GCC 3.4.4 RC1

GCC 3.4.4 RC1 is available here: ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/prerelease-3.4.4-20050510/ As usual, please test -- by using exactly those tarballs, so that we can detect packging errors. Put problems into Bugzilla, and Cc: me. At this point, the only problems that would block the release would be

Re: Recog - unrecognized insn when clobber present

"Vasanth Asokan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Quoting from the description of (clobber x), > > ### If the last group of expressions in a parallel are each a clobber > expression whose arguments are reg or match_scratch (see section 10.4 > RTL Template) expressions, the combiner phase can add the

RE: Recog - unrecognized insn when clobber present

>-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian >Lance Taylor >Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 6:17 PM >To: Vasanth >Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org >Subject: Re: Recog - unrecognized insn when clobber present > >Vasanth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> I am workin

Re: Validating a C++ back-end

On May 9, 2005, at 10:20 PM, Vasanth wrote: How do I run the C++ testsuite on my compiler? make check, it isn't meant to be that hard or complex. If you get 10 or fewer unexpected failures in the C++ testsuite and the libstdc++ testsuite, then, you are in the game, if more, you'll want to in

Re: Recog - unrecognized insn when clobber present

Vasanth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I am working on a port of GCC to a 32-bit RISC machine. I am having > trouble with .combine pass adding clobbers to instruction patterns. To > be more specific, > > (define_insn "lshrsi3_internal_reg_nohwshift" > [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand"

The Linux binutils 2.16.90.0.3 is released

This is the beta release of binutils 2.16.90.0.3 for Linux, which is based on binutils 2005 0510 in CVS on sources.redhat.com plus various changes. It is purely for Linux. The new i386/x86_64 assemblers no longer accept instructions for moving between a segment register and a 32bit memory location

Re: GCC 4.0.0 Performance Regressions?

On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 06:08:43PM -0500, Jason Bucata wrote: > Would it help to report some others [regressions]? > I might have time later this week to > work on some of the others, especially now that I have a much better idea of > what to look for. If you can find a small test with a large reg

Re: Targets using implicit extern "C"

Joe Buck wrote: Right, but you don't need the answer to the question until it's time to build libstdc++, and you can't build libstdc++ without a C library. So can't the test be deferred until that point? I don't think that's a good idea. People build compilers without headers frequently, and this

Re: GCC 4.0.0 Performance Regressions?

On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 11:46:38AM +0200, Giovanni Bajo wrote: > Jason Bucata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> You should try and isolate a single BYTEmark test which shows the > >> biggest regression. It's better if you manage to pack the whole test > >> as a single preprocessed source file. The

Re: Targets using implicit extern "C"

Joe Buck wrote: Ian Lance Taylor wrote: It would be hard to make that completely reliable for embedded systems development, where the header files may or not be available in any standard place at the time that gcc is configured. On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 04:30:43PM -0600, E. Weddington wrot

Re: Targets using implicit extern "C"

> Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>I think that the decision should be made at configure time, by checking > >>the #include headers to see if they are C++-ready. Look for the string > >>"__cplusplus" in some set of standard headers, if it is not found, > >>assume that we'll need implici

Recog - unrecognized insn when clobber present

Hi, I am working on a port of GCC to a 32-bit RISC machine. I am having trouble with .combine pass adding clobbers to instruction patterns. To be more specific, (define_insn "lshrsi3_internal_reg_nohwshift" [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand" "=d") (lshiftrt:SI (match_operand:S

Re: Targets using implicit extern "C"

Ian Lance Taylor wrote: Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 02:26:12PM -0400, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: How would people feel about adding a configure option --with-implicit-extern-c? Then we could justifiably flip the default for the generic *-elf, etc., targets. I

Re: Targets using implicit extern "C"

Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 02:26:12PM -0400, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > How would people feel about adding a configure option > > --with-implicit-extern-c? Then we could justifiably flip the default > > for the generic *-elf, etc., targets. In fact in general

Re: Targets using implicit extern "C"

Joe Buck wrote: On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 02:26:12PM -0400, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: How would people feel about adding a configure option --with-implicit-extern-c? Then we could justifiably flip the default for the generic *-elf, etc., targets. In fact in general we could then take the macro out of

Re: A question about tree-if-conv.c:tree_if_convert_stmt.

Hi Devang, > Just remove handling of GOTO_EXPR here and in if_convertible_stmt_p(). OK. Will submit a patch. Kazu Hirata

Re: A question about tree-if-conv.c:tree_if_convert_stmt.

On May 10, 2005, at 1:37 PM, Kazu Hirata wrote: Now, what would be the right fix here? Something like this? case GOTO_EXPR: break; Just remove handling of GOTO_EXPR here and in if_convertible_stmt_p(). - Devang

A question about tree-if-conv.c:tree_if_convert_stmt.

Hi, According to the CVS annotate of tree-if-conv.c, Devang Patel checked in the following code in tree_if_convert_stmt. case GOTO_EXPR: /* Unconditional goto */ add_to_predicate_list (bb_for_stmt (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1)), cond); Note that TREE_OPERAND (t, 1) seems wrong. A GOTO_EX

Re: Targets using implicit extern "C"

On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 02:26:12PM -0400, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > How would people feel about adding a configure option > --with-implicit-extern-c? Then we could justifiably flip the default > for the generic *-elf, etc., targets. In fact in general we could > then take the macro out of the tm.

Post-Lillehammer WG14 mailing

The post-Lillehammer WG14 mailing is now available at . It includes a copy of C99 merged with TC1 and TC2 (and apparently some other editorial changes in the foreword). The DR discussions in the draft minutes may not be rea

Can gcc select vector mode instruction patterns itself?

I'm porting gcc to a new VLIW architecture. There are 11 function units in the chip, and 4 of them are DSPs. Now I'm designing the SIMD instruction patterns, and I wouldn't like use the built-in functions to support it. If I wrote some instruction patterns which involved many V4QI packing/unpacki

Re: Regression on mainline in tree-vrp.c

On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 02:55:36PM -0400, Diego Novillo wrote: > On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 02:56:30PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote: > > > Appears that any nested loops are doomed with -O2 with gfortran. > > This is a critical important problem, because almost every > > Fortran program that I know contai

Re: Regression on mainline in tree-vrp.c

Diego Novillo writes: > Is this fixed now? This works for me. The Ada bootstrap problem on i386-pc-solaris2.10 is fixed, thanks. I tried to submit a separate bug report via gccbug, but that (like another one a bit earlier) got silently ignored ;-( It neither made it into Bugzilla nor triggered

Re: Regression on mainline in tree-vrp.c

On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 02:56:30PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote: > Appears that any nested loops are doomed with -O2 with gfortran. > This is a critical important problem, because almost every > Fortran program that I know contains nested loops. > Is this fixed now? This works for me. Diego.

Re: Targets using implicit extern "C"

"Joseph S. Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > In particular, I'm surprised at the Darwin configurations apparently > not defining NO_IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C, and at most OpenBSD configurations > not doing so (but alpha-openbsd gets it from alpha/alpha.h); VxWorks > configurations are also inconsistent

Re: building gcc 4.0.0 on Solaris

> I'm also using --with-gnu-as and --with-gnu-ld now. At some point these > were required or made a difference on HP-UX only as far as I can recall; > I hadn't noticed they were now required or making a difference on > Solaris too. They should not be required if --with-as and --with-ld are respect

Re: ppc-eabisim is broken in mainline

On May 10, 2005, at 2:04 PM, Joern RENNECKE wrote: Andrew Pinski wrote: On May 10, 2005, at 1:54 PM, Joern RENNECKE wrote: Between 20050505 and 20050510, the ppc-eabisim configuration was broken. /mnt/scratch/nightly/2005-05-10-orv/ppc/gcc//:1: Warning: line numbers must be positive; line

Re: building gcc 4.0.0 on Solaris

Hi, BTW: Have you tried to also look at what ulimits are set on your system? I've rebooted the system and things are really getting better (even Sun's "ar" seems to be working now). This was a kernel problem, the kernel is not up-to-date with patches and the workstation hadn't been rebooted for

Re: ppc-eabisim is broken in mainline

Andrew Pinski wrote: On May 10, 2005, at 1:54 PM, Joern RENNECKE wrote: Between 20050505 and 20050510, the ppc-eabisim configuration was broken. /mnt/scratch/nightly/2005-05-10-orv/ppc/gcc//:1: Warning: line numbers must be positive; line number 0 rejected That is PR 21250 and this has been

Re: ppc-eabisim is broken in mainline

On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 06:54:12PM +0100, Joern RENNECKE wrote: > Between 20050505 and 20050510, the ppc-eabisim configuration was broken. > I'm seeing this error: I'll take a look. Aldy

Re: ppc-eabisim is broken in mainline

On May 10, 2005, at 1:54 PM, Joern RENNECKE wrote: Between 20050505 and 20050510, the ppc-eabisim configuration was broken. /mnt/scratch/nightly/2005-05-10-orv/ppc/gcc//:1: Warning: line numbers must be positive; line number 0 rejected That is PR 21250 and this has been failing since April 19

ppc-eabisim is broken in mainline

Between 20050505 and 20050510, the ppc-eabisim configuration was broken. I'm seeing this error: /mnt/scratch/nightly/2005-05-10-orv/ppc/./gcc/xgcc -B/mnt/scratch/nightly/2005-05-10-orv/ppc/./gcc/ -nostdinc -B/mnt/scratch/nightly/2005-05-10-orv/ppc/powerpc-eabisim/newlib/ -isystem /mnt/sc

Re: building gcc 4.0.0 on Solaris

On Tue, 10 May 2005, Dimitri Papadopoulos-Orfanos wrote: > > Yeah, in 1991 my 386 featured 4 Mb and I really see no reason why it could > > not > > be used to build libgcj nowadays. ;-) > > Ooops :-) > > These were indeed Gb instead of Mb for those wondering... [have not followed this thread, so

Re: building gcc 4.0.0 on Solaris

Yeah, in 1991 my 386 featured 4 Mb and I really see no reason why it could not be used to build libgcj nowadays. ;-) Ooops :-) These were indeed Gb instead of Mb for those wondering... -- Dimitri

Re: building gcc 4.0.0 on Solaris

> /usr/local/binutils/bin/ld [...] -soname libgcj.so.6 > [...] > GNU ld version 2.16 >Supported emulations: > elf32_sparc > elf64_sparc > /usr/local/binutils/bin/ld: failed to set dynamic section sizes: Memory > exhausted > > Ouch! 1 Mb RAM + 2Mb swap ought to be enough. Yeah, in 1991

Re: GCSE considers read only memory clobbered by function calls.

On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 11:37:50AM +0300, Mostafa Hagog wrote: > I want to add the below example as a regression test; the difference > between the success and failure is the position of a load operation. Is > there a possibility to check this using the scan-assembler? No. r~

Re: use of preserve_temp_slots in copy_blkmode_from_reg

While looking at this, I found that expr.c always calls free_temp_slots immediately followed by pops_temp_slots. Isn't the call to free_temp_slots pointless there? It looks like it is now. It didn't used to be though (when we had RTL_EXPR).

Re: emit_conditional_move w/o compare insn (was: Full comparison in 'cbranchsi4' leads to error in gcc 4.0)

Hi Gary, Thanks a lot for the tip. After debugging, the problem seem to be coming from 'emit_conditional_move' which is called by 'expand_sdiv_pow2' when converting division-by-constants into shifting. The problem is that the architecture I have does not support compare operations: It either has

Re: Validating a C++ back-end

Vasanth wrote: > Hi Nathan, > > Thanks for the inputs. Can you tell me if there is a set of tests in > the G++ testsuite for verifying just my implementation of basic > machine dependent C++ hooks? To give examples - verify global > constructor/destructors being invoked correctly, init_priority, >

Re: Validating a C++ back-end

Hi Nathan, Thanks for the inputs. Can you tell me if there is a set of tests in the G++ testsuite for verifying just my implementation of basic machine dependent C++ hooks? To give examples - verify global constructor/destructors being invoked correctly, init_priority, thunks, Vtable stuff etc. C

Re: Mail. Mail! Mail?

On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 04:58:03PM +0100, Bernard Leak wrote: > Dear List, > > Jonathan Wakely wants me to send a patch (or more than one). :-) > >Send a patch. > Will do, after some further digging and sanity-testing, along the lines > I have already indicated. Did you expect it already? I h

Re: Mail. Mail! Mail?

Dear List, Jonathan Wakely wants me to send a patch (or more than one). >Send a patch. Will do, after some further digging and sanity-testing, along the lines I have already indicated. Did you expect it already? I have to consider that not all builds of GCC are on UN*X-type boxes. The existing m

Re: Mail. Mail! Mail?

Bernard Leak wrote: > Firstly, thanks to Bob Proulx for the helpful pointer to the Debian > search widget. This is a genuinely useful-looking tool. How pleasing! Not wanting to take credit inappropriately, it was Zack who suggested the Debian package search page. I was the mailx history rant! :

RE: Error building gcc 4.0.0 on AIX Box

Original Message >From: Carlo Corridore >Sent: 10 May 2005 16:16 > I'm trying to build gcc 4.0.0 on my Aix 4.3.3 Box > using a Gcc 3.3.3. > The error i have seems to be a system error on available resources > on my IBM RS6000. It looks like this: > > gmake[1]: Entering directory > `/home/

[gnu.org #232556] GNU Mirror: SWITCHmirror replaces Swiss SunSITE

Hello, I've updated the mirror list on gnu.org. I'm passing this on to you so you can consider it for the GCC mirrors list as per his request. Start of forwarded message Subject: [gnu.org #232556] GNU Mirror: SWITCHmirror replaces Swiss SunSITE From: "

Re: fold_indirect_ref bogous

On Tue, 3 May 2005, Jeffrey A Law wrote: > On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 16:19 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > > fold_indirect_ref, called from the gimplifier happily converts ^^ > > something like the following patch fixes this. > Right. Given that I'd seen similar problems with som

Error building gcc 4.0.0 on AIX Box

I'm trying to build gcc 4.0.0 on my Aix 4.3.3 Box using a Gcc 3.3.3. The error i have seems to be a system error on available resources on my IBM RS6000. It looks like this: gmake[1]: Entering directory `/home/sinn/COMUNE/develop/gcc-4.0.0/objdir/gcc' build/genattrtab ../../gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000

use of preserve_temp_slots in copy_blkmode_from_reg

copy_blkmode_from_reg (called from expand_call) calls preserve_temp_slots without pushing a scope first. Hence it appears to be possible, and I'm appearantly running into such a case, that it calls this when temp_slot_level is zero, leading to array accesses with index -1 (resulting in ill behav

Re: Mail. Mail! Mail?

On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 03:37:13PM +0100, Bernard Leak wrote: > Dear List, > > Firstly, thanks to Bob Proulx for the helpful pointer to the Debian > search widget. This is a genuinely useful-looking tool. How pleasing! > But unless he thinks this is another thing I should "just know about", > i

Re: Mail. Mail! Mail?

Dear List, Firstly, thanks to Bob Proulx for the helpful pointer to the Debian search widget. This is a genuinely useful-looking tool. How pleasing! But unless he thinks this is another thing I should "just know about", it's worth documenting *somewhere*. I don't suggest that the GCC documentati

Re: Validating a C++ back-end

Vasanth wrote: Hi, I am working on a fresh C++ port and I am filling in all the machine specific hooks. How do I run the C++ testsuite on my compiler? I am familiar with the GCC torture/execute tests and have my backend passing those tests reasonably well. Now, I am looking for something similar fo

RE: Mail. Mail! Mail?

Original Message >From: Daniel Berlin >Sent: 10 May 2005 14:07 > On Tue, 2005-05-10 at 10:14 +0100, Dave Korn wrote: >> Original Message >>> From: Zack Weinberg >>> Sent: 09 May 2005 19:38 >> >>> Bernard Leak writes: >> Can something be done to make the problem less obstruct

RE: Re: information

A mail message with subject "Re: information" has been found containing a virus. The message was sent from gcc@gcc.gnu.org to the following: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more information contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Mail. Mail! Mail?

On Tue, 2005-05-10 at 10:14 +0100, Dave Korn wrote: > Original Message > >From: Zack Weinberg > >Sent: 09 May 2005 19:38 > > > Bernard Leak writes: > > >> Can something be done to make the problem less obstructive? > >> It's not obvious that the script should try to be too clever and > >>

Re: Validating a C++ back-end

Vasanth wrote: Hi, I am working on a fresh C++ port and I am filling in all the machine specific hooks. How do I run the C++ testsuite on my compiler? I am familiar with the GCC torture/execute tests and have my backend passing those tests reasonably well. Now, I am looking for something similar fo

Re: Mainline bootstrap broken in varasm.c

Mark Mitchell wrote: Steve Kargl wrote: Julian already sent my a patch, which did not fix the problem. Additionally, I think the patch that caused the problem was committed by Nathan. Julian just happen to commit a patch to varasm.c two commits after Nathan. OK, thanks. I'm sure Nathan will lo

Re: building gcc 4.0.0 on Solaris

Hi, Pass -debug to collect2. I'm not sure this will give you a *small* testcase though. /usr/local/binutils/bin/ld [...] -soname libgcj.so.6 [...] GNU ld version 2.16 Supported emulations: elf32_sparc elf64_sparc /usr/local/binutils/bin/ld: failed to set dynamic section sizes: Memory exh

Re: building gcc 4.0.0 on Solaris

> Actually I'd like to help fix bugs in the Solaris toolchain, apart from > compiling my C++ programs. > > Using "xgcc -v" instead of plain "xgcc" I've found that the problem > happens here: > /tmp/GCC/gcc/collect2 [...] /tmp/GCC/gcc/crtn.o -soname libgcj.so.6 > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status

Re: building gcc 4.0.0 on Solaris

> Actually I'd like to help fix bugs in the Solaris toolchain, apart from > compiling my C++ programs. > > Using "xgcc -v" instead of plain "xgcc" I've found that the problem > happens here: > /tmp/GCC/gcc/collect2 [...] /tmp/GCC/gcc/crtn.o -soname libgcj.so.6 > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status

Re: building gcc 4.0.0 on Solaris

Hi, libgcj.so.6.0.0 is a monster so that could be a memory problem too. If you're not interested in Java, I'd suggest to configure with --disable-libgcj. Actually I'd like to help fix bugs in the Solaris toolchain, apart from compiling my C++ programs. Using "xgcc -v" instead of plain "xgcc" I

Re: building gcc 4.0.0 on Solaris

Hi, I have configured with: ./configure \ --with-as=/usr/local/binutils/bin/as \ --with-ld=/usr/local/binutils/bin/ld \ ... so I should be using GNU's as and ld. --with-gnu-as and --with-gnu-ld I presume? No, but configure does detect that, d

Re: building gcc 4.0.0 on Solaris

> > How did you configure? The mix of GNU tools and Sun tools looks > > suspicious. > > I think there's no mix involved. > > I have configured with: > ./configure \ > --with-as=/usr/local/binutils/bin/as \ > --with-ld=/usr/local/binutils/bin/ld \ > .

Re: building gcc 4.0.0 on Solaris

Hi, How did you configure? The mix of GNU tools and Sun tools looks suspicious. I think there's no mix involved. I have configured with: ./configure \ --with-as=/usr/local/binutils/bin/as \ --with-ld=/usr/local/binutils/bin/ld \ ... so I shou

Re: GCC 4.0.0 Performance Regressions?

Jason Bucata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> You should try and isolate a single BYTEmark test which shows the >> biggest regression. It's better if you manage to pack the whole test >> as a single preprocessed source file. Theoretically, this file >> should be compilable and linkable, and the resul

Re: building gcc 4.0.0 on Solaris

> I've worked around this by changing all occurrences of AR="ar" in > sparc-sun-solaris2.8/libjava/libtool to AR="/usr/local/binutils/bin/ar". > Using GNU's ar fixes the problem indeed. > > I have another problem later on, again in sparc-sun-solaris2.8/libjava: > > /tmp/GCC/gcc/xgcc -shared-libgcc

RE: Mail. Mail! Mail?

Original Message >From: Zack Weinberg >Sent: 09 May 2005 19:38 > Bernard Leak writes: >> Can something be done to make the problem less obstructive? >> It's not obvious that the script should try to be too clever and >> work out which name to use. Mail looks as useful as any name >> it ca

Re: GCC 4.0.0 Performance Regressions?

On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 02:04:37AM +0200, Giovanni Bajo wrote: > You should try and isolate a single BYTEmark test which shows the biggest > regression. It's better if you manage to pack the whole test as a single > preprocessed source file. Theoretically, this file should be compilable and > linka

RE: Full comparison in 'cbranchsi4' leads to error in gcc 4.0

> > This works fine on gcc 3.4, however on gcc 4.0 it creates an error during > optimization. According to my investigation, the error occurs when there is a > division by a constant power of 2 which needs to be transformed into > shifting. > The error generated is: > > internal compiler err

Re: GCSE considers read only memory clobbered by function calls.

I want to add the below example as a regression test; the difference between the success and failure is the position of a load operation. Is there a possibility to check this using the scan-assembler? Mostafa Hagog wrote on 09/05/2005 17:45:24: > > > > > It appears that GCSE considers "read o

Re: building gcc 4.0.0 on Solaris

Hi, I have installed binutils-2.16. Things work better in the sense that I get much farther into building the Java libraries. I still hit a problem: [...] ar rc .libs/libgcj0_convenience.a [... around 100.000 characters ...] internal error: error_message(58) [...] Is this a known issue? I've work

Re: GCSE considers read only memory clobbered by function calls.

Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 09/05/2005 18:09:10: > > It appears that GCSE considers "read only memory" as call clobbered, which > > is not the case in CSE. I have took the test for read-only memory from CSE > > and add it to GCSE where we compute the transparency. > > My wild gu

Re: GCSE considers read only memory clobbered by function calls.

Richard Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 09/05/2005 19:35:34: > On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 05:45:24PM +0300, Mostafa Hagog wrote: > > EXECUTE_IF_SET_IN_BITMAP (blocks_with_calls, 0, bb_index, bi) > > { > > ! if (! MEM_READONLY_P (x)) > > Looks like you should p