[Bug middle-end/18424] [3.4/4.0 Regression] ~6x+ performance regression, constant trees not being computed.

--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2004-12-21 07:59 --- Problems, with 4.0 avr test results (some good, some bad, some odd); 00c6 : int main (void){ c6: c8 ef ldi r28, 0xF8 ; 248 c8: d0 e1 ldi r29, 0x10 ; 16 ca:

Can You Help Me

I'm looking for the VP/Director of Customer Care and/or Data Services. Can you let me know who this is and how I would contact them. Thank you in advance, Helen

[Bug c/19099] No warning for uninitialized local variable use

--- Additional Comments From gopalv82 at dotgnu dot org 2004-12-21 07:40 --- Created an attachment (id=7788) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7788&action=view) Simple test case Generates different output with different optimisation levels - but no warnings at all. --

[Bug c/19099] New: No warning for uninitialized local variable use

Code similar to the one below does not give a warning (though one is expected). int foo() { int x = x; return x; } Though this code in itself seems stupid - this is how it hid into my codebase (in a simplified example). #include #define macro2(imm) \ do {\ int __va

[Bug tree-optimization/19098] tree-ssa-dom.c has an "if" statement whose condition is probably wrong

--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-21 07:34 --- Subject: Re: New: tree-ssa-dom.c has an "if" statement whose condition is probably wrong On Tue, 2004-12-21 at 05:59 +, kazu at cs dot umass dot edu wrote: > tree-ssa-dom.c has the following > > i

[Bug debug/16792] [4.0 regression] ICE in gen_subprogram_die, at dwarf2out.c:11267

--- Additional Comments From porten at kde dot org 2004-12-21 07:14 --- Re comment #8: my report #18018 was actually in relation to exactly this file from the Qt package. The test case is a destilled version. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16792

[Bug tree-optimization/19098] tree-ssa-dom.c has an "if" statement whose condition is probably wrong

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-12-21 06:51 --- Confirmed. This is in line 697 of version 1.20 of that file. This should definitely be resolved before 4.0 goes out. W. -- What|Removed |Added --

[Bug target/16111] generates invalid SSE movdqa instruction (instead of movaps)

--- Additional Comments From uros at kss-loka dot si 2004-12-21 06:42 --- Mainline does not generate movdqa insn anymore. However: g++ -O1 -msse -mfpmath=sse -fomit-frame-pointer -finline-limit=2000 pr16111.cpp ./a.out extents (-27.50 -27.50 -0.00 -0.00) g++ -O2 -msse

[Bug tree-optimization/15524] [4.0 Regression] jump threading on trees is slow with switch statements with large # of cases

--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-21 06:23 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] jump threading on trees is slow with switch statements with large # of cases On Mon, 2004-12-20 at 00:51 +, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > --- Additional Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/19098] New: tree-ssa-dom.c has an "if" statement whose condition is probably wrong

tree-ssa-dom.c has the following if (!e->flags & EDGE_DFS_BACK) which is always 0 because !e->flags is always 0 or 1, and EDGE_DFS_BACK is 32. -- Summary: tree-ssa-dom.c has an "if" statement whose condition is probably wrong Product: gcc

[Bug c++/12850] memory consumption for heavy template instantiations tripled since 3.3

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-21 05:53 --- Here are the results for -O0, now that PR 18683 is now fixed: cp/lex.c:716 (copy_decl)1087604: 0.3% 0: 0.0%5906492:10.6% 0: 0.0% 56404 cp/pt.c:3978 (c

[Bug tree-optimization/18813] not vectorizing obvious loop

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-21 05:44 --- Note we are unrolling this loop now so that should help SPEC. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18813

[Bug middle-end/12454] large number of if ();else if cause

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-21 05:02 --- The testcase is now fixed but the fundamental problem with the gimplifier still exists. So this is no longer a regression. -- What|Removed |Added -

[Bug libgcj/15719] GIJ Interpeter: Problem with NaN / infinity comparisons

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-21 03:58 --- Hmm, I also get true on the mainline on powerpc-darwin. -- What|Removed |Added Last reconf

[Bug target/16111] generates invalid SSE movdqa instruction (instead of movaps)

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-21 03:41 --- Hmm, I wonder if this is fixed now. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16111

[Bug c++/12850] memory consumption for heavy template instantiations tripled since 3.3

-- Bug 12850 depends on bug 18683, which changed state. Bug 18683 Summary: [4.0 Regression] seg fault in local allocate http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18683 What|Old Value |New Value -

[Bug middle-end/18683] [4.0 Regression] seg fault in local allocate

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-21 03:33 --- Fixed, thanks Roger. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |

[Bug middle-end/18683] [4.0 Regression] seg fault in local allocate

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-21 03:18 --- Subject: Bug 18683 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-21 03:18:51 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog gcc/config/rs6000:

[Bug tree-optimization/19096] Wrong code with -ftree-vectorize

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-12-21 02:40 --- This works for me, too, with a snapshot from 2004-12-14, or at least it doesn't abort and returns a return code of 1. What do you see, and what flags exactly do you use? I tried with -march=pentium4 -mmmx -

[Bug rtl-optimization/19097] Lots of else ifs take forever to compile

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-21 02:39 --- I think DOM is "fixing" the compile-time/memory-hog on the mainline :). -- What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug rtl-optimization/19097] New: Lots of else ifs take forever to compile

The following bit of code doesn't compile on my laptop (at -O2) because gcc gets killed. This happens with gcc 3.3.5 and gcc 3.4.3 and gcc 4.0 #define CL0(a) else if (b == a) { f(); } #define CL1(a) CL0(a##0) CL0(a##1) CL0(a##2) CL0(a##3) CL0(a##4) CL0(a##5) \ CL0(a##6) CL0(a##7) CL0(a##8) CL0(a#

[Bug middle-end/18683] [4.0 Regression] seg fault in local allocate

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-21 01:37 --- Subject: Bug 18683 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-21 01:37:35 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog function.c gcc/tes

[Bug tree-optimization/19096] Wrong code with -ftree-vectorize

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-21 01:28 --- This works for me on ppc-darwin. In .vect, I get "number of iterations cannot be computed". -- What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug target/18916] [4.0 Regression] mis-aligned vector code with copy memory (-maltivec)

--- Additional Comments From fjahanian at apple dot com 2004-12-21 01:25 --- My last patch also had problems, in that it changed alignment of local vector variables on stack. This alignment cannot be changed because AltiVec intrincics expect 128bit alignment. So, I conclude that only

[Bug other/19095] testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect.exp is not precise enough

--- Additional Comments From janis187 at us dot ibm dot com 2004-12-21 01:16 --- We're not supposed to use TCL code in test cases, so the proper syntax is /* { dg-require-effective-target keyword } */ I like the idea of running the vect tests multiple times for targets that have mult

[Bug other/19095] testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect.exp is not precise enough

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-21 01:13 --- For target support bits, there is some in lib/target-supports.exp, and some more in gcc.dg/i386-cpuid.h. For x86, probably the cpuid check should somehow be made available to tcl, and then let the test cas

[Bug tree-optimization/19096] New: Wrong code with -ftree-vectorize

use "-O1 -ftree-vectorize" to reproduce: -- extern void abort (void); static unsigned int prime_tab[] = {7, 127}; int main (void) { unsigned int n, low, mid, high; n = 64; low = 0; high = 1; while (low != high)

[Bug other/19095] New: testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect.exp is not precise enough

- For x86* it should not just set -sse2, but look for mmx/3dNow!/sse1 also - For all targets, when the instruction set is not available, we should still compile with the instruction set, just not run. See the powerpc and alpha for examples of what it *should* look like. -- Summ

[Bug libgcj/15001] [3.4 only] Using JNI with interpreter and interface methods yields SIGSEGV

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-21 00:49 --- Subject: Bug 15001 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-21 00:49:46 Modified files: libjava: ChangeLog Added files: libja

[Bug fortran/17675] [Regression w.r.t. g77] Alignment constraints not honored in EQUIVALENCE

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-21 00:39 --- Patch here: . -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/18749] GCC fails to mark stack-popping instruction in unwind-info

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-21 00:21 --- "xgcc (GCC) 4.0.0 20041220 (experimental)" produces this: $ ./xgcc -c -B. -O2 bug.c $ objdump -d bug.o bug.o: file format elf64-x86-64 Disassembly of section .text: 00

[Bug target/18749] GCC fails to mark stack-popping instruction in unwind-info

-- What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Keywords||EH, wron

[Bug fortran/18998] Gfortran produces wrong output (c/f to g77)

--- Additional Comments From Tobias dot Schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de 2004-12-21 00:04 --- Subject: Re: Gfortran produces wrong output (c/f to g77) Deji Akingunola wrote: >>--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 >>22:40 --- >>The pro

[Bug middle-end/12454] [4.0 Regression] [tree-ssa] Regression in g++.dg/parse/stack1.C

--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 23:26 --- Is this still an issue, and if so, is it fixable for GCC 4.0? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12454

[Bug other/19082] [4.0 Regression] build/genattrtab: out of memory allocating 151568 bytes after a total of 4161651196 bytes

-- What|Removed |Added Keywords|ice-on-valid-code | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19082

[Bug middle-end/18776] [4.0 Regression] Libgfortran doesn't build again

--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 23:07 --- See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-12/msg01386.html -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug other/16513] Libiberty doesn't honor the multi-os-directory settings

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 23:05 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW E

[Bug middle-end/18776] [4.0 Regression] Libgfortran doesn't build again

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 23:04 --- Subject: Bug 18776 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-20 23:04:42 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog expr.c Log message:

[Bug ada/19094] bootstrap errors

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 23:02 --- If I recall correctly Ada cannot be bootstrapped with a new version than itself but I could be wrong. Do you need to build Ada, if not do --enable-languages=c,c++,java,objc,f77 and this will disable Ada.

[Bug c++/19043] [3.3/3.4 regression] -fpermissive gives bad loop initializations

-- What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |minor Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1

[Bug fortran/18918] Eventually support the co-array f95 extension in gfortran

--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 22:44 --- This might be interesting, even though I think it's far out of reach currently. -- What|Removed |Added --

[Bug fortran/18998] Gfortran produces wrong output (c/f to g77)

--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 22:40 --- Forgot to say: this bug is caught by -fbounds-check. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18998

[Bug fortran/18998] Gfortran produces wrong output (c/f to g77)

--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 22:40 --- The problem is an out-of-bounds array access to sa, note its dimensions and the values the loop index takes on. -- What|Removed |Added --

[Bug libobjc/12035] [3.4/4.0 Regression] Patch for libobjc/gc.c that fixes compilation error of Objective-C with garbage collector enabled

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 22:37 --- Fixed with a slightly different patch that I added before. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug libobjc/13946] ObjC configured --with-objc-gc needs external Boehm gc

-- Bug 13946 depends on bug 12035, which changed state. Bug 12035 Summary: [3.4/4.0 Regression] Patch for libobjc/gc.c that fixes compilation error of Objective-C with garbage collector enabled http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12035 What|Old Value |

[Bug libobjc/12035] [3.4/4.0 Regression] Patch for libobjc/gc.c that fixes compilation error of Objective-C with garbage collector enabled

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 22:35 --- Subject: Bug 12035 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-20 22:35:08 Modified files: libobjc: ChangeLog Log message: chan

[Bug libobjc/12035] [3.4/4.0 Regression] Patch for libobjc/gc.c that fixes compilation error of Objective-C with garbage collector enabled

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 22:34 --- Subject: Bug 12035 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Branch: gcc-3_4-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-20 22:34:18 Modified files: libobjc: Change

[Bug libobjc/12035] [3.4/4.0 Regression] Patch for libobjc/gc.c that fixes compilation error of Objective-C with garbage collector enabled

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 22:32 --- Subject: Bug 12035 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-20 22:32:42 Modified files: libobjc: ChangeLog gc.c Log message:

[Bug target/18749] GCC fails to mark stack-popping instruction in unwind-info

--- Additional Comments From davidm at hpl dot hp dot com 2004-12-20 22:13 --- (In reply to comment #1) > Without a test case, nobody can give this bug a proper look. Can you > provide an example of how this fails for you? Sorry, that was sloppy of me. I'll attach a minimal test-cas

[Bug libobjc/12035] [3.4/4.0 Regression] Patch for libobjc/gc.c that fixes compilation error of Objective-C with garbage collector enabled

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 21:55 --- I think there is a better patch: Index: gc.c === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/libobjc/gc.c,v retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -p -r1.6 gc.c --- gc.c

[Bug c++/19092] g++ accepts code that violates 14.6.4.2

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-12-20 21:30 --- Actually, we can make this a rejects-valid like so: -- namespace NS1 { struct X {}; void foo(X); } namespace NS2 { static void foo(NS1::X); template void bar() {

[Bug other/19093] g++.dg/opt/max1.C fails on ia64 and x86_64

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 21:12 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug other/19093] g++.dg/opt/max1.C fails on ia64 and x86_64

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 21:12 --- Subject: Bug 19093 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Branch: gcc-3_3-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-20 21:12:34 Modified files: gcc/testsuite : Change

[Bug other/19093] g++.dg/opt/max1.C fails on ia64 and x86_64

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 21:09 --- Subject: Bug 19093 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Branch: gcc-3_4-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-20 21:09:37 Modified files: gcc/testsuite : Change

[Bug other/19093] g++.dg/opt/max1.C fails on ia64 and x86_64

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 21:07 --- Subject: Bug 19093 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-20 21:07:14 Modified files: gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog gcc/testsuite/g++.

[Bug libstdc++/17140] Floating point output is slow

--- Additional Comments From jlquinn at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 21:01 --- Trying on a power4 aix 5.2 box, in the testsuite, 27_io/basic_ostream/inserts_arithmetic/char/1.cc fails, because of a segfault in frexp(long double, int). In gdb, the args look fine. The int seems to be a

[Bug rtl-optimization/18942] Do loop is not as optimized as 3.3.2

--- Additional Comments From rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 20:49 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug rtl-optimization/18942] Do loop is not as optimized as 3.3.2

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 20:49 --- Subject: Bug 18942 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-20 20:48:54 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog simplify-rtx.c Log messag

[Bug tree-optimization/19067] ICE in tree-if-conv

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 20:43 --- Cool thanks Devang for testing the patch. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIR

[Bug c++/19092] g++ accepts code that violates 14.6.4.2

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-12-20 20:43 --- Indeed. It seems as if I am not the only one who wasn't aware of the restriction that dependent function calls can only be to functions with external linkage. This should be low priority, since we only acce

[Bug c++/19044] Alternate asm name for atan ignored when calling __builtin_atan

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 20:40 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug ada/19094] bootstrap errors

-- What|Removed |Added Component|bootstrap |ada http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19094

[Bug tree-optimization/19067] ICE in tree-if-conv

--- Additional Comments From dpatel at apple dot com 2004-12-20 20:32 --- Subject: Re: ICE in tree-if-conv On Dec 18, 2004, at 10:28 AM, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > I don't know but could possible the patch in here: > msg0051

[Bug bootstrap/19094] New: bootstrap errors

2 questions: during make bootstrap, on RedHat 3.3.3-7, there errors occur at the end: make[3]: Entering directory `/usr/local/bin/gcc-3.2.3/gcc/ada' gcc -c -g -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wtraditional -pedantic -Wno-long-long -W -Wall -gnatpg -gnata -g -O1 -

[Bug target/18987] [4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

--- Additional Comments From davidm at hpl dot hp dot com 2004-12-20 20:12 --- (In reply to comment #6) > Jim, David, can one of you look at this, and maybe revert the patch > for PR13158 because it causes this regression? Reverting the patch doesn't sound like a good idea, because it w

[Bug c++/19044] Alternate asm name for atan ignored when calling __builtin_atan

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 20:11 --- Subject: Bug 19044 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-20 20:11:42 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog c-common.c c-common.h c-dec

[Bug tree-optimization/19067] ICE in tree-if-conv

--- Additional Comments From dpatel at apple dot com 2004-12-20 20:05 --- Subject: Re: ICE in tree-if-conv I'll verify whether TCB patch works here or not. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19067

[Bug libstdc++/17243] Test failures due to missing C99 symbols

--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2004-12-20 20:02 --- *** Bug 19086 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17243

[Bug libstdc++/19086] libstdc++ testsuite fails due to missing C99 functions

--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2004-12-20 20:02 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 17243 *** -- What|Removed |Added Statu

[Bug other/19093] g++.dg/opt/max1.C fails on ia64 and x86_64

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 20:00 --- Actually it is just the testcase is invalid for 64bit targets (woops, my fault since I made it). This patch should fix the problem: Index: g++.dg/opt/max1.C =

[Bug libfortran/19032] modulo generates wrong result for divisor 1 and -1

--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 19:56 --- Updated patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-12/msg01563.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19032

[Bug middle-end/19068] [3.3 only] Wrong code for MIN_EXPR and MAX_EXPR

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 19:56 --- Please next time file a new bug since the orginal bug was fixed, I filed PR 19093 for the new bug. -- What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug middle-end/19093] New: g++.dg/opt/max1.C fails on ia64 and x86_64

g++.dg/opt/max1.C still failed on both Linux/ia64 and Linux/x86_64: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2004-12/msg00919.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2004-12/msg00923.html They are both 64bit targets. -- Summary: g++.dg/opt/max1.C fails on ia64 and x86_64 P

[Bug middle-end/19068] [3.3 only] Wrong code for MIN_EXPR and MAX_EXPR

--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2004-12-20 19:54 --- g++.dg/opt/max1.C still failed on both Linux/ia64 and Linux/x86_64: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2004-12/msg00919.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2004-12/msg00923.html They are both 64bit targets.

[Bug tree-optimization/19038] [4.0 Regression] out-of ssa causing loops to have more than one BB

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 19:47 --- (In reply to comment #8) > The reduced testcase (well heavely modified) looks like: Here is the resulting loop asm (on x86 where shows up worse than ppc which is the same because the RA does its work better

[Bug tree-optimization/19038] [4.0 Regression] out-of ssa causing loops to have more than one BB

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 19:23 --- This also causes a compile time issue as the RTL optimizers and the register allocator have to do more work. -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug libfortran/19032] modulo generates wrong result for divisor 1 and -1

-- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org | Status|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/19038] [4.0 Regression] out-of ssa causing loops to have more than one BB

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 19:04 --- The reduced testcase (well heavely modified) looks like: int f (int temp2, int temp3, int xlvj_, int zlvj_, int yv1j_, int yv2j_) { int temp1, temp5; for(;;) { temp1 = temp2*xlvj_ - temp3*zlvj_;

[Bug c++/19092] g++ accepts code that violates 14.6.4.2

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 18:50 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW E

[Bug rtl-optimization/19078] [4.0 Regression] Poor quality code after loop unrolling.

--- Additional Comments From rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 18:44 --- Patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-12/msg01554.html -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/19092] g++ accepts code that violates 14.6.4.2

--- Additional Comments From bagnara at cs dot unipr dot it 2004-12-20 18:32 --- Created an attachment (id=7784) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7784&action=view) Small program that allows to reproduce the problem -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19

[Bug c++/19092] New: g++ accepts code that violates 14.6.4.2

The attached snippet should not compile, since foo() has internal linkage. Instead, g++ compiles it happily and without a warning even when given -Wall -W -pedantic. -- Summary: g++ accepts code that violates 14.6.4.2 Product: gcc Version: 3.4.2 Status

[Bug tree-optimization/19038] [4.0 Regression] out-of ssa causing loops to have more than one BB

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 18:25 --- After getting access to sixtrack sources, steven and I found this is a problem in out of ssa committing on a new BB, I almost have a patch but it has one issue in that we could be the new statement's resu

[Bug tree-optimization/19080] [4.0 regression] ICE while compiling linux kernel

--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 18:23 --- Fix: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-12/msg01551.html -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/19080] [4.0 regression] ICE while compiling linux kernel

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 18:18 --- Subject: Bug 19080 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-20 18:18:37 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog tree-flow-inline.h tree-ssa

[Bug target/19087] Overflowed address in dwarf debug line information

--- Additional Comments From ericw at evcohs dot com 2004-12-20 17:44 --- (In reply to comment #5) > Hmm, on the mainline I get an error about dwarf2 not being supported: > t.c:1: error: target system does not support the "dwarf-2" debug format > If you're talking about HEAD/4.0, then

[Bug tree-optimization/17617] Micro-optimize INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (or tree.def rather)

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-12-20 17:14 --- The question raised in several of the messages in that discussion is whether an enumeration of equality checks is converted into a range check if the tested values are consecutive. Here is the answer:

[Bug c++/17648] [3.3/3.4 Regression] template destructor was not called for inherited classes

--- Additional Comments From SWElef at post dot sk 2004-12-20 17:09 --- (In reply to comment #13) > Here's a condensed version of Wolfgang's testcase: > > int i=1; > class A; > template struct B > { > A *p; > ~B() > { > --i; >

[Bug tree-optimization/17617] Micro-optimize INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (or tree.def rather)

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-12-20 17:08 --- A patch (with following long discussion) has been proposed here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-12/msg01495.html W. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17617

[Bug tree-optimization/13761] [tree-ssa] component refs to the same struct should not alias

--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 16:35 --- The structure-aliasing branch now has code (or will as soon as cvs finishes committing) that will fix dale's testcaes to the extent i can. We produce identical code for both loops, now. I haven't quite f

[Bug libfortran/19071] complex formatted output has too many items

-- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2004-12-

[Bug rtl-optimization/13366] ICE using MMX/SSE builtins with -O

--- Additional Comments From uros at kss-loka dot si 2004-12-20 15:39 --- Equivalent SSE2 version works OK: typedef int v8hi __attribute__ ((mode (V8HI))); int f (unsigned short n) { v8hi vec = { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, n }; v8hi hw = __builtin_ia32_pmulhw128 (vec, vec); return (__bu

[Bug libstdc++/19091] problem with string to double conversion (overflow situation)

--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2004-12-20 15:35 --- Indeed, *it overflows*. Try changing you testcase like this: istringstream s("+4E308"); s >> r; if (!s.fail()) cout << r << endl; What happens, is just that overflows and r is left unchanged; by chance,

[Bug c++/19043] [3.3/3.4 regression] -fpermissive gives bad loop initializations

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-12-20 15:34 --- Confirmed. It works in 2.95 and mainline, but nothing in between (I tested 3.2.3, 3.3.4, 3.4.3). It is thus a regression, although I believe not a very serious one given that the code is in fact invalid and o

[Bug other/19082] [4.0 Regression] build/genattrtab: out of memory allocating 151568 bytes after a total of 4161651196 bytes

-- What|Removed |Added CC||segher at kernel dot ||crashing dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugz

[Bug rtl-optimization/19078] [4.0 Regression] Poor quality code after loop unrolling.

--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2004-12-20 15:22 --- More seriously, I think that we (the libstdc++-v3 people) should more carefully test the effect of the new optimizations on std::algorithm: indeed, we are talking about benchmarks, not pointless microbenchmarks: s

[Bug libstdc++/19091] New: problem with string to double conversion (overflow situation)

Following conversion should overflow, and not return 8.02393e-308. Same problem, although different output, when reading "4E308" from standard input. #include #include using namespace std; int main() { double r; istringstream s("+4E308"); s >> r; cout << r << endl; } -- Sum

[Bug c++/19076] Pointer to member function not matched to pointer to member template

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-12-20 15:15 --- This last testcase indeed still shows the problem. It doesn't compile with gcc, but does with icc. W. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19076

[Bug rtl-optimization/19078] [4.0 Regression] Poor quality code after loop unrolling.

--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2004-12-20 15:13 --- ;) Well, many people believe I look too *often* at microbenchmarks... ;) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19078

[Bug target/10395] [x86] vector types are incorrectly aligned causing crash in multi-threaded apps or when using in main, plus other times

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-12-20 15:13 --- An attribute could work. I doubt that a general flag would be useful, since one in general doesn't know which functions are thread entry points, so the compiler would have to emit such stack alignment code in

  1   2   >