--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18
20:57 ---
Fixed by:
2005-05-18 Geoffrey Keating <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* tree-cfg.c (pass_remove_useless): This pass works on trees.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2005-05-18
21:00 ---
Subject: Re: no folding back to ARRAY_REF
On May 18, 2005, at 4:51 PM, joseph at codesourcery dot com wrote:
>
> --- Additional Comments From joseph at codesourcery dot com
> 2005-05-18 20:51 --
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18 21:01
---
Habitual reconfirm.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18 21:02
---
Habitual reconfirm.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18338
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18 21:02
---
Habitual reconfirm.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18340
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18 21:03
---
Habitual reconfirm.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18344
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18 21:03
---
Habitual reconfirm.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18482
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18 21:03
---
Habitual reconfirm.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18911
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18 21:03
---
Habitual reconfirm.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19461
FAIL: g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr14814.C scan-tree-dump-times &this 0
appeared on mainline, most or all platforms, 20050518. This is a new testcase
but presumptively a regression because bug 14814 was reportedly fixed in 4.0.0.
--
Summary: [4.1 Regression] g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr14814.C scan-
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18
21:12 ---
Yes it was fixed by that patch.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18
21:13 ---
No just the testcase is failing, the problem described in PR 14814 is still
fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
---
> The new test pr14814.C is failing on mainline, 20050518, all or most
> platforms.
>
> FAIL: g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr14814.C scan-tree-dump-times &this 0
Yea. I know. We may be better off xfailing this given the code we get
from FRE and the conservative handling of ADDR_EXPRs wit
--- Additional Comments From jason at redhat dot com 2005-05-18 21:17
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] removing a temporary return
value when we cannot
On 18 May 2005 20:45:22 -, "bernie at develer dot com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> My backtrace looks suspiciously similar to
This test program:
# 1 "test.cc"
# 1 "np.h" 1
# 1 "Math.h" 1 3 4
template static inline void push(T* element, T** head)
{
element->m_flink = *head;
*head = element;
}
produces:
In file included from test.cc:2:
Math.h:1: error: template with C linkage
If I delete the "# 1 "Math.h" 1 3 4" then
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18 21:23
---
This is fixed by Zdenek recent fix for aliasing issues. I'm setting the target
milestone to 4.1, but if Zdenek applies his patch to 4.0 this should probably be
changed as well.
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18
21:23 ---
Confirmed, hmm, I wonder if something is not marked as GTY.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18 21:24
---
Fixed by Zdenek's recent patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-05/msg00178.html, keeping this bug open until
the patch is also committed to the 4.0 branch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18
21:26 ---
This is a target problem, it is not defining NO_IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18 21:36
---
Also new today on i686-pc-linux:
FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90 -O (test for excess errors)
I can't confirm the C failures because I only run the Fortran testsuite.
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From matt at 3am-software dot com 2005-05-18 21:39
---
Subject: Re: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
rth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18 06:09
> ---
> Do you still reproduce
--- Additional Comments From pkoning at equallogic dot com 2005-05-18
21:41 ---
Thanks. I added that to config/mips/elf.h and it works correctly now.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21656
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18
21:44 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18
21:51 ---
Nice. Now it's really an aliasing problem only - and maybe bad timing for when
we end up with such nice state.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19626
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18
22:02 ---
Index: tree-ssa-forwprop.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/tree-ssa-forwprop.c,v
retrieving revision 2.17
diff -u -p -r2.17 tree-ssa-forwprop.c
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18
22:11 ---
Subject: Bug 19495
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-18 22:11:24
Modified files:
libstdc++-v3 : ChangeLog
libstdc++-v3/inclu
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||21657
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21412
The patch from PR21412 is causing miscompilation of glibc. Anything that uses
libpthread is crashing in __libc_dl_error_tsd.
void ** __attribute__ ((const))
__libc_dl_error_tsd (void)
{
static __thread void *data;
return &data;
}
When compiled without the patch:
dl-tsd.os:
--- Additional Comments From janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18 22:19
---
This is the same problem that causes cc1plus to segfault building SPEC CPU2000
test eon for powerpc-linux at any level of optimization including -O0. The
segfault happens when maybe_fold_offset_to_component_r
--- Additional Comments From hubicka at ucw dot cz 2005-05-18 22:22 ---
Subject: Re: [Bug gcov/profile/20815] -fprofile-use barfs with "coverage
mismatch for function '...' while reading counter 'arcs'."
coverage_checksum_string already knows a bit about ignoring random seed
produced me
--- Additional Comments From hubicka at ucw dot cz 2005-05-18 22:47 ---
Subject: Re: [Bug gcov/profile/20815] -fprofile-use barfs with "coverage
mismatch for function '...' while reading counter 'arcs'."
>
> --- Additional Comments From hubicka at ucw dot cz 2005-05-18 22:22
> --
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18 22:49
---
Ug. Missed deleting a line from local-dynamic side.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|u
Consider:
void
f (void)
{
int *p, *q, *r;
int a[10];
p = &a[5];
q = p - 1;
r = q - 1;
*r = 1;
}
Here is what I get from the first CCP.
f ()
{
int a[10];
int * r;
int * q;
int * p;
:
p_1 = &a[5];
q_2 = &a[4];
r_3 = q_2 - 4B;
*r_3 = 1;
return;
}
Note that p_1 and q
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |kazu at cs dot umass dot edu
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
00:40 ---
Hmm, we have an INDIRECT_REF with no type, I wonder how that could.
--
What|Removed |Added
Compiling the C Torture file "weak-6.c" (below) gives an error at O0 and O1, as
seemed to be expected
by the author. At O2, there's no error or warning.
214> gcc -O2 -c ../c/noerror/GPL/3.3.2/nowarn/bulk/gcc.dg/weak/weak-6.c
215> gcc -O1 -c ../c/noerror/GPL/3.3.2/nowarn/bulk/gcc.dg/weak/weak-
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
00:48 ---
Hmm, the problem is we don't have a reference type at the point we clone the
constructor. The reason
why it worked before Honza's patch is because we did not call
build_fold_indirect_ref before. This is
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
01:02 ---
I think I have a patch, the problem is that the type for the cloned parm does
not get updated. I wonder
why this has not showed up before.
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
01:19 ---
Confirmed, unit-at-a-time related.
--
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 01:58
---
The root cause of this has nothing to do with the type system per-se.
The original program skirts the line of legality, and get_expr_operands
is falling over.
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 03:42
---
The patch in comment #13 works; build completes for cris-elf and testsuite
results seem sane (same "new failures" as cris-axis-linux-gnu before this
patch). Also tested on mmix-knuth-mmixware, no regressions (no
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-05-19 03:55
---
(In reply to comment #0)
> The current -fdelete_null_pointer_checks implementation makes assumptions that
> the target processor will trap on reads or writes to address zero.
> Unfortunately,
> these assumption
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 04:23
---
Part 1 of a fix: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-05/msg01947.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21541
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
05:35 ---
I'm testing a fix for this.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19
06:30 ---
Subject: Bug 21541
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-19 06:29:47
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog ifcvt.c
Log message:
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-19 06:31
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
101 - 146 of 146 matches
Mail list logo
