[Bug target/45752] [4.5 regression] ICE in ix86_vectorize_builtin_vec_perm_ok
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-23 07:20 --- It is caused by revision 155584: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-01/msg00043.html and fixed by revision 161655: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-07/msg6.html on trunk. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Target Milestone|--- |4.5.2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45752
[Bug tree-optimization/45750] [4.6 Regression] ICE: in iterative_hash_expr, at tree.c:6831 on invalid code
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-23 06:46 --- It is caused by revision 161655: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-07/msg6.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-23 06:46:05 date|| Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45750
[Bug middle-end/45325] [4.6 Regression] target attribute doesn't work with -march=i586
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-23 00:20 --- *** Bug 45753 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45325
[Bug middle-end/45753] [4.6 Regression] Revision 162918 failed gcc.target/i386/pr38240.c
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-23 00:20 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 45325 *** -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45753
[Bug middle-end/45753] New: [4.6 Regression] Revision 162918 failed gcc.target/i386/pr38240.c
On Linux/ia32, revision 162918: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-08/msg00129.html caused: [...@gnu-35 rrs]$ /export/gnu/import/rrs/162918/usr/bin/gcc -m32 -march=i586 -S pr38240.c pr38240.c: In function \u2018g\u2019: pr38240.c:8:21: internal compiler error: in convert_move, at expr.c:326 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. [...@gnu-35 rrs]$ -- Summary: [4.6 Regression] Revision 162918 failed gcc.target/i386/pr38240.c Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45753
[Bug middle-end/45234] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE in expand_call, at calls.c:2845 when passing aligned function argument from unaligned stack after alloca
--- Comment #23 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-22 21:36
---
(In reply to comment #22)
> The 4.5/4.4 backports of this patch break:
> /* { dg-do compile } */
> /* { dg-options "-march=i586" { target ilp32 } } */
>
> struct S { union { double b[4]; } a[18]; } s, a[5];
> void foo (struct S);
> struct S bar (struct S, struct S *, struct S);
>
> void
> foo (struct S arg)
> {
> }
>
> void
> baz (void)
> {
> foo (bar (s, &a[1], a[2]));
> }
We are trying to adjust stacking when calling builtin functions. This patch
works for me:
index aef823f..0c7588a 100644
--- a/gcc/calls.c
+++ b/gcc/calls.c
@@ -2369,7 +2369,7 @@ expand_call (tree exp, rtx target, int ignore)
preferred_unit_stack_boundary = preferred_stack_boundary / BITS_PER_UNIT;
- if (SUPPORTS_STACK_ALIGNMENT)
+ if (SUPPORTS_STACK_ALIGNMENT && fndecl && !DECL_IS_BUILTIN (fndecl))
{
/* All variable sized adjustments must be multiple of preferred
stack boundary. Stack alignment may change preferred stack
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45234
[Bug c/45741] [4.6 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in string_constant (expr.c:9863) when parsing memcmp()
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-21 17:37 --- It is caused by revision 164438: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00734.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-21 17:37:53 date|| Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45741
[Bug c++/45562] [4.6 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in cp_build_unary_op (typeck.c:5083) with -std=gnu++0x -fipa-cp-clone -fcompare-debug
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-21 14:54 --- It is caused by revision 162911: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-08/msg00122.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-21 14:54:00 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45562
[Bug tree-optimization/45563] [4.6 Regression] g++.dg/opt/devirt1.C ICEs in ipcp_init_cloned_node, at ipa-cp.c:190 with -fno-early-inlining -fipa-cp-clone
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-21 14:46 --- It is caused by revision 162911: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-08/msg00122.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-21 14:46:17 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45563
[Bug middle-end/45738] [4.6 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected var_decl, have debug_expr_decl in const_value_known_p, at varpool.c:375
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-21 12:23 --- It is caused by revision 164438: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00734.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-21 12:23:29 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45738
[Bug middle-end/45712] [4.6 Regression] Segmentation violation when compiling spec source on either x86 or ppc with debugging
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-21 00:00 --- It is caused by revision 163808: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00099.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45712
[Bug middle-end/45234] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE in expand_call, at calls.c:2845 when passing aligned function argument from unaligned stack after alloca
--- Comment #21 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-20 20:40 --- Fixed. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45234
[Bug tree-optimization/45733] [4.6 Regression] ICE: verify_stmts failed: invalid conversion in gimple call with -fstrict-overflow -ftree-vectorize
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-20 19:50 --- (In reply to comment #2) > Looks like it is caused by revision 164367: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00661.html > Revision 164367 is the cause. Revision 164367 also caused PR 45720. Don't know if they are related. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45733
[Bug lto/45702] [4.6 Regression] New LTO test failures
--- Comment #14 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-20 17:10 --- One solution is always pass -L to linker even if the directory is known to linker. Gcc always does that for multi-lib. This will make gcc more consistent. It may also allow using system linker with native sysroot toolchain. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45702
[Bug lto/45702] [4.6 Regression] New LTO test failures
--- Comment #13 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-20 16:56 --- Here is the deal: 1. The linker default search paths are /lib, /usr/lib. 2. "ld -r" disables the linker default search paths. 3. Gcc always passes -Lmulti-lib-dir to ld when multi-lib is enabled. On Linux/ia32, gcc never passes -L/lib -L/usr/lib to linker. It works with the linker default search paths. But "gcc -r" disables the linker default search paths and "gcc -r -lm" doesn't work. On Linux/x86-64, gcc always passes -Lmulti-lib-dir to linker and "gcc -r -lm" works with -m32/-m64. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45702
[Bug tree-optimization/45734] [4.6 Regression] Devirtualization results in wrong-code
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-20 15:27 --- It is caused by revision 161655: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-07/msg6.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-20 15:27:10 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45734
[Bug middle-end/45706] [4.6 regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-114.c
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-20 13:54 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Whoops. Yeah, I only added x86_64-*-* to the vect_perm targets. Obviously,
> as sse2 is active by default for the vectorizer testsuite I also need to
> add the i?86-*-* targets. H.J., can you try with this patch on a native
> system
> (so that we may see any possible fallout)?
>
> Index: testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
> ===
> --- testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp (revision 164367)
> +++ testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp (working copy)
> @@ -2426,6 +2426,7 @@ proc check_effective_target_vect_perm {
> set et_vect_perm_saved 0
> if { [istarget powerpc*-*-*]
> || [istarget spu-*-*]
> +|| [istarget i?86-*-*]
> || [istarget x86_64-*-*] } {
> set et_vect_perm_saved 1
> }
>
It works.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45706
[Bug middle-end/45720] [4.6 regression] Revision 164367 miscompiled SPEC CPU 2K
-- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
[Bug testsuite/45719] gcc.target/i386/pad-3.c scan-assembler-not nop fails at -m32 for-fPIC
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 16:27 --- Fixed. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Component|c |testsuite Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45719
[Bug middle-end/45720] New: [4.6 regression] Revision 164367 miscompiled SPEC CPU 2K
Revision 164367: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00661.html miscompiled SPEC CPU 2K at -O3. On Linux/x86-64, I got Running 186.crafty ref peak lnx32e-gcc default *** Miscompare of crafty.out, see /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/spec/2000/x86_ 64/spec/benchspec/CINT2000/186.crafty/run/0004/crafty.out.mis ... Running 200.sixtrack ref peak lnx32e-gcc default *** Miscompare of inp.out, see /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/spec/2000/x86_64/ spec/benchspec/CFP2000/200.sixtrack/run/0004/inp.out.mis with -O3 -funroll-loops -ffast-math. On Linux/ia32, I got Running 254.gap ref peak lnx32-gcc default *** Miscompare of ref.out, see /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/spec/2000/i686/sp ec/benchspec/CINT2000/254.gap/run/0004/ref.out.mis with -O3 -funroll-loops -msse2 -mfpmath=sse -ffast-math. -- Summary: [4.6 regression] Revision 164367 miscompiled SPEC CPU 2K Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
[Bug c/45719] gcc.target/i386/pad-3.c scan-assembler-not nop fails at -m32 for-fPIC
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 15:11 --- Does adding "-fno-pic" work on Darwin? -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45719
[Bug debug/43628] [4.5 Regression] in-class func-ptr type parameter has unspecified DW_AT_type
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 14:49 --- Fixed. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43628
[Bug debug/43628] [4.5 Regression] in-class func-ptr type parameter has unspecified DW_AT_type
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 14:13 --- 4.5 isn't fixed. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED | Summary|[4.5/4.6 Regression] in-|[4.5 Regression] in-class |class func-ptr type |func-ptr type parameter has |parameter has unspecified |unspecified DW_AT_type |DW_AT_type | Target Milestone|4.6.0 |4.5.2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43628
[Bug debug/44645] [4.5 Regression] missing debug info for pointer types
--- Comment #10 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 14:13 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 43628 *** -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44645
[Bug debug/43628] [4.5/4.6 Regression] in-class func-ptr type parameter has unspecified DW_AT_type
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 14:13 --- *** Bug 44645 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||redi at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43628
[Bug debug/44645] [4.5 Regression] missing debug info for pointer types
--- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 13:26 --- This is caused by revision 154354: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-11/msg00575.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at redhat dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44645
[Bug c++/45709] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 regression] internal compiler error: in add_phi_arg, at tree-phinodes.c:395
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 03:36 --- A patch is posted at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-09/msg01461.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc- ||patches/2010- ||09/msg01461.html http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45709
[Bug c++/45709] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 regression] internal compiler error: in add_phi_arg, at tree-phinodes.c:395
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-18 02:59 --- This patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-09/msg01459.html fixes the bug, but caused: FAIL: g++.dg/conversion/op5.C (test for errors, line 18) FAIL: g++.dg/conversion/op5.C (test for excess errors) Now, we get [...@gnu-6 gcc]$ ./xgcc -B./ -S -O /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/conversion/op5.C -ansi -pedantic-errors /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/conversion/op5.C: In function \u2018void foo(const B&)\u2019: /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/conversion/op5.C:18:15: error: conversion from \u2018const B\u2019 to non-scalar type \u2018A\u2019 requested [...@gnu-6 gcc]$ "const" is missing. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.3.6 |--- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45709
[Bug c++/45709] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 regression] internal compiler error: in add_phi_arg, at tree-phinodes.c:395
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 22:20 --- Revision 127647 is the first revision which failed to compile this. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at redhat dot com Component|middle-end |c++ http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45709
[Bug middle-end/45709] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 regression] internal compiler error: in add_phi_arg, at tree-phinodes.c:395
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 22:17 --- Revision 127647: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2007-08/msg00541.html introduced: [...@gnu-26 gcc]$ ./xgcc -B./ -S -O ../../../pr45709.cc ../../../pr45709.cc: In member function virtual void foo::bar(): ../../../pr45709.cc:27: error: PHI def is not a GIMPLE value storage_8 = PHI <©Back.1_1->storage[0](2), ©Back.1_1->storage[1](3)> ©Back.1_1->storage[0]; ../../../pr45709.cc:27: error: PHI def is not a GIMPLE value storage_8 = PHI <©Back.1_1->storage[0](2), ©Back.1_1->storage[1](3)> ©Back.1_1->storage[1]; ../../../pr45709.cc:27: error: invalid operand to unary operator ©Back.1_1->storage; ../../../pr45709.cc:27: internal compiler error: verify_stmts failed Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. [...@gnu-26 gcc]$ -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45709
[Bug middle-end/45709] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 regression] internal compiler error: in add_phi_arg, at tree-phinodes.c:395
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 22:02 --- It was introduced between revision 127644 and 127649. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45709
[Bug target/44542] expand_one_stack_var_at may set DECL_ALIGN to a too high value
--- Comment #19 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 20:24 --- It comes back with revision 164375: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00669.html for PR 45678. On Linux/ia32, I got FAIL: gcc.target/i386/incoming-9.c scan-assembler-not andl[\\t ]*\\$-16,[\\t ]*%esp It is because we are using stack offset of local variable for its alignment. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||45678 nThis|| Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|FIXED | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44542
[Bug c++/45709] New: internal compiler error: in add_phi_arg, at tree-phinodes.c:395
[...@gnu-35 rrs]$ cat foo.cc
struct foo {
virtual void bar();
struct Rect {
int bottom;
};
struct Region {
static Region subtract(const Rect& lhs, const Rect& rhs)
{
Region reg;
Rect* storage = reg.storage;
{
if (lhs.bottom > rhs.bottom)
storage++;
reg.count = storage - reg.storage;
}
return reg;
}
Rect storage[4];
int count;
};
Rect dirtyRegion;
Rect oldDirtyRegion;
};
void foo::bar()
{
const Region copyBack(Region::subtract(oldDirtyRegion, dirtyRegion));
}
[...@gnu-35 rrs]$ /export/gnu/import/rrs/164143/usr/bin/gcc -S -O foo.cc
foo.cc: In member function virtual void foo::bar():
foo.cc:27:70: internal compiler error: in add_phi_arg, at tree-phinodes.c:395
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
[...@gnu-35 rrs]$
--
Summary: internal compiler error: in add_phi_arg, at tree-
phinodes.c:395
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45709
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #25 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 17:26 --- A patch is posted at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-09/msg01425.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc- ||patches/2010- ||09/msg01425.html http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #24 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 16:35 --- Created an attachment (id=21821) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21821&action=view) A patch The problem is we failed to update stack alignment when we increase alignment of local variable. This patch works for me. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug middle-end/45706] [4.6 regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-114.c
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 16:30 --- For some reason, it only fails with 32bit gcc. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45706
[Bug middle-end/45706] [4.6 regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-114.c
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 16:30 --- (In reply to comment #1) > This passes for me, even in -m32 mode (if -msse is added, like vect.exp > does): > > % ./cc1 -ftree-vectorize -fno-vect-cost-model -msse2 -O2 \ > vect-114.c -ftree-vectorizer-verbose=2 2>&1 | grep note: > vect-114.c:13: note: LOOP VECTORIZED. > vect-114.c:6: note: vectorized 1 loops in function. > Please note. The failure is FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-114.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 0 loops" 1 ^^^ -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45706
[Bug middle-end/45706] New: [4.6 regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-114.c
On Linux/ia32, revision 164369 gave FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-114.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 0 loops" 1 Revision 164366 is OK. It may be caused by revision 164367: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00661.html -- Summary: [4.6 regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-114.c Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45706
[Bug middle-end/45699] [4.6 Regression] Incorrect copy constructor generated with -O
-- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-17 14:29:19 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45699
[Bug middle-end/45699] [4.6 Regression] Incorrect copy constructor generated with -O
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 14:29 --- It is caused by revision 159362: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-05/msg00414.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mjambor at suse dot cz http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45699
[Bug lto/45702] [4.6 Regression] New LTO test failures
--- Comment #11 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 14:11 --- (In reply to comment #9) > Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] New LTO test failures > > On Fri, 17 Sep 2010, jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > > > --- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-17 14:04 > > --- > > Dejagnu adds it always for dg-do link/run, and there doesn't seem to be a > > way > > to bypass that. > > Hm, so I'd say blame it on the host system of HJ. Or alternatively As I said, it is a REGRESSION, which means it passed before. I believe it is caused by your --combine change. See: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/2010-09/msg00267.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-17 14:11:09 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45702
[Bug lto/45702] [4.6 Regression] New LTO test failures
--- Comment #10 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 14:08 --- (In reply to comment #6) > With -r -nostdlib when -lm is mentioned on the command line, it is looking for > libm.a. Guess you have it installed on one box and not on the other one. > That said, the tests really shouldn't have -lm on their link line. > /usr/lib/libm.a is available. 32bit gcc driver doesn't pass -L/usr/lib to ld and 64bit gcc driver does. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45702
[Bug lto/45702] [4.6 Regression] New LTO test failures
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 13:52 --- Works fine in 64bit with -m32 [...@gnu-6 gcc]$ /export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/gcc/xgcc -B/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/gcc/ /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c -flto -r -nostdlib /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c -lm -m32 -o pr28712.exe [...@gnu-6 gcc]$ Failed on ia32. [...@gnu-6 gcc]$ /export/build/gnu/gcc-32bit/build-i686-linux/gcc/xgcc -B/export/build/gnu/gcc-32bit/build-i686-linux/gcc/ /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c -flto -r -nostdlib /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c -lm -o pr28712.exe /usr/local/bin/ld: cannot find -lm collect2: ld returned 1 exit status [...@gnu-6 gcc]$ -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45702
[Bug lto/45702] [4.6 Regression] New LTO test failures
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 13:36 --- -m32 works on Intel64 since gcc driver passes /export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/gcc/collect-ld --eh-frame-hdr -m elf_i386 -dynamic-linker /lib/ld-linux.so.2 -o pr28712.exe -r -L/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/gcc/32 -L/lib/../lib -L/usr/lib/../lib -L/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/gcc /tmp/ccLRsGQH.lto.o -lm to collect-ld. Only ia32 fails. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45702
[Bug lto/45702] [4.6 Regression] New LTO test failures
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 13:35 --- I got # /export/build/gnu/gcc-32bit/build-i686-linux/gcc/xgcc -B/export/build/gnu/gcc-32bit/build-i686-linux/gcc/ /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c -flto -r -nostdlib /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr28712.c -lm -o pr28712.exe -v /export/build/gnu/gcc-32bit/build-i686-linux/gcc/collect-ld --eh-frame-hdr -m elf_i386 -dynamic-linker /lib/ld-linux.so.2 -o pr28712.exe -r -L/export/build/gnu/gcc-32bit/build-i686-linux/gcc /tmp/ccLvxKIY.o /tmp/ccpjReNk.o /tmp/ccBVusXG.o -lm /usr/local/bin/ld: cannot find -lm collect2: ld returned 1 exit status For some reason, gcc driver failed to pass -L/usr/lib to collect-ld. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45702
[Bug rtl-optimization/45685] [4.6 Regression] GCC optimizer for Intel x64 generates inefficient code
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-17 13:04 --- (In reply to comment #4) > This all happens in IF conversion pass. > > 4.6 regresses in the sense that a branch is emitted instead of cmov for: > This is caused by revision 159106: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-05/msg00156.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||matz at suse dot de Summary|GCC optimizer for Intel x64 |[4.6 Regression] GCC |generates inefficient code |optimizer for Intel x64 ||generates inefficient code Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 Version|4.4.3 |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45685
[Bug lto/45702] New: [4.6 Regression] New test failures
On Linux/x86, revision 164357 gave FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 -g1 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 -g1 -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 -g1 -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 -g3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 -g3 -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gdwarf-2 -g3 -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+ (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+ -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+ -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+1 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+1 -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+1 -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+3 -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs+3 -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs1 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs1 -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs1 -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs3 -O (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/pr41893-1.c -gstabs3 -O3 (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr27898.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr28706.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr28712.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr30762-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr31529-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr34457-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr34668-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr34989-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/pr43557-1.c (test for excess errors) Revision 164355 is OK. -- Summary: [4.6 Regression] New test failures Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: lto AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45702
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #21 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 14:30 --- (In reply to comment #20) > The patch in comment #4 makes memcpy folding not lie about alignment. X86 only cares about alignment for vector modes. Can we combine 2 patches into one? > cfgexpand still lies about alignment though. > Let's open a new bug and fix it separately. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #19 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 14:17 --- (In reply to comment #17) > That's true. But many expanders can make use of DECL_ALIGN information, e.g. > to choose faster code. If cfgexpand keeps doing what it does now, namely > bumping DECL_ALIGN of variables up to PREFERRED_STACK_BOUNDARY even when in > the > end the stack block doesn't end up being aligned that way, then it lies to the > expander The problem isn't limited to stack. > and that will hit us again and again. On x86-64/i686, I don't think we want > to > prevent memcpy folding as your patch does, at least not for CPUs where movu* > is > fast. That is true. Whatever we do, we can't lie about alignment, on stack or not. Once we fix that, the rest shouldn't be too hard to fix. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #16 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 13:59 --- (In reply to comment #13) > With that patch the assignment generated from memcpy doesn't need more > that int alignment, but still cfgexpand.c sets DECL_ALIGN of the > decl to 128 so expand uses aligned instructions. > > cfgexpand.c should not increase alignment and not set 'needs stack > alignment' then, based on your comment #10. So this _is_ about > stack alignment (but maybe not exclusively). > When we do float d[4]; __m128 *p = (__m128 *) &d; all bets are off. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #15 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 13:54 --- Created an attachment (id=21810) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21810&action=view) A patch This patch adds HARD_ALIGNMENT_MODE_P and works for me. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #12 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 13:32 --- (In reply to comment #4) > Created an attachment (id=21809) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21809&action=view) [edit] > patch to fix "half STRICT_ALIGNMENT" targets memcpy folding > > Might need this patch to fix as well. i?86 / x86_64 isn't really > !STRICT_ALIGNMENT. > We need a HARD_ALIGNMENT which depends on type for x86. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #11 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 13:21 --- This code: if (TREE_CODE (srcvar) == ADDR_EXPR && var_decl_component_p (TREE_OPERAND (srcvar, 0)) && tree_int_cst_equal (TYPE_SIZE_UNIT (srctype), len) && (!STRICT_ALIGNMENT || !destvar || src_align >= TYPE_ALIGN (desttype))) srcvar = fold_build2 (MEM_REF, destvar ? desttype : srctype, srcvar, off0); does float d[4]; __m128 *p = (__m128 *) &d; and treats p as properly aligned. I don't see how it can ever work with SSE. It has nothing to do with stack alignment. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #10 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 13:10 --- When __builtin_memcpy increases the alignment of source or destination, it should update needed stack alignment if source or destination is on stack. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 13:05 --- If __builtin_memcpy generates instructions which require bigger alignment than alignments of source or destination, it should increase the alignment of source or destination. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug rtl-optimization/45678] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] crash on vector code with -m32 -msse
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-16 13:02 ---
This also failed:
---
typedef float V __attribute__ ((vector_size (16)));
V g;
float d[4] = { 4, 3, 2, 1 };
int
main ()
{
V e;
__builtin_memcpy (&e, &d, sizeof (d));
V f = { 5, 15, 25, 35 };
e = e * f;
g = e;
return 0;
}
---
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x0804837e in main () at foo.c:11
11e = e * f;
Missing separate debuginfos, use: debuginfo-install glibc-2.12.1-2.0.f13.i686
(gdb) disass
Dump of assembler code for function main:
0x08048374 <+0>: push %ebp
0x08048375 <+1>: mov%esp,%ebp
0x08048377 <+3>: movaps 0x8048470,%xmm0
=> 0x0804837e <+10>:mulps 0x8049644,%xmm0
0x08048385 <+17>:movaps %xmm0,0x8049670
0x0804838c <+24>:mov$0x0,%eax
0x08048391 <+29>:pop%ebp
0x08048392 <+30>:ret
End of assembler dump.
(gdb) q
There is no stack involved. Somehow we failed to align
array of float properly.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45678
[Bug middle-end/45663] [4.6 regression] New test failures
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-15 05:45 --- *** Bug 45675 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45663
[Bug middle-end/45675] [4.6 Regression] New guality test failures
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-15 05:45 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 45663 *** -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45675
[Bug middle-end/45675] New: [4.6 Regression] New guality test failures
On Linux/x86, revision 164252: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00546.html caused: FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O2 line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O2 -flto line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O2 -fwhopr line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O3 -g line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -Os line 42 a.j == 14 -- Summary: [4.6 Regression] New guality test failures Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45675
[Bug target/45670] Less efficient x86 addressing mode selection on 4.6, causes -Os size regression from 4.5
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-15 05:25 --- It is caused by revision 162618: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-07/msg00972.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-15 05:25:27 date|| Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45670
[Bug middle-end/44382] Slow integer multiply
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-15 04:29 --- *** Bug 45671 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44382
[Bug tree-optimization/45671] Reassociate expressions for greater parallelism
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-15 04:29 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 44382 *** -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED GCC build triplet|powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu | GCC host triplet|powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu | GCC target triplet|powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu | Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45671
[Bug c++/45635] [4.6 regression] Failed to bootstrap on Linux/ia64
--- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-15 04:09 --- (In reply to comment #5) > Created an attachment (id=21792) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21792&action=view) [edit] > gcc46-pr45635.patch > > Alternatively, we can avoid computing the address of fn altogether on > TARGET_VTABLE_USES_DESCRIPTORS targets. > This one can bootstrap. But it caused FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-2.c execution, -O1 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-2.c execution, -Os But it doesn't trigger Sep 14 11:06:05 gnu-11 kernel: 20040709-2.x7(8794): unaligned access to 0x6000f4ae, ip=0x40004e70 which http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635#c6 does. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635
[Bug c++/45635] [4.6 regression] Failed to bootstrap on Linux/ia64
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-14 19:22 --- (In reply to comment #6) > Created an attachment (id=21793) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21793&action=view) [edit] > Proposed patch > > Hi, > this patch should solve the problem (dive into ADDR_EXPR to get actual > fndecl).I no longer have any ia-64 machine able to bootstrap, but will try to > find one tonight. I would be very happy if someone did beat me on this ;) > It seems to work. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635
[Bug c++/45665] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected class 'type', have 'exceptional' (error_mark) in grokdeclarator, at cp/decl.c:8797 on invalid code
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-14 16:02 --- It is caused by revision 159939: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-05/msg00996.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at redhat dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45665
[Bug middle-end/45663] New: [4.6 regression] New test failures
On Linux/x86, revision 164252: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00546.html caused: FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O2 line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O2 -flto line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O2 -fwhopr line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -O3 -g line 42 a.j == 14 FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.c -Os line 42 a.j == 14 -- Summary: [4.6 regression] New test failures Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45663
[Bug middle-end/45662] [4.6 regression] New x86 test failures
-- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45662
[Bug middle-end/45662] New: [4.6 regression] New x86 test failures
On Linux/x86, revision 164250: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00544.html caused FAIL: gcc.target/i386/funcspec-1.c scan-assembler addps[ \t] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/funcspec-1.c scan-assembler fsubs[ \t] FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/fast-math-pr38968.f90 scan-tree-dump vect "vectorized 1 loops" -- Summary: [4.6 regression] New x86 test failures Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45662
[Bug c++/45651] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE in import_export_decl, at cp/decl2.c:2344
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-13 18:53 --- It is caused by revision 115086: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2006-06/msg00805.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45651
[Bug rtl-optimization/44281] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] Global Register variable pessimisation
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-11 13:49 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> GCC snapshot has regressed compared to gcc-4.5:
>
> #include
> #include
>
> #define LIKELY(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), 1)
> #define UNLIKELY(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), 0)
>
> register uint32_t *Iptr __asm__("rbp");
>
> typedef void (*inst_t)(uint64_t types, uint64_t a, uint64_t b);
>
> __attribute__ ((noinline)) void dec_helper(uint64_t types, uint64_t a,
> uint64_t
> b) {
> assert("FIXME"=="");
> }
>
> void dec(uint64_t types, uint64_t a, uint64_t b) {
> if (LIKELY((types & 0xFF) == 1)) {
> uint32_t next = Iptr[1];
> --a;
> ++Iptr;
> ((inst_t) (uint64_t) next)(types, a, b);
> } else dec_helper(types, a, b);
> }
This is caused by revision 160124:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-06/msg00036.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44281
[Bug c/45647] compiler segfault when building coreutils-8.5 "head" program with -Os, -O2 or -O3
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-11 13:41 --- It has been fixed at least since revision 163804. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45647
[Bug middle-end/45644] [4.6 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 is miscompiled
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-11 00:23 --- It also failed with -DSPEC_CPU -DNDEBUG -O2 -ffast-math -DSPEC_CPU_LP64 -fno-strict-aliasing -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45644
[Bug middle-end/45644] [4.6 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 is miscompiled
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-11 00:20 --- It is caused by revision 164135: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00427.html I got *** glibc detected *** ../run_base_test_lnx32e-gcc./soplex_base.lnx32e-gcc: double free or corruption (out): 0x00722970 *** === Backtrace: = /lib64/libc.so.6[0x3099675676] ../run_base_test_lnx32e-gcc./soplex_base.lnx32e-gcc[0x449466] ../run_base_test_lnx32e-gcc./soplex_base.lnx32e-gcc[0x4408e6] ../run_base_test_lnx32e-gcc./soplex_base.lnx32e-gcc[0x406c4d] /lib64/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xfd)[0x309961ec5d] ../run_base_test_lnx32e-gcc./soplex_base.lnx32e-gcc[0x401e3d] === Memory map: 0040-00464000 r-xp 08:11 56688876 /export/gnu/import/rrs/spec/2006/spec/benchspec/CPU2006/450.soplex/run/run_base_test_lnx32e-gcc./soplex_base.lnx32e-gcc 00663000-00664000 rw-p 00063000 08:11 56688876 /export/gnu/import/rrs/spec/2006/spec/benchspec/CPU2006/450.soplex/run/run_base_test_lnx32e-gcc./soplex_base.lnx32e-gcc 00664000-00732000 rw-p 00:00 0 [heap] 309920-309921e000 r-xp 08:05 1177353 /lib64/ld-2.12.1.so 309941e000-309941f000 r--p 0001e000 08:05 1177353 /lib64/ld-2.12.1.so 309941f000-309942 rw-p 0001f000 08:05 1177353 /lib64/ld-2.12.1.so 309942-3099421000 rw-p 00:00 0 309960-3099786000 r-xp 08:05 1177356 /lib64/libc-2.12.1.so 3099786000-3099986000 ---p 00186000 08:05 1177356 /lib64/libc-2.12.1.so 3099986000-309998a000 r--p 00186000 08:05 1177356 /lib64/libc-2.12.1.so 309998a000-309998b000 rw-p 0018a000 08:05 1177356 /lib64/libc-2.12.1.so 309998b000-30 rw-p 00:00 0 309a60-309a683000 r-xp 08:05 1177374 /lib64/libm-2.12.1.so 309a683000-309a882000 ---p 00083000 08:05 1177374 /lib64/libm-2.12.1.so 309a882000-309a883000 r--p 00082000 08:05 1177374 /lib64/libm-2.12.1.so 309a883000-309a884000 rw-p 00083000 08:05 1177374 /lib64/libm-2.12.1.so 77879000-77acb000 rw-p 00:00 0 77acb000-77ae r-xp 08:11 24960103 /export/gnu/import/rrs/164135/usr/lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 77ae-77cdf000 ---p 00015000 08:11 24960103 /export/gnu/import/rrs/164135/usr/lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 77cdf000-77ce rw-p 00014000 08:11 24960103 /export/gnu/import/rrs/164135/usr/lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 77ce-77ce1000 rw-p 00:00 0 77cf9000-77cfa000 rw-p 00:00 0 77cfa000-77ddf000 r-xp 08:11 24960082 /export/gnu/import/rrs/164135/usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6.0.15 77ddf000-77fde000 ---p 000e5000 08:11 24960082 /export/gnu/import/rrs/164135/usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6.0.15 77fde000-77fe6000 r--p 000e4000 08:11 24960082 /export/gnu/import/rrs/164135/usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6.0.15 77fe6000-77fe8000 rw-p 000ec000 08:11 24960082 /export/gnu/import/rrs/164135/usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6.0.15 77fe8000-77ffe000 rw-p 00:00 0 77ffe000-77fff000 r-xp 00:00 0 [vdso] 7ffde000-7000 rw-p 00:00 0 [stack] ff60-ff601000 r-xp 00:00 0 [vsyscall] -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mjambor at suse dot cz Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45644
[Bug middle-end/45644] New: [4.6 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 is miscompiled
On Linux/x86-64, revision 164143 miscompiled 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006: Running 450.soplex ref peak lnx32e-gcc default 450.soplex: copy 0 non-zero return code (exit code=0, signal=11) I used "-DSPEC_CPU -DNDEBUG -O3 -funroll-loops -ffast-math -DSPEC_CPU_LP64 -fno-strict-aliasing". -- Summary: [4.6 Regression] 450.soplex in SPEC CPU 2006 is miscompiled Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45644
[Bug middle-end/45634] [4.6 regression] Revision 163973 faild to compile 191.fma3d in SPEC CPU 2K
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 18:41 --- Fixed. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45634
[Bug fortran/45636] Failed to fold simple Fortran string
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 15:32 --- (In reply to comment #1) > I have a slightly different result with your code. > > troutmask:sgk[212] gfc4x -c -O g.f90 > g.f90: In function 'rcrdrd': > g.f90:1:0: internal compiler error: in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1218 > Please submit a full bug report, > with preprocessed source if appropriate. > See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. > > It is fixed by http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00475.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636
[Bug c++/45635] [4.6 regression] Failed to bootstrap on Linux/ia64
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 14:52 --- It may be caused by revision 164148: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00440.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635
[Bug fortran/45636] New: Failed to fold simple Fortran string
For this simple Fortran string:
[...@gnu-6 pr45634]$ cat pr45634.f90
SUBROUTINE RCRDRD (VTYP)
CHARACTER(4), INTENT(OUT) :: VTYP
CHARACTER(1), SAVE :: DBL = "D"
VTYP = DBL
END
GCC generates:
[...@gnu-6 pr45634]$ cat pr45634.s
.file "pr45634.f90"
.text
.p2align 4,,15
.globl rcrdrd_
.type rcrdrd_, @function
rcrdrd_:
.LFB0:
.cfi_startproc
movzbl dbl.1557(%rip), %eax
movw$8224, 1(%rdi)
movb$32, 3(%rdi)
movb%al, (%rdi)
ret
.cfi_endproc
.LFE0:
.size rcrdrd_, .-rcrdrd_
.section.rodata
.type dbl.1557, @object
.size dbl.1557, 1
dbl.1557:
.ascii "D"
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 4.6.0 20100910 (experimental)"
.section.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
IFORT generates:
[...@gnu-6 pr45634]$ cat icc.s
# -- Machine type EFI2
# mark_description "Intel(R) Fortran Compiler XE for applications running on
Intel(R) 64, Version 12.0.0 Beta Build 20100512";
# mark_description "-O3 -S";
.file "pr45634.f90"
.text
..TXTST0:
# -- Begin rcrdrd_
# mark_begin;
.align16,0x90
.globl rcrdrd_
rcrdrd_:
# parameter 1: %rdi
# parameter 2: %rsi
..B1.1: # Preds ..B1.0
..___tag_value_rcrdrd_.1: #1.18
movl $538976324, (%rdi)#4.7
ret #5.7
--
Summary: Failed to fold simple Fortran string
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45636
[Bug middle-end/45634] [4.6 regression] Revision 163973 faild to compile 191.fma3d in SPEC CPU 2K
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 14:39 --- A patch is posted at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-09/msg00951.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc- ||patches/2010- ||09/msg00951.html http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45634
[Bug c++/45635] New: [4.6 regression] Failed to bootstrap on Linux/ia64
On Linux/ia64, revision 164164 gave
../../../../src-trunk/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/array_type_info.cc:33:1: internal
compiler error: tree check: expected tree that contains 'decl with RTL'
structure, have 'addr_expr' in output_constant, at varasm.c:4408
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
make[7]: *** [array_type_info.lo] Error 1
make[7]: Leaving directory
`/export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/bld/ia64-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++'
Revision 164140 is OK.
--
Summary: [4.6 regression] Failed to bootstrap on Linux/ia64
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45635
[Bug middle-end/45634] [4.6 regression] Revision 163973 faild to compile 191.fma3d in SPEC CPU 2K
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 13:39 --- [...@gnu-16 0001]$ cat pr45634.f90 SUBROUTINE RCRDRD (VTYP) CHARACTER(4), INTENT(OUT) :: VTYP CHARACTER(1), SAVE :: DBL = "D" VTYP = DBL END [...@gnu-16 0001]$ /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/usr/bin/gcc -S -O2 pr45634.f90 pr45634.f90: In function \u2018rcrdrd\u2019: pr45634.f90:1:0: internal compiler error: in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1218 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. [...@gnu-16 0001]$ -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45634
[Bug middle-end/45634] New: [4.6 regression] Revision 163973 faild to compile 191.fma3d in SPEC CPU 2K
On Linux/x86-64, revision 163997 failed to build 191.fma3d in SPEC CPU 2K: [...@gnu-27 0001]$ /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/usr/bin/gfortran -c -o getirv.o -DSPEC_CPU2000_LP64 -O3 -funroll-loops -ffast-math getirv.f90 getirv.f90: In function �rcrdrd�: getirv.f90:213:0: internal compiler error: in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1218 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. [...@gnu-27 0001]$ This is caused by revision 163973: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00265.html It isn't fixed as of revision 164143. -- Summary: [4.6 regression] Revision 163973 faild to compile 191.fma3d in SPEC CPU 2K Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45634
[Bug tree-optimization/45626] Segfault in fold_const_aggregate_ref
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 04:27 --- It is caused by revision 163808: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00099.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-10 04:27:15 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45626
[Bug target/45623] GCC 4.5.[01] breaks our ffi on Linux64. ABI break?
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 02:56 --- (In reply to comment #0) > See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=594611 and > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=590683 > for more details. This breaks users of Firefox Sync on GCC 4.5. > The bug isn't present in gcc 4.4 or trunk. What would it take to cherry-pick a > fix for 4.5.x? > You either identify which checkin fixes it or find a testcase so that I can use it to find the fix. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45623
[Bug target/45623] GCC 4.5.[01] breaks our ffi on Linux64. ABI break?
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 00:51 --- I am not ware any x86-64 psABI changes in gcc 4.5. Please provide a testcase. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45623
[Bug target/45623] GCC 4.5.[01] breaks our ffi on Linux64. ABI break?
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-10 00:38 --- Mozilla bugs say "Platform: x86 Linux". But gcc bug says "powerpc64-*-linux". What is going on? -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC| |hjl dot tools at gmail dot | |com Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45623
[Bug c++/45606] [4.5/4.6 Regression] match a method prototyped a typedef alias with the original type (using stdlib)
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-09 18:23 --- It is caused by revision 156316: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-01/msg00784.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at redhat dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45606
[Bug rtl-optimization/45614] [4.6 Regression] ICE: RTL check: expected code 'reg', have 'subreg' in rhs_regno, at rtl.h:1056 with -ftree-vectorize
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-09 14:09 --- Fixed. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45614
[Bug rtl-optimization/45614] [4.6 Regression] ICE: RTL check: expected code 'reg', have 'subreg' in rhs_regno, at rtl.h:1056 with -ftree-vectorize
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-09 13:26 --- I think it is fixed by revision 164071: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00363.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45614
[Bug testsuite/45604] New: [4.6 regression] New test failures
On Linux/x86, revision 164033 gave
FAIL: g++.dg/opt/pr30965.C scan-tree-dump-times optimized "variable_..D. =
v_..D." 2
FAIL: g++.dg/tree-ssa/pointer-reference-alias.C scan-tree-dump-times optimized
"\*a" 1
FAIL: g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr27090.C scan-tree-dump optimized "f_..D.->x;"
Revision 164022 is OK. It may be caused by revision 164031:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00323.html
--
Summary: [4.6 regression] New test failures
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45604
[Bug tree-optimization/45598] [4.6 Regression] ICE; in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1218
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-08 16:19 --- This is caused by revision 163973: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00265.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45598
[Bug tree-optimization/45598] [4.6 Regression] ICE; in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1218
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-08 15:30 --- On Linux/x86-64, revision 163997 failed to build 191.fma3d in SPEC CPU 2K: [...@gnu-27 0001]$ /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/usr/bin/gfortran -c -o getirv.o -DSPEC_CPU2000_LP64 -O3 -funroll-loops -ffast-math getirv.f90 getirv.f90: In function rcrdrd: getirv.f90:213:0: internal compiler error: in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:1218 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. [...@gnu-27 0001]$ -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC| |hjl dot tools at gmail dot | |com GCC build triplet|x86_64-apple-darwin10 | GCC host triplet|x86_64-apple-darwin10 | GCC target triplet|x86_64-apple-darwin10 | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45598
[Bug target/36502] i386/darwin generates unnecessary stack ops in every function
--- Comment #49 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-08 02:16 --- Fixed. -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36502
[Bug target/40959] build fails - No rule to make target `/usr/ports/lang/gcc43/work/build/ia64-portbld-freebsd8.0/libgcc/crtfastmath.o', needed by `T_TARGET'. Stop.
--- Comment #18 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-08 00:32
---
(In reply to comment #17)
> (In reply to comment #9)
> > unwind-ia64_s.o(.text+0x30b2): In function `uw_frame_state_for':
> > ../.././../gcc-4.5-20091112/libgcc/../gcc/config/ia64/unwind-ia64.c:1788:
> > undefined reference to `_Unwind_FindTableEntry'
> > unwind-ia64_s.o(.text+0x7632): In function `_Unwind_FindEnclosingFunction':
> > ../.././../gcc-4.5-20091112/libgcc/../gcc/config/ia64/unwind-ia64.c:1745:
> > undefined reference to `_Unwind_FindTableEntry'
> > /usr/bin/ld: ./libgcc_s.so.1.tmp: hidden symbol `_Unwind_FindTableEntry'
isn't
> > defined
> > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> > gmake[3]: *** [libgcc_s.so] Error 1
> > gmake[3]: Leaving directory
> > `/usr/ports/lang/gcc45/work/build/ia64-portbld-freebsd9.0/libgcc'
> > gmake[2]: *** [all-stage1-target-libgcc] Error 2
>
> After making the change to libgcc/config.host that is also described in
> comment #5 I get the same.
>
> libc indeed does feature _Unwind_FindTableEntry() as I can easily verify
> with the following program:
>
> void _Unwind_FindTableEntry();
> int main() { _Unwind_FindTableEntry(); }
>
> Just, why do we then get this link failure? Adding -v I see that
> /lib/libc.so.7 is explicitly part of the collect2 invocation.
>
Because _Unwind_FindTableEntry is marked hidden.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40959
[Bug middle-end/45589] [4.6 Regression] 200.sixtrack in SPEC CPU 2000 is miscompiled
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-08 00:29 --- I used "-O3 -funroll-loops -ffast-math" on Linux/x86-64. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45589
[Bug middle-end/45589] [4.6 Regression] 200.sixtrack in SPEC CPU 2000 is miscompiled
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-08 00:18 --- It is caused by revision 163915: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-09/msg00207.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45589
[Bug middle-end/45589] [4.6 Regression] 200.sixtrack in SPEC CPU 2000 is miscompiled
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-07 22:25 --- Revision 163963 is bad. Revision 163913 is OK. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45589
[Bug middle-end/45589] New: [4.6 Regression] 200.sixtrack in SPEC CPU 2000 is miscompiled
On Linux/x86, 200.sixtrack in SPEC CPU 2000 is miscompiled at -O3: Running 200.sixtrack ref peak lnx32e-gcc default *** Miscompare of inp.out, see /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/spec/2000/x86_64/ spec/benchspec/CFP2000/200.sixtrack/run/0004/inp.out.mis [...@gnu-16 x86_64]$ cat /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/spec/2000/x86_64/spec/benchspec/CFP2000/200.sixtrack/run/0004/inp.out.mis 'inp.out' short [...@gnu-16 x86_64]$ -- Summary: [4.6 Regression] 200.sixtrack in SPEC CPU 2000 is miscompiled Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45589
[Bug tree-optimization/45580] [4.6 Regression] Building WebKit fails with compiler catching SIGSEGV in gimple_fold_obj_type_ref_known_binfo()
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-07 17:02 --- Valgrind reports: Compiler executable checksum: 49fb87eb28749ed7ad604cc77a74ec38 ==24854== Invalid read of size 2 ==24854==at 0x1258998: gimple_fold_obj_type_ref_known_binfo (gimple-fold.c:1383) ==24854==by 0x1258E57: gimple_fold_obj_type_ref (gimple-fold.c:1416) ==24854==by 0x1259081: fold_gimple_call (gimple-fold.c:1460) ==24854==by 0x125931D: fold_stmt_1 (gimple-fold.c:1522) ==24854==by 0x12596C6: fold_stmt (gimple-fold.c:1601) ==24854==by 0xDE9EC7: substitute_and_fold (tree-ssa-propagate.c:1135) ==24854==by 0xD4FD07: ccp_finalize (tree-ssa-ccp.c:877) ==24854==by 0xD58452: do_ssa_ccp (tree-ssa-ccp.c:2357) ==24854==by 0xB5B1A0: execute_one_pass (passes.c:1569) ==24854==by 0xB5B38F: execute_pass_list (passes.c:1624) ==24854==by 0xB5B3B0: execute_pass_list (passes.c:1625) ==24854==by 0xCE6503: tree_rest_of_compilation (tree-optimize.c:452) ==24854== Address 0x0 is not stack'd, malloc'd or (recently) free'd ==24854== ../3rdparty/javascriptcore/JavaScriptCore/runtime/JSGlobalData.cpp: In static member function static void QTJSC::JSGlobalData::storeVPtrs(): ../3rdparty/javascriptcore/JavaScriptCore/runtime/JSGlobalData.cpp:79:6: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45580
[Bug tree-optimization/45580] [4.6 Regression] Building WebKit fails with compiler catching SIGSEGV in gimple_fold_obj_type_ref_known_binfo()
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-09-07 16:51 --- It is caused by revision 161655: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-07/msg6.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-09-07 16:51:12 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45580
