(void*), void*) ()
at ../../gcc/gcc/passes.c:1702
#8  0x007ca7ec in execute_ipa_pass_list(opt_pass*) () at
../../gcc/gcc/passes.c:2527
#9  0x0064f758 in compile() ()
#10 0x0064fb15 in finalize_compilation_unit() ()
#11 0x00528a57 in cp_write_global_declarations() () at
../../gcc/gcc/cp/decl2.c:4024
#12 0x0085a565 in compile_file() ()
#13 0x0085bd5a in toplev_main(int, char**) ()
#14 0x774ef755 in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6
#15 0x004c8249 in _start ()

[Bug bootstrap/53343] [4.8 regression] options.c:9944:1: error: no previous prototype for 'common_handle_option_auto' breaks bootstrap

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53343

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED

--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
11:53:20 UTC ---
Fixed,  --disable-build-poststage1-with-cxx no longer existent.

[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P1

[Bug middle-end/53338] [4.8 Regression] Unaligned store generated for aligned data

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53338

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED

--- Comment #8 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
11:49:51 UTC ---
This has been fixed by the most recent re-org of how get_object_alignment
works.

[Bug middle-end/54515] cc1plus sigsegv -O2 anonymous namespace

[werner.henze at alumni dot tu-berlin.de]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54515

--- Comment #3 from Werner Henze  
2012-09-07 11:49:43 UTC ---
Created attachment 28145
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28145
preprocessed file as written by the sigsegv handler

Just saw a second sigsegv. This might be related to the bug (including same
project files), but it might also be another bug.
This compilation succeeds with -O0 and -O1, it crashes with -O3, -O2 and -Os.
In this case there is no anonymous namespace involved.

[Bug bootstrap/53300] [4.8 Regression] AIX bootstrap related to varpool patch

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53300

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P1

[Bug regression/53203] [4.8 Regression]: gcc.dg/setjmp-1.c

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53203

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P4

[Bug middle-end/53161] [4.8 Regression] ICE with weakref function and a function which takes vector types

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53161

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED

--- Comment #11 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
11:43:32 UTC ---
Fixed.

[Bug libstdc++/54388] [4.7/4.8 Regression] std::array.at() const results in undefined behaviour

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54388

Jonathan Wakely  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC|jwakely.gcc at gmail dot|
   |com |
 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot   |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
   |gnu.org |

--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely  2012-09-07 
11:35:31 UTC ---
mine

[Bug other/53143] [4.8 Regression] ' in c_tree_printer, at c-objc-common.c:136

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53143

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED

--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
11:33:10 UTC ---
Supposedly fixed.

[Bug debug/53135] [4.7/4.8 Regression] internal compiler error: in value_format, at dwarf2out.c:8010

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53135

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P2

[Bug middle-end/53106] [4.8 Regression] Benchmarks in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to build

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53106

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED

--- Comment #10 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
11:27:41 UTC ---
Fixed I presume.

[Bug middle-end/53088] [4.8 Regression] gcc.target/i386/pr39082-1.c

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53088

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED

--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
11:25:26 UTC ---
Fixed.

[Bug middle-end/53062] [4.8 Regression] 445.gobmk in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to build

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53062

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
   Last reconfirmed||2012-09-07
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
11:23:46 UTC ---
I don't see it failing - does it still fail for you?

[Bug middle-end/52996] [4.8 Regression] ice in verify_loop_structure, at cfgloop.c:1567

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52996

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P1

[Bug other/52777] [4.8 Regression] ./options.h:3546:0: error: "MASK_SIO" redefined [-Werror]

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52777

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED

--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
11:19:26 UTC ---
Fixed.

[Bug middle-end/52664] [4.8 Regression]: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr31261.c fails

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52664

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P4
  Component|other   |middle-end

--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
11:18:13 UTC ---
That's fold.

[Bug middle-end/52650] [4.8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr51106-2.c * (internal compiler error)

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52650

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P1

[Bug middle-end/52640] [4.8 Regression] performance bottleneck: gcc/tree.c;value_member

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52640

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P1

--- Comment #15 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
11:10:57 UTC ---
Any progress on the "real" solution?  If not, can you install the branch fix on
trunk?  Thx.

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

[amker at gcc dot gnu.org]

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

--- Comment #25 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-07 11:01:02 UTC ---
Author: amker
Date: Fri Sep  7 11:00:52 2012
New Revision: 191068

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191068
Log:
Backport from 2012-09-04 mainline r190919

PR target/45070
* config/arm/arm.c (thumb1_extra_regs_pushed): Handle return value of
size less than 4 bytes by using macro ARM_NUM_INTS.
(thumb1_unexpanded_epilogue): Use macro ARM_NUM_INTS.

Modified:
branches/ARM/embedded-4_6-branch/gcc/ChangeLog.arm
branches/ARM/embedded-4_6-branch/gcc/config/arm/arm.c

[Bug c++/54511] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] internal compiler error: in make_decl_rtl, at varasm.c:1147

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54511

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P2

[Bug middle-end/54515] cc1plus sigsegv -O2 anonymous namespace

[werner.henze at alumni dot tu-berlin.de]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54515

--- Comment #2 from Werner Henze  
2012-09-07 10:53:33 UTC ---
Created attachment 28144
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28144
preprocessed file as written by the sigsegv handler

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

[amker at gcc dot gnu.org]

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

--- Comment #24 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-07 10:50:40 UTC ---
Author: amker
Date: Fri Sep  7 10:50:35 2012
New Revision: 191067

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191067
Log:
Backport from 2012-09-04 mainline r190919

PR target/45070
* config/arm/arm.c (thumb1_extra_regs_pushed): Handle return value of
size less than 4 bytes by using macro ARM_NUM_INTS.
(thumb1_unexpanded_epilogue): Use macro ARM_NUM_INTS.

Modified:
branches/ARM/embedded-4_7-branch/gcc/ChangeLog.arm
branches/ARM/embedded-4_7-branch/gcc/config/arm/arm.c

[Bug middle-end/54486] [4.6 Regression] Spurious printf format warning mentions nonexistent type 'sizetype'

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54486

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P2
Summary|[4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression]|[4.6 Regression] Spurious
   |Spurious printf format  |printf format warning
   |warning mentions|mentions nonexistent type
   |nonexistent type 'sizetype' |'sizetype'

[Bug middle-end/54516] New: ICE in reload_cse_simplify_operands, at postreload.c:403 with -O1 -march=armv7-a -mthumb

[Bernhard.Rosenkranzer at linaro dot org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54516

 Bug #: 54516
   Summary: ICE in reload_cse_simplify_operands, at
postreload.c:403 with -O1 -march=armv7-a -mthumb
Classification: Unclassified
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: bernhard.rosenkran...@linaro.org


Created attachment 28143
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28143
Reduced test case

$ arm-linux-gnueabi-g++ -O1 -march=armv7-a -mthumb -S ice.cc
ice.cc: In function 'void bug1046999()':
ice.cc:12:1: error: insn does not satisfy its constraints:
(insn 121 120 52 2 (set (zero_extract:SI (reg/f:SI 13 sp)
(const_int 16 [0x10])
(const_int 16 [0x10]))
(const_int 65535 [0x])) bug1046999.cc:3 348 {*arm_movtas_ze}
 (nil))
ice.cc:12:1: internal compiler error: in reload_cse_simplify_operands, at
postreload.c:403
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See  for instructions.


Introduced in svn rev 190472

[Bug fortran/54443] [4.7 Regression] Segmentation Fault when Compiling for code using Fortran Polymorphic Entities

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54443

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |4.7.2
   Priority|P3  |P4
Summary|[4.7/4.8 Regression]|[4.7 Regression]
   |Segmentation Fault when |Segmentation Fault when
   |Compiling for code using|Compiling for code using
   |Fortran Polymorphic |Fortran Polymorphic
   |Entities|Entities

--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
10:48:22 UTC ---
Fixed on trunk sofar.

[Bug c++/54416] [4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE (segv) in codegen

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54416

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||error-recovery
   Priority|P3  |P4

[Bug libstdc++/54392] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] std::string::assign() fails to update length

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54392

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||wrong-code
   Priority|P3  |P2

[Bug libstdc++/54388] [4.7/4.8 Regression] std::array.at() const results in undefined behaviour

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54388

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P2

[Bug target/54373] [4.7/4.8 Regression]: build fails for mmix-knuth-mmixware libobjc GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54373

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P4

[Bug tree-optimization/54295] [4.7 Regression] Widening multiply-accumulate operation uses wrong value extension

[rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54295

--- Comment #6 from Richard Earnshaw  2012-09-07 
10:37:12 UTC ---
Author: rearnsha
Date: Fri Sep  7 10:37:08 2012
New Revision: 191066

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191066
Log:
PR tree-ssa/54295
* tree-ssa-math-opts.c (widening_mult_conversion_strippable_p):
Sign-extension of a zero-extended value can be simplified to
just zero-extension.

testsuite:
* gcc.target/arm/pr50318-1.c: Scan for smlal.
* gcc.target/arm/smlaltb-1.c: XFAIL test.
* gcc.target/arm/smlaltt-1.c: Likewise.

Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr50318-1.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/smlaltb-1.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/smlaltt-1.c
trunk/gcc/tree-ssa-math-opts.c

[Bug c++/54341] [4.7 Regression] ICE (segfault) in cx_check_missing_mem_inits, at cp/semantics.c:6093

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54341

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P2
Summary|[4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE|[4.7 Regression] ICE
   |(segfault) in   |(segfault) in
   |cx_check_missing_mem_inits, |cx_check_missing_mem_inits,
   |at cp/semantics.c:6093  |at cp/semantics.c:6093

--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
10:36:26 UTC ---
Fixed for trunk sofar.

[Bug libstdc++/54307] [4.7 regression] increases in memory usage by some C++11 (and C++03) standard containers

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54307

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED

--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
10:35:04 UTC ---
I believe this change has been reverted for 4.7.2.

[Bug target/54300] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Erroneous optimization causes wrong Neon data management

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54300

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
  Known to work||4.6.3
 Ever Confirmed|1   |0

[Bug middle-end/53667] [4.6 Regression] Cray pointer: Wrong result with optimizations

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53667

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Known to work||4.7.2, 4.8.0
Summary|[4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression]|[4.6 Regression] Cray
   |Cray pointer: Wrong result  |pointer: Wrong result with
   |with optimizations  |optimizations

--- Comment #9 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
10:32:04 UTC ---
Fixed for 4.7/4.8 sofar, latent on the 4.6 branch but more difficult to
backport.

[Bug tree-optimization/54295] [4.7 Regression] Widening multiply-accumulate operation uses wrong value extension

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54295

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P2
Summary|[4.7/4.8 regression]|[4.7 Regression] Widening
   |Widening|multiply-accumulate
   |multiply-accumulate |operation uses wrong value
   |operation uses wrong value  |extension
   |extension   |

--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
10:31:13 UTC ---
Fixed on trunk sofar.

[Bug middle-end/53667] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Cray pointer: Wrong result with optimizations

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53667

--- Comment #8 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
10:30:00 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Sep  7 10:29:56 2012
New Revision: 191065

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191065
Log:
2012-09-07  Richard Guenther  

PR middle-end/53667
* tree-ssa-structalias.c (handle_rhs_call): Properly clobber
EAF_NOESCAPED arguments.  Transitively close non-EAF_DIRECT
arguments separately.

Modified:
branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/tree-ssa-structalias.c

[Bug target/54252] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bad alignment code generated for Neon loads

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54252

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED

--- Comment #11 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
10:28:05 UTC ---
Fixed.

[Bug middle-end/53667] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Cray pointer: Wrong result with optimizations

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53667

--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
10:27:07 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Sep  7 10:27:02 2012
New Revision: 191064

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191064
Log:
2012-09-07  Richard Guenther  

PR middle-end/53667
* tree-ssa-structalias.c (handle_rhs_call): Properly clobber
EAF_NOESCAPED arguments.  Transitively close non-EAF_DIRECT
arguments separately.

Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/tree-ssa-structalias.c

[Bug fortran/54225] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] fortran compiler segfault processing ' print *, A(1,*) '

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54225

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P2
   Priority|P2  |P4

[Bug fortran/54225] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] fortran compiler segfault processing ' print *, A(1,*) '

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54225

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P2

[Bug fortran/54208] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] compilation error for ubound construct in PARAMETER statements

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54208

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P4

[Bug middle-end/54515] cc1plus sigsegv -O2 anonymous namespace

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54515

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
   Last reconfirmed||2012-09-07
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
10:24:50 UTC ---
Attachment missing.

[Bug libstdc++/54172] [4.7 Regression] __cxa_guard_acquire thread-safety issue

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54172

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||wrong-code
   Priority|P3  |P2
Summary|[4.7/4.8 Regression]|[4.7 Regression]
   |__cxa_guard_acquire |__cxa_guard_acquire
   |thread-safety issue |thread-safety issue

--- Comment #13 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
10:23:00 UTC ---
Fixed on trunk sofar.

[Bug target/54160] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] gcc should not define __OBJC2__ when lang is not set to ObjC (gcc 4.6 and later)

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54160

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P2

[Bug c++/54145] [4.7/4.8 Regression] no symbol generated for `void QMailThreadSortKey::deserialize

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54145

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P2
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
   Last reconfirmed||2012-09-07
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
10:20:47 UTC ---
I can confirm that the symbol is not emitted.  I cannot confirm this is an
error.

[Bug tree-optimization/54077] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bytemark FP EMULATION 44% slower than with clang

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54077

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P2

--- Comment #13 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
10:14:28 UTC ---
I can't see any such regression on our autotesters.  They run with
-O3 -ffast-math -funroll-loops -march=native on various AMD architectures.

[Bug tree-optimization/54073] [4.7/4.8 Regression] SciMark Monte Carlo test performance has seriously decreased in recent GCC releases

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54073

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||missed-optimization
   Priority|P3  |P2

[Bug c++/54053] [4.7 Regression] g++ accepts (invalid?) ""0; expression.

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54053

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||accepts-invalid
 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED
   Target Milestone|4.7.2   |4.8.0

--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
10:08:03 UTC ---
Fixed on trunk.

[Bug target/54051] [4.7 Regression] Invalid alignment specifier generated for vld3_lane_* and vld3_dup_* intrinsics.

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54051

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P2
Summary|[4.7/ 4.8 regression]   |[4.7 Regression] Invalid
   |Invalid alignment specifier |alignment specifier
   |generated for vld3_lane_*   |generated for vld3_lane_*
   |and vld3_dup_* intrinsics.  |and vld3_dup_* intrinsics.

[Bug c++/54046] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] wrong control reaches end of non-void function for switch case with throw and default

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54046

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |4.6.4
   Priority|P3  |P2

[Bug middle-end/54041] [4.7/4.8 regression] -mshort ICE in convert_memory_address_addr_space, at explow.c:327

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54041

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Target||m68k-linux-gnu
   Priority|P3  |P4

[Bug c++/54515] New: cc1plus sigsegv -O2 anonymous namespace

[werner.henze at alumni dot tu-berlin.de]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54515

 Bug #: 54515
   Summary: cc1plus sigsegv -O2 anonymous namespace
Classification: Unclassified
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: werner.he...@alumni.tu-berlin.de


cc1plus crashes with a sigsegv.
The crash does occur with -O2, not with -Os or -O1.
The crash does not occur if I do not use an anonymous namespace for the
functions ReadPIB7400, ReadPIB7420, AddAdapterAndReferencedAdapters and
GenerateTrafficForPhyRate (by commenting out the lines #73452, #73458, #74520
and #74616).

[Bug tree-optimization/54000] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression][IVOPTS] Performance breakdown for gcc-4.{6,7} vs. gcc-4.5 using std::vector in matrix vector multiplication

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54000

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P2
Summary|[4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression]|[4.6/4.7/4.8
   |Performance breakdown for   |Regression][IVOPTS]
   |gcc-4.{6,7} vs. gcc-4.5 |Performance breakdown for
   |using std::vector in matrix |gcc-4.{6,7} vs. gcc-4.5
   |vector multiplication   |using std::vector in matrix
   ||vector multiplication
  Known to fail||4.7.1, 4.8.0

--- Comment #8 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
10:00:27 UTC ---
Thanks for the reduced testcase.  The innermost loops compare as follows:

4.5:

.L7:
movsd   (%rbx,%rcx), %xmm0
addq$8, %rcx
mulsd   0(%rbp,%rdx), %xmm0
addq$8, %rdx
cmpq$24, %rdx
addsd   %xmm0, %xmm1
movsd   %xmm1, (%rsi)
jne .L7

4.7:

.L13:
movq64(%rsp), %rdi
movq80(%rsp), %rdx
addq%rcx, %rdi
addq%r8, %rdx
movsd   -8(%rax,%rdi), %xmm0
mulsd   (%rsi,%rax), %xmm0
addq$8, %rax
cmpq$24, %rax
addsd   (%rdx), %xmm0
movsd   %xmm0, (%rdx)
jne .L13

so we seem to have a register allocation / spilling issue here as well
as a bad induction variable choice.  GCC 4.8 is not any better here.

[Bug c++/53958] set_slot_part and canon_value_cmp using 90% of compile time

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53958

Richard Guenther  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P3  |P2
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
   Last reconfirmed||2012-09-07
 Blocks||47344
   Target Milestone|4.6.4   |---
Summary|[4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression]|set_slot_part and
   |set_slot_part and   |canon_value_cmp using 90%
   |canon_value_cmp using 90%   |of compile time
   |of compile time |
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther  2012-09-07 
09:46:43 UTC ---
Confirmed.  Happens in all maintained releases, duplicating the regression
to 47344.