I have done quite a few experiments with this to
narrow down the problem. The performance numbers are
slower compared to *No Feedback optimization with just
-O3* Here are some of them. All the experiments were
done on a new build-area in order to eliminate effects
of old feedback files.
Bernardo Innocenti [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
|
| The full list of bugs is produced below. Maintainers, please look
| into any of those and see which ones you can fix or give guidance for
| fixes in ways that are suitable for a stable branch.
|
| This m68k patch:
|
Paolo, could you go back and think about the bootstrapping problem
from MinGW's perspective?
I had considered cygwin, that had some problems because of the
executable-file extension. I had also thought of using batch files via
config.build, but got stuck because Windows. does not have as
Dale Johannesen wrote:
With -march=pentium4 -mfpmath=sse -O2, we get an extra move for code like
double d = atof(foo);
int i = d;
callatof
fstpl -8(%ebp)
movsd -8(%ebp), %xmm0
cvttsd2si %xmm0, %eax
(This is Linux, Darwin is similar.) I
Hi,
nios2 has a set of custom registers for custom instructions. They all
start with c, like
custom 1 c4, c2, c0
I want to define a peephole to replace a sequence of codes with this
above custom instruction.
custom instruction is defined as following in nios2.md
(define_insn custom_inii
I need to declare a symbol which is weaker in the executable than in any
external static or dynamic library.
In other words, the executable provides some fallback function
implementation (in my example, for write). But if the linker or
dynamic linker resolves it, the symbol definition from an
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 07:19:43AM -0400, Dimitry Golubovsky wrote:
I need to declare a symbol which is weaker in the executable than in any
external static or dynamic library.
In other words, the executable provides some fallback function
implementation (in my example, for write). But if
Dimitry Golubovsky wrote:
I need to declare a symbol which is weaker in the executable than in any
external static or dynamic library.
In other words, the executable provides some fallback function
implementation (in my example, for write). But if the linker or
dynamic linker resolves it,
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 10:16:48AM -0400, Dimitry Golubovsky wrote:
Dimitry Golubovsky wrote:
I need to declare a symbol which is weaker in the executable than in any
external static or dynamic library.
In other words, the executable provides some fallback function
implementation (in
All,
Is there a way to exclude a given directory, for example,
libjava, from multilibing? There are certainly cases where
it may make sense to have the C/C++ runtime be multilibbed
one way, but not have libjava multilibed the same way.
I looked for something like this in the docs and
Jan,
That's going to be rather difficult given that the app
has over 1000 files. Is there a way I can turn off the
default options one at a time ?
Thx
-girish
--- Jan Hubicka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have done quite a few experiments with this to
narrow down the problem. The performance
I was wondering if any addition work had been completed toward pragma
support for the autovectorization branch (see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg01560.html)?
Thanks..
Chad Rosier
Ok - thanks.
For #1, if I build with --static, then no libraries can be linked in
dynamically at runtime... I need to do this for some custom Qt libraries
and plugins, so I can't just make a completely static executable. This is
unfortunate - the resulting binaries would be big, but they'd
I appreciate your help, but I don't really appreciate the way you insinuate
that I didn't do some leg work before running off to the mailing list. I
*DID* RTFM, thank you very much. I found the -rpath option, tried it, and
it didn't work. I mentioned this in my original post - I was
Oh! I didn't know you could do that! Thanks very much!
Mark
- Original Message -
From: Haren Visavadia [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Mark Cuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: How to make an application look somewhere other than /lib
Hi,
I am trying to find out how to insert annotations for certain array
references identified in tree-loop-linear.c so that when converting to
RTL they can be handled differently. I find that simply inserting a
flag in the tree node is not enough as optimizations later on can lead
to the node
On 07/26/05 12:28 AM, Giovanni Bajo sat at the `puter and typed:
Louis LeBlanc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I added the -fstack-check switch to my makefile and recompiled with
various optimizations. I was pretty surprised at the file sizes that
showed up:
No Optimization:
-rwxr-xr-x
Louis LeBlanc wrote:
I also found, to my delight and surprise, that the same code appears
to perform between 10% and 20% better - in a rough, fairly imprecise
environment.
why surprise?
I am not sure if I unerstand ...can you elaborate please ? So what I
need is if I identify say a reference a[i] inside a loop, I want to
identify the corresponding RTL. What I find now is that
these get transformed for example
D.1065_17 = a_matrix[i_24][k_30]; // I have identified
On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 18:39 -0400, drizzle drizzle wrote:
I am not sure if I unerstand ...can you elaborate please ? So what I
need is if I identify say a reference a[i] inside a loop, I want to
identify the corresponding RTL.
What are you trying to do at the RTL level with array references?
What doesnt exist very long - the references ?
At RTL level, I just want to insert a counter for each one of
these. One alternative I saw is inserting a dummy functiion call.
Would that work ? If so, for a given name, how do I create a
corresponding function expression for it ?
thanks
Snapshot gcc-3.4-20050726 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/3.4-20050726/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 3.4 CVS branch
with the following options: -rgcc-ss-3_4-20050726
You'll find
On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 19:42 -0400, drizzle drizzle wrote:
What doesnt exist very long - the references ?
By RTL, they've been expanded to pointer accesses.
At RTL level, I just want to insert a counter for each one of
these.
Why do it at the rtl level.
Why not do it at the tree
tree level is fine too, it was just that the RTL level already had a
host of counters being inserted. One implementation question if I may
ask, so at the tree level how do I create a call to my function. I
know how to insert it into the tree but some how all my creations
attempts with
On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 20:08 -0400, drizzle drizzle wrote:
tree level is fine too, it was just that the RTL level already had a
host of counters being inserted. One implementation question if I may
ask, so at the tree level how do I create a call to my function.
build_function_call_expr.
Look
Hi,
Where can I download gcc binary code for Linux? What's
URL?
Thanks.
simon
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 09:15:20PM -0700, Simon Tsai wrote:
Where can I download gcc binary code for Linux? What's
URL?
You're best off using the gcc package that is designed to work with
your distribution. Please ask a list that is devoted to your GNU/Linux
distribution to find out how to do
Simon Tsai [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Where can I download gcc binary code for Linux? What's
URL?
This is actually the wrong mailing list for this question. Can you
tell us why you wrote to this list, so that we can encourage people to
write to the correct list instead? Thanks. The right
Mark Cuss wrote:
I'm pretty certain that I'm not the only person who struggles with the Oh,
that app was built on RH 8 so it won't run on RH 7.3 problems, so I'm
trying to find a solution where I can configure my build system in such a
way that I can distribute a set of libraries with my
Mark Cuss wrote:
I'm pretty certain that I'm not the only person who struggles with the Oh,
that app was built on RH 8 so it won't run on RH 7.3 problems, so I'm
trying to find a solution where I can configure my build system in such a
way that I can distribute a set of libraries with my
--- Additional Comments From gschafer at zip dot com dot au 2005-07-26
06:07 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Fixed at least in 4.0.1.
No it's not.
Please see these results for example (all from different folks):
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-07/msg01370.html
In these files:
libmudflap/testsuite/libmudflap.cth/pass3{7,9}-frag.c
the timeout is overridden to 3 seconds. This is way too short if for example
running the testsuite with -j3 on an SMP box. It results in many timeouts as per
these examples:
When a prototyped function of var-arg is called without any arguments
to the variable part, crxor 6,6,6 is not generated. -O0
-mno-prototype does NOT resolve the problem either.
test.c
int test(const char *a, ...);
void test1(const char *a)
{ test(a, 0); }
void test2(const char
--- Additional Comments From Jean-pierre dot vial at wanadoo dot fr
2005-07-26 06:36 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
I cannot reproduce it on 20050725. What options are you using to create the
executable.
I tried with -O0, -O1, -O2, and -O3 and no success.
no bug with -O0 or -O1
bug
Darwin ignores the alignment/packed attributes on this structure, forcing the
structure to have 8-byte alignment and 16-byte size:
---
struct Test {
double D __attribute__((packed,aligned(4)));
short X;
};
---
Ian Lance Taylor did a great analysis of the history of this, tracking it back
to
--- Additional Comments From irar at il dot ibm dot com 2005-07-26 07:07
---
The data dependence issue was solved by this patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
patches/2005-07/msg01195.html (committed). However, this loop is still not
vectorizable because of noncontinuous access.
--
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
07:35 ---
Subject: Bug 22486
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-07-26 07:34:58
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog fold-const.c
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
07:37 ---
In principle this is fixed. Of course we either need a tree-combiner or
forwprop on steroids to catch all cases. Which would make this bug a duplicate.
Closed Fixed.
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
08:26 ---
These are the only bugs I could find in expand_complex_addition:
Index: tree-complex.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/tree-complex.c,v
In http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-07/msg01369.html and test results
of mine not yet posted, I see that if one tries to run the treelang test suite
multiple times, e.g., with different compile options such as for multilibbed
builds, the first run is done but not more...
To me, this
Okul Oncesi Couk ve Anne Baba Egitimi
Okul Oncesi Cocuklar Icın Hazırlanmis Odullu CD'leri Gordunuzmu?
http://www.cocukdunyasi.net
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26 09:44
---
I'm betting it's the same bug that is visible with 1.cc (again, 1.cc indeed
FAILs, does not PASS) on mmix-knuth-mmixware (cutnpaste from log):
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-07-26
09:46 ---
What is the value of 'type' when error() is called?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19932
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
09:46 ---
Subject: Bug 23053
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-07-26 09:46:23
Modified files:
libstdc++-v3 :
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-07-26 09:48
---
Fixed for 4.0.2.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
PASSes with Mon Jul 18 16:34:10 UTC 2005.
FAILs with Mon Jul 25 22:33:14 UTC 2005.
gcc.log says:
Executing on host: /home/hp/combined/mmix-regobj/gcc/xgcc
-B/home/hp/combined/mmix-regobj/gcc/ /hom\
e/hp/combined/combined/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ifc-20040816-2.c -c -O2
-ftree-vectorize
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26 09:58
---
Created an attachment (id=9362)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9362action=view)
preprocessed testcase
/home/hp/combined/mmix-regobj/gcc/cc1 -fpreprocessed ifc-20040816-2.i -quiet
-dumpbase
--- Additional Comments From sebastian dot pop at cri dot ensmp dot fr
2005-07-26 10:06 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong code for casts and scev
After inlining, we end up with a loop containing the following code:
b.0_3 = (signed char) b_8;
D.1621_4 = (int) b.0_3;
a_5
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
10:18 ---
Let's try this patch then.
Index: passes.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/passes.c,v
retrieving revision 2.105
diff -u -3 -p -r2.105
--- Additional Comments From richard dot guenther at gmail dot com
2005-07-26 10:38 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong code for casts and scev
You should also add the (two) testcases from the PR.
Richard.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22236
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
10:39 ---
I can reproduce this with the C test case from comment #24 on x86_64-linux
with -march=nocona. With -march=k8 that test case does _not_ abort.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
10:43 ---
Well I'll be damned!
$ ./xgcc -B. t.c -O2 -march=nocona
$ ./a.out
Aborted
$ ./xgcc -B. t.c -O2 -march=nocona -da -fdump-tree-all
$ ./a.out
$
$ ./xgcc -B. t.c -O2 -march=nocona -S -da
$ mv t.s
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
11:18 ---
My version of t.c:
===
void abort ();
typedef struct _Node
{
struct _Node *next, *prev;
} Node;
void __attribute__ ((noinline)) append (Node * q, Node *
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
11:43 ---
Smaller test case:
==
void abort ();
typedef struct _Node
{
struct _Node *next, *prev;
} Node;
inline void
swap (Node ** a, Node ** b)
{
--
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P1
Summary|[4.0/4.1 Regression]|[4.0/4.1 Regression] wrong
|std::swap()
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
12:01 ---
What should we do with this bug? If m32r is no longer affected, then
what is? Maybe suspend this one or close it as WONTFIX?
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
12:03 ---
Rainer, can you look into those failures a bit more closely? Maybe you can
see in the testsuite log how they fail?
--
What|Removed |Added
In g77 you define a typeless BOZ constant that can be assigned to any other
type, using the formats ''X, ''Z etc. This allows PARAMETERs to be
defined like:
PROGRAM TLBOZ
DOUBLE PRECISION inf, nan
PARAMETER ( inf = '7FF0'Z )
PARAMETER ( nan =
Compiling
int foo (void)
{
return;
}
with -ansi -pedantic gives two warnings; with GCC 3.3 it only gave one. As a
QOI issue 3.3's behaviour is superior - warning about control reaching the end
of the function is a bit odd.
--
Summary: Redundant / bogus warning
--- Additional Comments From neil at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26 12:13
---
I meant to add -Wall to the warning list.
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Redundant
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23070
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
12:54 ---
Created an attachment (id=9363)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9363action=view)
Smaller testcase
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
12:58 ---
Confirmed, I cannot reduce the testcase any further. Removing any little
unneeded code makes the bug
go away.
--
What|Removed |Added
The follwing program:
#include stdio.h
#define LOG
FILE *log_file;
int f2 (int x)
{
#ifdef LOG
static long toto = 0;
static const char *fname = __func__;
static void __attribute__ ((destructor)) f (void) {
fprintf (log_file, %s: toto=%ld\n, fname, toto);
}
toto += x;
#endif
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:03 ---
This isn't just related, this is a dup of PR 18026.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 18026 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:03 ---
*** Bug 23074 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
Hello,
I do apologize if my ignorance is the problem here, but I am having a strange
problem with the version of gcc included in suse 9.3: gcc version 3.3.5
20050117 (prerelease) (SUSE Linux). The same problem was observed with gcc
3.3.1. I have not tried later versions, but I can't find the
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:05 ---
Just remove the static and it will work.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:06 ---
I should note static functions inside a function is invalid code.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23076
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:10 ---
I have (with whatever load of patches applied...)
;; Function ListSwap (ListSwap)
ListSwap (x, y)
{
struct Node * tmp;
struct _Node * D.1292;
bb 0:
tmp = x-next;
if (tmp != 0B) goto L0; else goto
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:11 ---
Confirmed, one warning comes from the front-end and the other bogus warning
comes from the
middle-end. I have not looked to see if we set TREE_NO_WARNING on the return
and if the middle-end
looks at
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
Keywords|
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:14 ---
We have one now :)
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--
Bug 19104 depends on bug 21445, which changed state.
Bug 21445 Summary: [meta-bug] we need a reassociate pass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21445
What|Old Value |New Value
--
Bug 15878 depends on bug 21445, which changed state.
Bug 21445 Summary: [meta-bug] we need a reassociate pass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21445
What|Old Value |New Value
--
Bug 19105 depends on bug 21445, which changed state.
Bug 21445 Summary: [meta-bug] we need a reassociate pass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21445
What|Old Value |New Value
--
Bug 16157 depends on bug 21445, which changed state.
Bug 21445 Summary: [meta-bug] we need a reassociate pass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21445
What|Old Value |New Value
--
Bug 17955 depends on bug 21445, which changed state.
Bug 21445 Summary: [meta-bug] we need a reassociate pass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21445
What|Old Value |New Value
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:14 ---
Confirmed based on what Apple's GCC does and what Geoff said.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:16 ---
This has moved very much off my radar since it was fixed in 4.1.0 and 4.0.0
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-07-26 13:17
---
Yes, but why P1 - P2?!?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22591
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:18 ---
Richard guenther is working on aliasing for arrays, i'll leave this one for him
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:21 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-07/msg01608.html does not help
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:21 ---
I still don't believe this is a bug.
As the alignment of whole struct is still 8 as double is first, even if the
alignment of that double is 4.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From p dot w dot draper at durham dot ac dot uk
2005-07-26 13:28 ---
Andrew, I've said this is related to bug 18026, rather than a duplicate, as the
actual format used for these typeless BOZ constants is none standard and not
the same as in bug 18026.
As in
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
13:29 ---
For a reduced array with only 4 elements (I know - this should be a --param) we
now get in .vars (with the array aliasing patch):
f (n)
{
int n.39;
unsigned int ivtmp.33;
int lsm_tmp.32;
int
--- Additional Comments From dorit at il dot ibm dot com 2005-07-26 13:59
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong code for casts and
scev
Hi Sebastian,
The modifications you suggest will make the tests uninteresting - they were
introduced with unknown loop-bound/offset on
--- Additional Comments From dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26 14:08
---
The ABI specifies the alignment of the entire record is doubleword if the
first field is an FP double, regardless of the alignment of the type itself.
--
What|Removed
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
14:27 ---
Subject: Bug 22606
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-07-26 14:27:33
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
libobjc:
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
14:28 ---
Fixed, added your testcase also.
Also I noticed that your testcase fails with the next runtime, oh well. Not my
bug.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
14:32 ---
I think I see the same thing at -O2 on a couple of tests on ppc-darwin.
Is the execution a missing symbol?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21992
Source code:
#include stdio.h
int main (int argc, char * argv[])
{
unsigned int t[2] = {1, 1};
*((double *)t) = 0.0;
printf(%d\n, t[1]);
}
This code prints 1 insted of 0 when with: gcc foo.c -o foo -O2
Output of gcc -v foo.c -o foo2 -O2:
Reading specs from
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
14:36 ---
No this is not bad alias analysis, You are invoking undefined code by
violating aliasing rules in C/C++.
This is a dup of bug 21920.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21920 ***
--
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
14:37 ---
*** Bug 23077 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
14:46 ---
(In reply to comment #31)
Smaller test case:
This works for me. The original test case does abort, though.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22591
--- Additional Comments From sebastian dot pop at cri dot ensmp dot fr
2005-07-26 15:15 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong code for casts and scev
Dorit Naishlos wrote:
The modifications you suggest will make the tests uninteresting - they were
introduced with unknown
--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
15:21 ---
Confirmed.
The following testcase crashes on i686-pc-linux-gnu when compiled with
-O -ftree-vectorize -msse2:
==
void foo(int* __restrict__ p, int*
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
15:26 ---
Here is the backtrace:
#0 0x00424b88 in fwrite () from /lib/tls/libc.so.6
#1 0x081381fd in vect_analyze_data_refs_alignment (loop_vinfo=0xa3bebb0) at
/home/peshtigo/
1 - 100 of 220 matches
Mail list logo
