[Bug c/60622] [4.9 Regression] symbol missing when compiled with -flto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60622 Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution|--- |INVALID --- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- You need gcc-nm to read slim object file, because the symbol is in the __gnu_lto_slim section in this case. % gcc-nm test.o U arg T foo See: http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/changes.html for more details.
[Bug c/60622] [4.9 Regression] symbol missing when compiled with -flto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60622 --- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- BTW you can also use the following switch to display more info: % readelf -SW test.o There are 16 section headers, starting at offset 0x5a0: Section Headers: [Nr] Name TypeAddress OffSize ES Flg Lk Inf Al [ 0] NULL 00 00 00 0 0 0 [ 1] .text PROGBITS 40 00 00 AX 0 0 1 [ 2] .data PROGBITS 40 00 00 WA 0 0 1 [ 3] .bss NOBITS 40 00 00 WA 0 0 1 [ 4] .gnu.lto_.inline.7470c5c6dcce8093 PROGBITS 40 1f 00 E 0 0 1 [ 5] .gnu.lto_foo.7470c5c6dcce8093 PROGBITS 5f 000120 00 E 0 0 1 [ 6] .gnu.lto_.symbol_nodes.7470c5c6dcce8093 PROGBITS 00017f 25 00 E 0 0 1 [ 7] .gnu.lto_.refs.7470c5c6dcce8093 PROGBITS 0001a4 14 00 E 0 0 1 [ 8] .gnu.lto_.decls.7470c5c6dcce8093 PROGBITS 0001b8 000229 00 E 0 0 1 [ 9] .gnu.lto_.symtab.7470c5c6dcce8093 PROGBITS 0003e1 26 00 E 0 0 1 [10] .gnu.lto_.optsPROGBITS 000407 4d 00 E 0 0 1 [11] .comment PROGBITS 000454 2a 01 MS 0 0 1 [12] .note.GNU-stack PROGBITS 00047e 00 00 0 0 1 [13] .shstrtab STRTAB 00047e 00011f 00 0 0 1 [14] .symtab SYMTAB 0009a0 000180 18 15 14 8 [15] .strtab STRTAB 000b20 24 00 0 0 1 Key to Flags: W (write), A (alloc), X (execute), M (merge), S (strings), l (large) I (info), L (link order), G (group), T (TLS), E (exclude), x (unknown) O (extra OS processing required) o (OS specific), p (processor specific)
[Bug libstdc++/60621] std::vector::emplace_back generates massively more code than push_back
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60621 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org --- Some things that help: -fabi-version=0 -fwhole-program (so it knows emplace_back won't be used anywhere else, and it can inline it and remove the unneeded paths)
[Bug java/44495] [4.7/4.8/4.9 regression] ICE in java_mangle_resource_name, at java/mangle.c:658
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44495 Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX --- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org --- No real interest I guess.
[Bug bootstrap/56704] rlim_t problem gcc 4.8.0 on Solaris 2.10/sparc?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56704 Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX --- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org --- No feedback.
[Bug ada/37110] Assert_Failure at atree.adb:886 caused by legal prefixed notation
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37110 Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2014-03-23 Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org --- Still happens on mainline.
[Bug ada/51114] ICE when creating a private derived type
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51114 Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2014-03-23 Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org --- Still happens on the mainline.
[Bug libstdc++/58168] Installation of GCC 4.8.1 (libstdc++) hangs in make_sunver.pl on Solaris10/SPARC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58168 Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME --- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org --- Presumably.
[Bug rtl-optimization/57425] [4.8 Regression] RTL alias analysis unprepared to handle stack slot sharing
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57425 Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #20 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org --- Fixed everywhere now.
[Bug ada/48368] missing support for ZCX on the ARM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48368 Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0 --- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org --- AdaCore has contributed ZCX support on the mainline.
[Bug debug/16063] Debuggers need more information about enum types in C++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16063 --- Comment #6 from Mark Wielaard mark at gcc dot gnu.org --- Posted a patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-03/msg01198.html
[Bug libstdc++/60621] std::vector::emplace_back generates massively more code than push_back
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60621 --- Comment #2 from marc at kdab dot com --- Yes, that helps a bit, but emplace_back still generates larger code than the corresponding rvalue-push_back. Considering that the latter also needs to generate the implicitly defined move ctor for S, this is still somewhat surprising and runs counter to the motivation to have emplace_back in the first place.
[Bug rtl-optimization/60601] [4.9 Regression] profiledbootstrap fails with Ada
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60601 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- I guess it is not a big deal to do: save_growing_size = obstack_object_size (obstack); + save_growing_value = NULL; if (save_growing_size 0) save_growing_value = obstack_finish (obstack); to workaround the bogus warning. Of course it would be nice to understand why uninit doesn't handle this, since it should be the pretty much easiest case of predicated uninit analysis. --- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Sun Mar 23 11:29:42 2014 New Revision: 208770 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208770root=gccview=rev Log: PR rtl-optimization/60601 * bb-reorder.c (fix_up_fall_thru_edges): Test EDGE_FALLTHRU everywhere. * gcc.c (eval_spec_function): Initialize save_growing_value. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/bb-reorder.c trunk/gcc/gcc.c
[Bug rtl-optimization/60601] [4.9 Regression] profiledbootstrap fails with Ada
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60601 --- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Sun Mar 23 11:30:57 2014 New Revision: 208771 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208771root=gccview=rev Log: PR rtl-optimization/60601 * bb-reorder.c (fix_up_fall_thru_edges): Test EDGE_FALLTHRU everywhere. * gcc.c (eval_spec_function): Initialize save_growing_value. Modified: branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/bb-reorder.c branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/gcc.c
[Bug rtl-optimization/60601] [4.9 Regression] profiledbootstrap fails with Ada
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60601 --- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Sun Mar 23 11:31:36 2014 New Revision: 208772 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208772root=gccview=rev Log: PR rtl-optimization/60601 * bb-reorder.c (fix_up_fall_thru_edges): Test EDGE_FALLTHRU everywhere. Modified: branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_7-branch/gcc/bb-reorder.c
[Bug rtl-optimization/60601] [4.9 Regression] profiledbootstrap fails with Ada
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60601 Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org --- Apparently an old pasto.
[Bug c/60624] New: creation of working linux sparc32 kernel fails
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60624
Bug ID: 60624
Summary: creation of working linux sparc32 kernel fails
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wbx at openadk dot org
Hi,
recently I updated my gcc 4.7.3 based cross-toolchain to 4.8.2. Since then my
sparc32 kernel does not boot in qemu-system-sparc anymore.
I used git bisect to find following commit, which breaks it:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revisionrevision=190291
Bug fixed with this commit:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54109
When reverting the change in gcc 4.8.2, system boots up fine again.
Can anybody explain me, why removing an optimization in gcc, breaks the Linux
kernel bootup?
You can find a working and a broken kernel on http://www.openadk.org/sparc
including disassembled versions. The bug happens with at least 3.13.6, 3.12.13,
3.11.10, 3.10.33 and 3.4.82.
Oops on boot with Qemu 1.7.0: qemu-system-sparc -M SS-5 -nographic -kernel
vmlinux.broken:
CPUs: 1 x FMI,MB86904
UUID: ----
Welcome to OpenBIOS v1.1 built on Oct 2 2013 22:57
Type 'help' for detailed information
[sparc] Kernel already loaded
switching to new context:
PROMLIB: obio_ranges 1
PROMLIB: Sun Boot Prom Version 3 Revision 2
Linux version 3.13.6 (wbx@kop-brodkorbw) (gcc version 4.8.2 (GCC) ) #2 Sun Mar
23 12:11:57 CET 2014
bootconsole [earlyprom0] enabled
ARCH: SUN4M
TYPE: SPARCstation 5
Ethernet address: 52:54:00:12:34:56
OF stdout device is: /obio/zs@0,10:a
PROM: Built device tree with 22213 bytes of memory.
Booting Linux...
Power off control detected.
Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference
tsk-{mm,active_mm}-context =
tsk-{mm,active_mm}-pgd = fc00
\|/ \|/
@'/ ,. \`@
/_| \__/ |_\
\__U_/
swapper(0): Oops [#1]
CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper Not tainted 3.13.6 #2
task: f0251eb8 ti: f0248000 task.ti: f0248000
PSR: 04001fc4 PC: f026d9ec NPC: f026d9f0 Y: Not tainted
PC: pcpu_setup_first_chunk+0x590/0x74c
%G: f03d2c58 00ff 0001 f0401000 075b f0248000
%O: 0001 0001 002c f0249e70 f026d9ac
RPC: pcpu_setup_first_chunk+0x550/0x74c
%L: f025 f025 f025 0001 0001
%I: f074fbe0 f0751000 0008 f03d3000 8000 f0759100 f0249ed0 f026dc1c
Disabling lock debugging due to kernel taint
Caller[f026dc1c]: setup_per_cpu_areas+0x74/0x98
Caller[f0263a68]: start_kernel+0x104/0x3cc
Caller[f026343c]: continue_boot+0x324/0x334
Caller[f0263048]: execute_in_high_mem+0x48/0x98
Instruction DUMP: 82006001 8328c001 82007fff c2208012 c2062004 80a06000
228b f8276008 c2276008
Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
Press Stop-A (L1-A) to return to the boot prom
Thanks for any help in advance.
Waldemar
[Bug libstdc++/60623] FAIL: libstdc++-abi/abi_check
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60623 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org --- The hppa-linux-gnu/baseline_symbols.txt file hasn't been updated since 2012. Could you run make new-abi-baseline make check-abi and see if that solves it. If so, we'll need the new baseline file checked in.
[Bug fortran/60543] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Function with side effect removed by the optimizer.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60543 --- Comment #8 from Sarantis Pantazis sarantis.pantazis at gmail dot com --- Created attachment 32430 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32430action=edit Compilation logs and installation workflow
[Bug fortran/60543] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Function with side effect removed by the optimizer.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60543 --- Comment #9 from Sarantis Pantazis sarantis.pantazis at gmail dot com --- Thank you for the fast response and effort. I have installed gcc from svn but the results are still the same. Perhaps I mis-installed something? Attached you will find the logs and the installation workflow. Is step #14 perhaps wrong? The output of gfortran -v seems correct though. Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=/home/sarantis/latestGcc/gcc-build/gcc/gfortran Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/home/sarantis/latestGcc --enable-languages=c,fortran,c++ --disable-multilib Thread model: posix gcc version 4.9.0 20140323 (experimental) (GCC)
[Bug fortran/60543] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Function with side effect removed by the optimizer.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60543 --- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr --- Thank you for the fast response and effort. I have installed gcc from svn but the results are still the same. Perhaps I mis-installed something? Attached you will find the logs and the installation workflow. Is step #14 perhaps wrong? Did you recompile the module defining random()?
[Bug libstdc++/60623] FAIL: libstdc++-abi/abi_check
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60623 --- Comment #2 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: danglin Date: Sun Mar 23 15:12:38 2014 New Revision: 208774 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208774root=gccview=rev Log: PR libstdc++/60623 * config/abi/post/hppa-linux-gnu/baseline_symbols.txt: Update. Modified: trunk/libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog trunk/libstdc++-v3/config/abi/post/hppa-linux-gnu/baseline_symbols.txt
[Bug libstdc++/60623] FAIL: libstdc++-abi/abi_check
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60623 John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Fixed.
[Bug c++/60625] New: attributes on template member function definition inside class definition not supported
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60625
Bug ID: 60625
Summary: attributes on template member function definition
inside class definition not supported
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: petschy at gmail dot com
struct Foo
{
templateint U
// error: attributes are not allowed on a function-definition
static int Bar() __attribute__((always_inline))
{
return U;
}
// no error, although this is a fn definition, too
static int Baz(bool x) __attribute__((always_inline))
{
return x ? Bar5() : Bar42();
}
};
g++ -c 20140323-force_inline.cpp
20140323-force_inline.cpp:5:20: error: attributes are not allowed on a
function-definition
static int Bar() __attribute__((always_inline))
Tried with all minor versions from 4.4 to 4.9, same results.
Supporting attributes on in-class defined template members would be really
useful, or rather, convenient. Otherwise, one have to declare the function with
the attribute inside the class, then define it outside the class. For short and
simple functions this is rather tedious.
Regards, Peter
[Bug c++/60625] attributes on template member function definition inside class definition not supported
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60625 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org --- For function definitions (nothing to do with templates) the attribute has to come at the beginning, not at the end. Move it right before 'static' and it will compile.
[Bug c++/60625] attributes on template member function definition inside class definition not supported
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60625 --- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org --- Or somewhere else before the function name, ie. as part of the declaration-specifiers.
[Bug c/60624] creation of working linux sparc32 kernel fails
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60624 Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2014-03-23 CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org --- recently I updated my gcc 4.7.3 based cross-toolchain to 4.8.2. Since then my sparc32 kernel does not boot in qemu-system-sparc anymore. I used git bisect to find following commit, which breaks it: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revisionrevision=190291 Bug fixed with this commit: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54109 When reverting the change in gcc 4.8.2, system boots up fine again. Can anybody explain me, why removing an optimization in gcc, breaks the Linux kernel bootup? Probably because this uncovered a latent optimization bug. Can you try the latest snapshot of the 4.8 branch (or the branch from the SVN repository)?
[Bug c++/60625] attributes on template member function definition inside class definition not supported
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60625 --- Comment #3 from petschy at gmail dot com --- Thanks. It's then an inconsistency, right? Because the non-template fn def didn't trigger the error while the template version did so. Moreover, the error message is misleading, because it said attributes were not allowed, while they are allowed, just not at the end.
[Bug c/60624] creation of working linux sparc32 kernel fails
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60624 --- Comment #2 from Waldemar Brodkorb wbx at openadk dot org --- Created attachment 32431 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32431action=edit shell script to compile toolchain and kernel
[Bug c/60624] creation of working linux sparc32 kernel fails
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60624
--- Comment #3 from Waldemar Brodkorb wbx at openadk dot org ---
same problem exist with gcc 4.8 git branch:
Linux version 3.13.6 (wbx@kop-brodkorbw) (gcc version 4.8.3 20140317
(prerelease) (GCC) ) #19 Sun Mar 23 19:23:11 CET 2014
bootconsole [earlyprom0] enabled
ARCH: SUN4M
TYPE: SPARCstation 5
Ethernet address: 52:54:00:12:34:56
OF stdout device is: /obio/zs@0,10:a
PROM: Built device tree with 22213 bytes of memory.
Booting Linux...
Power off control detected.
Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference
tsk-{mm,active_mm}-context =
tsk-{mm,active_mm}-pgd = fc00
\|/ \|/
@'/ ,. \`@
/_| \__/ |_\
\__U_/
swapper(0): Oops [#1]
[Bug c++/56038] declarations in xmmintrin.h conflict with mingw-w64 intrin.h in c++ mode
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56038 --- Comment #12 from Erik van Pienbroek erik-gcc-bugzilla at vanpienbroek dot nl --- (In reply to tim.lebedkov from comment #11) Qt 5.2.1 cannot be build in 32 bit with mingw-w64 4.8.2 because of this bug. Why is it not fixed? A fix for this issue was applied in the intrin.h of mingw-w64 v3.1.0 (which was released in January 2014). Here's the commit in question: http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/code/6303/ You might want to consider updating your toolchain. I can't judge whether the fix applied in mingw-w64 is correct or whether something needs to be changed in gcc itself as well. Therefore I'm leaving this bug open for now. If the gcc devs think otherwise feel free to close this bug. Qt5 itself can now be built properly against gcc 4.8.2 and mingw-w64 v3.1.0 without any issues.
[Bug c++/59912] [C++1y] ICE when deducing return type for specialized functions
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59912 Volker Reichelt reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2014-03-23 CC||reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 Known to fail||4.8.0, 4.9.0 --- Comment #1 from Volker Reichelt reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org --- Confirmed.
[Bug c++/60626] New: [c++1y] ICE with pointer to function with auto parameter
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60626
Bug ID: 60626
Summary: [c++1y] ICE with pointer to function with auto
parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: error-recovery, ice-on-invalid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: abutcher at gcc dot gnu.org
The following invalid code snippet (compiled with -std=c++1y)
triggers an ICE on trunk:
==
struct A {};
void (*A::p)(auto) = 0;
==
bug.cc:3:18: error: 'void (* A::p)(auto:1)' is not a static member of 'struct
A'
void (*A::p)(auto) = 0;
^
bug.cc:3:18: error: template definition of non-template 'void (* A::p)(auto:1)'
bug.cc:3:22: internal compiler error: in poplevel, at cp/decl.c:568
void (*A::p)(auto) = 0;
^
0x5c3903 poplevel(int, int, int)
../../gcc/gcc/cp/decl.c:568
0x5fd2a8 end_template_decl()
../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:3809
0x6a1f31 finish_fully_implicit_template
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:32121
0x6cd346 cp_parser_init_declarator
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:16826
0x6ce9e9 cp_parser_simple_declaration
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:11225
0x6b2983 cp_parser_block_declaration
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:11106
0x6d9022 cp_parser_declaration
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:11003
0x6d7d18 cp_parser_declaration_seq_opt
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:10889
0x6d95ca cp_parser_translation_unit
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:4030
0x6d95ca c_parse_file()
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:31645
0x7f9de3 c_common_parse_file()
../../gcc/gcc/c-family/c-opts.c:1061
Please submit a full bug report, [etc.]
Adam, you might want to have a look at this one.
[Bug c++/60627] New: [c++1y] ICE in explicit template instantiation containing auto parameter
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60627
Bug ID: 60627
Summary: [c++1y] ICE in explicit template instantiation
containing auto parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic, error-recovery, ice-on-invalid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: abutcher at gcc dot gnu.org
The following invalid code snippet (compiled with -std=c++1y)
triggers an ICE on trunk:
=
templatetypename T void foo(T) {}
template void foo(auto);
void bar()
{
foo(0);
}
=
bug.cc:3:23: error: template parameter list used in explicit instantiation
template void foo(auto);
^
bug.cc: In instantiation of 'void foo(T) [with T = auto:1]':
bug.cc:3:23: required from here
bug.cc:1:27: internal compiler error: in dependent_type_p, at cp/pt.c:20474
templatetypename T void foo(T) {}
^
0x602058 dependent_type_p(tree_node*)
../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:20474
0x5d6450 require_complete_types_for_parms
../../gcc/gcc/cp/decl.c:10864
0x5d6450 check_function_type
../../gcc/gcc/cp/decl.c:12981
0x5d6450 start_preparsed_function(tree_node*, tree_node*, int)
../../gcc/gcc/cp/decl.c:13155
0x611ab0 instantiate_decl(tree_node*, int, bool)
../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:19837
0x651427 instantiate_pending_templates(int)
../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:19997
0x68c37f cp_write_global_declarations()
../../gcc/gcc/cp/decl2.c:4311
Please submit a full bug report, [etc.]
Also, the first diagnostic could be improved: It's not obvious that auto is a
template-parameter-list (and in other contexts it really isn't).
Adam, you might want to have a look at this one.
[Bug c++/60628] New: [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] [c++11] ICE initializing array of auto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60628
Bug ID: 60628
Summary: [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] [c++11] ICE initializing
array of auto
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org
The following (invalid?) code snippet (compiled with -std=c++11 or
-std=c++0x for older compilers) triggers an ICE since GCC 4.6.0:
=
#include initializer_list
void foo(int i)
{
auto x[i] = { 0 };
}
=
bug.cc: In function 'void foo(int)':
bug.cc:5:19: internal compiler error: in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:13032
auto x[i] = { 0 };
^
0x62bba3 tsubst_copy
../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:13032
0x60a6a6 tsubst_copy_and_build(tree_node*, tree_node*, int, tree_node*, bool,
bool)
../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:15287
0x614496 tsubst_expr
../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:13980
0x61dc56 tsubst(tree_node*, tree_node*, int, tree_node*)
../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:11597
0x61cf47 tsubst(tree_node*, tree_node*, int, tree_node*)
../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:12046
0x648e17 listify_autos
../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:21612
0x648e17 do_auto_deduction(tree_node*, tree_node*, tree_node*)
../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:21636
0x5db251 cp_finish_decl(tree_node*, tree_node*, bool, tree_node*, int)
../../gcc/gcc/cp/decl.c:6198
0x6cd22d cp_parser_init_declarator
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:16858
0x6ce9e9 cp_parser_simple_declaration
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:11225
0x6b2983 cp_parser_block_declaration
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:11106
0x6b3aa1 cp_parser_declaration_statement
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:10753
0x6b40eb cp_parser_statement
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:9486
0x6b4f39 cp_parser_statement_seq_opt
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:9764
0x6b50a6 cp_parser_compound_statement
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:9718
0x6c62db cp_parser_function_body
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:18736
0x6c62db cp_parser_ctor_initializer_opt_and_function_body
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:18772
0x6cc8b2 cp_parser_function_definition_after_declarator
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:22897
0x6cd75f cp_parser_function_definition_from_specifiers_and_declarator
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:22809
0x6cd75f cp_parser_init_declarator
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:16628
Please submit a full bug report, [etc.]
[Bug c++/60628] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] [c++11] ICE initializing array of auto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60628 Volker Reichelt reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.4.0, 4.5.0 Target Milestone|--- |4.7.4 Known to fail||4.6.0, 4.7.0, 4.8.0, 4.9.0
[Bug c++/60629] New: [c++11] ICE initializing array of function pointers with auto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60629
Bug ID: 60629
Summary: [c++11] ICE initializing array of function pointers
with auto
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org
The following (valid?) code snippet (compiled with -std=c++11 or
-std=c++0xfor older compilers) triggers an ICE since GCC 4.4.0
(when auto was introduced):
void foo(int i)
{
auto(*p)[i] = (int(*)[i])0;
}
bug.cc: In function 'void foo(int)':
bug.cc:3:28: internal compiler error: in unify_array_domain, at cp/pt.c:17272
auto(*p)[i] = (int(*)[i])0;
^
0x638602 unify_array_domain
../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:17272
0x6355df unify
../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:17821
0x635303 unify
../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:17802
0x638bd7 unify_one_argument
../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:16338
0x63afec type_unification_real
../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:16410
0x648d1a do_auto_deduction(tree_node*, tree_node*, tree_node*)
../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:21663
0x5db251 cp_finish_decl(tree_node*, tree_node*, bool, tree_node*, int)
../../gcc/gcc/cp/decl.c:6198
0x6cd22d cp_parser_init_declarator
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:16858
0x6ce9e9 cp_parser_simple_declaration
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:11225
0x6b2983 cp_parser_block_declaration
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:11106
0x6b3aa1 cp_parser_declaration_statement
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:10753
0x6b40eb cp_parser_statement
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:9486
0x6b4f39 cp_parser_statement_seq_opt
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:9764
0x6b50a6 cp_parser_compound_statement
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:9718
0x6c62db cp_parser_function_body
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:18736
0x6c62db cp_parser_ctor_initializer_opt_and_function_body
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:18772
0x6cc8b2 cp_parser_function_definition_after_declarator
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:22897
0x6cd75f cp_parser_function_definition_from_specifiers_and_declarator
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:22809
0x6cd75f cp_parser_init_declarator
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:16628
0x6ce9e9 cp_parser_simple_declaration
../../gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:11225
Please submit a full bug report, [etc.]
[Bug c++/60629] [c++11] ICE initializing array of function pointers with auto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60629
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2014-03-23
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Confirmed. We hit
17268 parm_max = TYPE_MAX_VALUE (parm_dom);
17269 parm_cst = TREE_CODE (parm_max) == INTEGER_CST;
17270 if (!parm_cst)
17271 {
17272 gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (parm_max) == MINUS_EXPR);
assert where parm_max is (sizetype) (SAVE_EXPR (ssizetype) i + -1).
[Bug rtl-optimization/49358] optimization regression in 4.7.0, 4.6.1 from 4.5.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49358 --- Comment #3 from Václav Zeman vhaisman at gmail dot com --- And still a problem with gcc version 4.8.1 (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.8.1-10ubuntu9).
[Bug fortran/60543] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Function with side effect removed by the optimizer.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60543 --- Comment #11 from Sarantis Pantazis sarantis.pantazis at gmail dot com --- Yes, I did; I used make clean first (also rm *.o *.f90 *.s in the main folder to clean up the files generated by -save-temps).
[Bug fortran/60543] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Function with side effect removed by the optimizer.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60543 --- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr --- Yes, I did; I used make clean first (also rm *.o *.f90 *.s in the main folder to clean up the files generated by -save-temps). Did you update the compiler name in your makefile? I have just been caught by that when comparing the results in the bug_OPT1mode_withWRITE and bug_OPT1mode_noWRITE directories. With the right compiler for both, I get 2000105810051017 Can you do the following cp MOD/generalfunctions.mod generalFunctions.mod.gz gunzip generalFunctions.mod.gz grep PURE generalFunctions.mod you should only see UNKNOWN-PROC DECL UNKNOWN 0 0 INTRINSIC FUNCTION PURE) () (CHARACTER 1 0 UNKNOWN-PROC DECL UNKNOWN 0 0 INTRINSIC FUNCTION PURE) () (CHARACTER 1 0 i.e., no IMPLICIT_PURE.
[Bug fortran/55117] Programs fails to read namelist (contains derived types objects)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55117 --- Comment #25 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org --- Preliminary patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2014-03/msg00150.html
[Bug libstdc++/60630] New: FAIL: 21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.cc (test for excess errors)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60630 Bug ID: 60630 Summary: FAIL: 21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.cc (test for excess errors) Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: danglin at gcc dot gnu.org Host: hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00 Target: hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00 Build: hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00 spawn /xxx/gnu/gcc/objdir/./gcc/xg++ -shared-libgcc -B/xxx/gnu/gcc/objdir/./gcc -nostdinc++ -L/xxx/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00/libstdc++-v3/src -L/xxx/ gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00/libstdc++-v3/src/.libs -L/xxx/gnu/gcc/objdi r/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/.libs -B/opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.9/hppa 2.0w-hp-hpux11.00/bin/ -B/opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.9/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00/lib/ -isyste m /opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.9/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00/include -isystem /opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4 .9/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00/sys-include -B/xxx/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00 /./libstdc++-v3/src/.libs -fdiagnostics-color=never -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERT -fmessage- length=0 -g -O2 -g -O2 -DLOCALEDIR=. -nostdinc++ -I/xxx/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa2.0 w-hp-hpux11.00/libstdc++-v3/include/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00 -I/xxx/gnu/gcc/objdir/ hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00/libstdc++-v3/include -I/xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/libsu pc++ -I/xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/include/backward -I/xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc ++-v3/testsuite/util /xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_st ring/literals/types.cc -std=gnu++1y -S -o types.s /xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.c c: In function 'void test01()': /xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.c c:35:39: error: unable to find string literal operator 'operators' with 'const wchar_t [6]', 'long unsigned int' arguments static_assert(std::is_samedecltype(LHellos), std::wstring::value, ^ /xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.c c:35:39: error: unable to find string literal operator 'operators' with 'const wchar_t [23]', 'long unsigned int' arguments /xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.c c:35:51: error: 'wstring' is not a member of 'std' static_assert(std::is_samedecltype(LHellos), std::wstring::value, ^ /xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.c c:35:51: error: 'wstring' is not a member of 'std' /xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.c c:35:63: error: template argument 1 is invalid static_assert(std::is_samedecltype(LHellos), std::wstring::value, ^ /xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.c c:35:63: error: template argument 2 is invalid compiler exited with status 1 output is: /xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.c c: In function 'void test01()': /xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.c c:35:39: error: unable to find string literal operator 'operators' with 'const wchar_t [6]', 'long unsigned int' arguments static_assert(std::is_samedecltype(LHellos), std::wstring::value, ^ /xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.c c:35:39: error: unable to find string literal operator 'operators' with 'const wchar_t [23]', 'long unsigned int' arguments /xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.c c:35:51: error: 'wstring' is not a member of 'std' static_assert(std::is_samedecltype(LHellos), std::wstring::value, ^ /xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.c c:35:51: error: 'wstring' is not a member of 'std' /xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.c c:35:63: error: template argument 1 is invalid static_assert(std::is_samedecltype(LHellos), std::wstring::value, ^ /xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.c c:35:63: error: template argument 2 is invalid FAIL: 21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.cc (test for excess errors) Excess errors: /xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.c c:35:39: error: unable to find string literal operator 'operators' with 'const wchar_t [6]', 'long unsigned int' arguments /xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/literals/types.c c:35:39: error: unable to find string literal operator 'operators' with 'const
[Bug fortran/60128] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Wrong ouput using en edit descriptor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128 --- Comment #36 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org --- Looks Good! I will commit the change in Comment #34 soon.
[Bug fortran/60128] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Wrong ouput using en edit descriptor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128 --- Comment #37 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Mon Mar 24 00:29:43 2014 New Revision: 208780 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208780root=gccview=rev Log: 2014-03-23 Dominique d'Humieres domi...@lps.ens.fr PR libfortran/60128 * gfortran.dg/fmt_en.f90: Update test. XFAIL for i?86-*-solaris2.9*. Modified: trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_en.f90
[Bug libfortran/58015] FAIL: gfortran.dg/round_4.f90: Unsatisfied symbol nextafterl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58015 --- Comment #9 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: danglin Date: Mon Mar 24 00:32:41 2014 New Revision: 208781 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208781root=gccview=rev Log: PR libfortran/59313 PR libfortran/58015 * gfortran.dg/erf_3.F90: Skip on hppa*-*-hpux*. * gfortran.dg/round_4.f90: Likewise. Modified: trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/erf_3.F90 trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/round_4.f90
[Bug libfortran/59313] gfortran.dg/erf_3.F90 FAILs on Solaris/SPARC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59313 --- Comment #10 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: danglin Date: Mon Mar 24 00:32:41 2014 New Revision: 208781 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208781root=gccview=rev Log: PR libfortran/59313 PR libfortran/58015 * gfortran.dg/erf_3.F90: Skip on hppa*-*-hpux*. * gfortran.dg/round_4.f90: Likewise. Modified: trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/erf_3.F90 trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/round_4.f90
[Bug fortran/54070] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Wrong code with allocatable deferred-length (array) function results
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54070 --- Comment #7 from Damian Rouson rouson at stanford dot edu --- I assume the ICE below is related to this PR, but the argument in this case is an array. Should I generate a separate PR? $ cat parse_command_line.f90 module parse_command_line implicit none contains function get_keyword_values(default_values) result(actual_values) character(len=*), intent(in) :: default_values(:) character(len=:), allocatable :: actual_values(:) actual_values=default_values end function end module $ gfortran -c parse_command_line.f90 parse_command_line.f90: In function 'get_keyword_values': parse_command_line.f90:7:0: internal compiler error: in gimplify_var_or_parm_decl, at gimplify.c:1721 actual_values=default_values ^ parse_command_line.f90:7:0: internal compiler error: Abort trap: 6 gfortran: internal compiler error: Abort trap: 6 (program f951) Abort trap: 6 $ gfortran --version GNU Fortran (MacPorts gcc49 4.9-20140316_0) 4.9.0 20140316 (experimental)
