i don't know if you're trying to be funny...
but what's between the definition of N1 and the undef of A may be a very
complex. it's just simplified for demonstration.
Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2012 00:42:16 -0500
From: de...@adacore.com
To:
i don't know if you're trying to be funny...
but what's between the definition of N1 and the undef of A may be a very
complex. it's just simplified for demonstration.
It's not good programming practice to have a macro (in this case A) have
two different values, with an #undef between then.
On 31/12/11 10:44, R A wrote:
alright, here's another example why eval is a good idea:
#define A 17 #define B 153 #define N1
((A + B)/2) /* intended was (17 + 153)/2 */
#undef A #define A 230 #define N2 ((A + B)/2) /*
intended was (230 + 153)/2 */
On 01/01/2012 12:42 AM, Robert Dewar wrote:
On 12/31/2011 4:44 AM, R A wrote:
alright, here's another example why eval is a good idea:
#define A 17
#define B 153
#define N1 ((A + B)/2) /* intended was (17 + 153)/2 */
#undef A
#define A 230
#define N2
Sandra Loosemore san...@codesourcery.com writes:
I'm still finding my way around LTO; can anyone who's more familiar
with this help narrow down where to look for the cause of this? I
don't even know if this is a compiler or ld bug at this point. I'm
I would look into the interaction between
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49986
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-01
08:41:43 UTC ---
reference to `.__emutls_get_address'
This means libgcc's emultls.o is not being linked in for some reason.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50588
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51704
Ira Rosen irar at il dot ibm.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51722
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50643
--- Comment #2 from Jon Grant jg at jguk dot org 2012-01-01 11:58:05 UTC ---
differentiation between:
* error
* promoted-to-error
No visibility for the user as they appear the same in the output. Is the
differentiation needed?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51069
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-01
12:07:42 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sun Jan 1 12:07:34 2012
New Revision: 182767
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=182767
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51723
--- Comment #2 from andyg1001 at hotmail dot co.uk 2012-01-01 13:05:50 UTC ---
I have double-checked and, yes, it does work in the latest revision from trunk
- sorry, I ought to have checked that first.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51723
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51723
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-01 13:31:51 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Sun Jan 1 13:31:48 2012
New Revision: 182768
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=182768
Log:
2012-01-01 Paolo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51723
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51556
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-01-01
13:40:08 UTC ---
If we can figure out a small testcase we can add it and close the issue as
fixed for 4.7.0.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51543
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-01-01
13:43:08 UTC ---
cpp0x/parse1.C seems related
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51543
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51704
--- Comment #3 from irar at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-01 13:52:21 UTC ---
Author: irar
Date: Sun Jan 1 13:52:13 2012
New Revision: 182769
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=182769
Log:
PR tree-optimization/51704
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51633
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-01-01
13:54:44 UTC ---
Bah...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51069
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51723
--- Comment #6 from andyg1001 at hotmail dot co.uk 2012-01-01 15:25:50 UTC ---
As a suggestion, the test case added in commit
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revisionrevision=182768 should have the
additional two lines:
constexpr B b1 = A10, 20,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49826
--- Comment #4 from Dmitry Gorbachev d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com
2012-01-01 15:33:59 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
The linker does not work very well with undecorated stdcall-s. For example:
http://sourceware.org/PR13495. But if that bug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51724
Bug #: 51724
Summary: no matching function for call; confused by earlier
errors, bailing out
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51502
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-01
16:12:50 UTC ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Jan 1 16:12:39 2012
New Revision: 182770
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=182770
Log:
2012-01-01 Thomas König
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51502
Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51502
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-01
16:27:53 UTC ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Jan 1 16:27:45 2012
New Revision: 182771
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=182771
Log:
2012-01-01 Thomas König
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49693
Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51725
Bug #: 51725
Summary: [4.7 regression] segfault in stage 3 when compiling
gcc/opts.c for sparc64-linux
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51725
--- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2012-01-01
17:06:36 UTC ---
Apparently only occurs with options '-g -O2'. I don't get the ICE if I drop -g
or select any other -O level.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51725
Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51723
--- Comment #7 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-01-01
18:30:08 UTC ---
Oops, you are right, will do.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51724
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-01-01
18:32:37 UTC ---
Mainline seems fine, just rejects it.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51726
Bug #: 51726
Summary: LTO and attribute 'selectany'
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16603
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51379
--- Comment #6 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-01 20:21:39 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Sun Jan 1 20:21:36 2012
New Revision: 182775
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=182775
Log:
/cp
2012-01-01
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51379
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51725
Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|sparc64-linux |sparc64-linux,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51370
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51223
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16603
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-01 22:33:35 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Sun Jan 1 22:33:31 2012
New Revision: 182776
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=182776
Log:
/cp
2012-01-01
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16603
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18986
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2316
Marc Glisse marc.glisse at normalesup dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #25181|0 |1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51727
Bug #: 51727
Summary: Changing module files
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20140
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2316
--- Comment #36 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-02
01:04:14 UTC ---
The library should overload qsort, then the libitm/clone.cc change wouldn't be
needed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2316
--- Comment #37 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-02
02:30:17 UTC ---
I think the change to tree.c should not be done as it is middle-end code. That
should be in the C++ front-end specific code instead. That is the middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38884
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50679
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||meta-bug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50616
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39375
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-02
04:16:52 UTC ---
__asm__ (xxx : +X (sum));
Is most likely what you want to use. This says the sum might be clobbered but
it might not be as the same value is used if it was
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39456
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-02
04:25:03 UTC ---
What about doing something like:
#define function_def(base_section, funname, RET, ARGS)
__attribute__((__section__(base_section ##funname))) RET funname ARGS
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51666
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51728
Bug #: 51728
Summary: [4.7 Regression]: libstdc++
25_algorithms/count_if/1.cc,
25_algorithms/partition_point/1.cc,
25_algorithms/search/1.cc SEGV ICE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51675
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51704
Ira Rosen irar at il dot ibm.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50494
Ira Rosen irar at il dot ibm.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
The attached patch prevents the creation of reg-moves for definitions
with MODE_CC and thus solves this ICE.
Currently testing and bootstrap on ppc64-redhat-linux, enabling SMS on
loops with SC 1.
OK for 4.7 once testing completes?
Yes, thanks for catching this. Shouldn't we prevent creating
The diff below adds support for OpenBSD/amd64 and cleans up the
OpenBSD/i386 configury bits such that they can be shared. The OpenBSD
ports people have maintained their own set of patches for these
targets, but this is a re-implementation from scratch to prevent
copyright issues. I have a
Hi,
I'm adding the testcase and closing the issue.
Thanks,
Paolo.
//
2012-01-01 Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com
PR c++/51723
* g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-delegating2.C: New.
Index: g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-delegating2.C
Hello,
Yes, thanks for catching this. Shouldn't we prevent creating such
regmoves for (the other case of) intra-loop anti-deps as well?
Right! sorry for missing that. I added an additional check in
create_ddg_dep_from_intra_loop_link.
Also, thanks to Bernhard Rosenkraenzer for opening PR
Hi,
This patch adds a check that a statement is inside the loop/basic block
that is being analyzed before accessing its vect info.
Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64-suse-linux.
Committed.
Ira
ChangeLog:
PR tree-optimization/51704
* tree-vect-slp.c
Hi!
Committed to trunk as every year...
2012-01-01 Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com
gcc/
* gcc.c (process_command): Update copyright notice dates.
* gcov.c (print_version): Likewise.
* gcov-dump.c (print_version): Likewise.
* mips-tfile.c (main): Likewise.
Hello,
Thanks for the comments! I incorporated them in the attached patch.
Currently testing and bootstrap with the other patch in the series on
ppc64-redhat-linux, enabling SMS on loops with SC 1.
Thanks again,
Revital
2012-01-01 Richard Sandiford richard.sandif...@linaro.org
OK.
Jason
Hi,
in the audit trail of this *old* PR, which is about the miscompilation of:
char const c = 'q';
enum
{
x = c,
y = sizeof(x)
};
int test[y == sizeof(char) ? 1 : -1];
Andrew noticed that the problem is in the perform_integral_promotions
call at the beginning of
On 01/01/2012 03:17 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Andrew noticed that the problem is in the perform_integral_promotions
call at the beginning of build_enumerator. Now, the funny thing is, I
don't see why we should be calling it at all!
Indeed, 7.2 seems pretty clear that we shouldn't. OK.
Jason
This is for 32bit, C language only.
Tested by cross and then cross-native from x86_64 Linux
--Doug
2012-01-01 Douglas B Rupp r...@gnat.com
toplevel/config/mh-interix: Remove as unneeded.
toplevel/config/picflag.m4 (i[[34567]]86-*-interix3*):
Change triplet to
Hello,
additionally to the suggested patch by Pawel Sikora, I added the
adjustments for mt-allocator to it too.
ChangeLog
2012-01-01 Kai Tietz kti...@redhat.com
PR libstc++/51673
* config/abi/pre/gnu-versioned-namespace.ver: Adjusted new/delete
operators signature for
On 31/12/2011 18:03, Tobias Burnus wrote:
OK for the trunk?
OK
Thanks
Mikael
Hi,
Hello,
additionally to the suggested patch by Pawel Sikora, I added the
adjustments for mt-allocator to it too.
ChangeLog
2012-01-01 Kai Tietzkti...@redhat.com
PR libstc++/51673
* config/abi/pre/gnu-versioned-namespace.ver: Adjusted new/delete
operators signature
Hi,
I'm trying to do something about this old PR, which I find rather
disturbing: I see what's going wrong - and shouldn't be too hard to fix,
but I'd like to have help on the appropriate way to actually do it.
We have this kind of snippet:
templatetypename T void foo() {
unsigned char
On 01/01/2012 08:10 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
The analysis is confirmed by the fact that the rather heavy handed
patchlet which I'm attaching, which uses copy_node to avoid the
corruption, works. How do we normally handle this kind of situation?
In most cases, trees are unshared at
The attached patch addresses PR 31640.
It reduces the the default function alignment when not optimizing for
size from cache line size (32 bytes) to 4 bytes and sets the loop
alignment to 4 bytes when not optimizing for size. Moreover, it brings
back the -falign-loops option which was always
On 01/02/2012 02:49 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 01/01/2012 08:10 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
The analysis is confirmed by the fact that the rather heavy handed
patchlet which I'm attaching, which uses copy_node to avoid the
corruption, works. How do we normally handle this kind of situation?
In
From: Alexandre Oliva aol...@redhat.com
Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 20:57:24 +0100
* cselib.h (cselib_add_permanent_equiv): Declare.
(canonical_cselib_val): New.
* cselib.c (new_elt_loc_list): Rework to support value
equivalences. Adjust all callers.
77 matches
Mail list logo
