--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.2 |4.2.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28594
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.2 |4.2.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28639
--- Comment #20 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 14:53
---
Fixed on mainline.
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
System include file is broken as described in section.
fixincludes does not create any modification of it, let alone fixed as
described. Newly built gcc includes broken file when run. This may
break just any program built with gcc, and does break compiling
`toplev.c' with `stage1/xgcc' as desc
--- Comment #67 from whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2006-08-11 15:22 ---
Uros,
>Slightly offtopic, but to put some numbers to comment #8 and comment #11,
>equivalent SSE code now reaches only 50% of x87 single performance and 60% of
>x87 double performance on AMD x86_64
FYI, you *may* g
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 15:39 ---
Confirmed. I think we should split at least the reassociation and reciprocals
from -funsafe-math-optimizations, as for example on x86 we create fsin/fsincos
and friends which are of lower precision than required.
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 16:17 ---
A regression hunt using an i686-linux cross compiler for the submitter's
testcase with "-O2 -march=i486 -mtune=i686" identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=105606
r105606 | bo
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 16:33 ---
This only happens for a small number of kernels and 95% of them are a mandrake
kernel.
So I don't think this should be fixed on GCC's side.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 17:17 ---
> The attached runs the testcase below correctly and regtests, except for
> gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_5.f90, on Cygwin_NT/PIV.
I have tracked down the cause of this - it's just building tonto-2.3 at
pres
--- Comment #6 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-08-11 18:40 ---
The loop in vt_find_locations starts with
Basic block 22:
IN:
Stack adjustment: 80
Reg 8: __ret+0
Reg 15: this+0 this+0
Reg 32: __ret+0
Reg 33: __ret+0
Reg 35: __c+0
Reg 112: this+0
Reg 113: __ret+0
Reg 114: __ret+0
Reg 115:
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 18:46 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the test case added for comment #3
identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=115086
r115086 | jason | 2006-06-30 01:15:56 + (Fri, 30
--- Comment #13 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 19:01
---
Subject: Bug 23454
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri Aug 11 19:01:45 2006
New Revision: 116088
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=116088
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/23454
* reorg.c (re
--- Comment #14 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 19:02
---
Subject: Bug 23454
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri Aug 11 19:02:45 2006
New Revision: 116089
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=116089
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/23454
* reorg.c (re
--- Comment #15 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 19:04
---
Subject: Bug 23454
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri Aug 11 19:04:04 2006
New Revision: 116090
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=116090
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/23454
Backport from
--- Comment #16 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 19:06
---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-08/msg00375.html
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 19:24 ---
A regression hunt using an arm-ep93xx-linux-gnueabi cross compiler on
powerpc-linux, with the testcase minimal.c, identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=105121
r105121 | kazu
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 19:27 ---
This problem also affects powerpc-linux, where a regression hunt identified the
following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=112408
r112408 | geoffk | 2006-03-27 06:09:48 + (Mon, 27 Mar 2006)
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
GCC host triplet|arm-ep93xx-linux-gnueabi|
GCC target triplet||arm-ep93xx-linux-gnu
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 19:30 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|norma
--- Comment #18 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 19:46
---
I think this is now fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-08-11 19:55 ---
Subject: Bug number PR28660
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-08/msg00378.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
--- Comment #10 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-08-11 21:06 ---
Subject: Bug number PR23624
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-08/msg01740.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
--- Comment #1 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-08-11 21:25 ---
Subject: Bug number PR23794
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-08/msg00381.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 22:24 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=106566
r106566 | mmitchel | 2005-11-06 19:41:18 + (Sun, 06 Nov 2005)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 22:29 ---
A regression hunt using the first testcase identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=94656
r94656 | giovannibajo | 2005-02-03 10:26:22 + (Thu, 03 Feb 2005)
A regression hunt
Building 4.1.x on powerpc-linux-gnu and sparc-linux-gnu lets the libstdc++ ABI
check fail (log attached); a libstlport4.6 built on a glibc-2.3.6 system cannot
resolve the references to the libstdc++6 built on the glibc-2.4 system.
--
Summary: ABI test failures building libstdc++ on a
--- Comment #1 from doko at ubuntu dot com 2006-08-11 22:47 ---
Created an attachment (id=12069)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12069&action=view)
test log
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28701
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 22:50 ---
I think this is a fall out of the 12bit long double changes.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28701
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 23:00 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=114667
r114667 | mmitchel | 2006-06-15 03:40:42 + (Thu, 15 Jun 2006)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org c
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 23:57 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using a C compiler identified the following
patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=101799
r101799 | dberlin | 2005-07-08 23:37:11 + (Fri, 08 Jul 2005)
--
jan
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-12 00:02 ---
The real question is why we even get to that point in mark_weak.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #35 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 07:17
---
Jan, I'm assigning it to you since you have already spent a fair amount of time
on it and made significant progress. Thanks for tackling the hard stuff.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 07:26
---
Jan posted a patch 3 days ago.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 07:31
---
Investigating.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assigne
--- Comment #8 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 07:33
---
Paul, could you update the status of this PR? Thanks in advance.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #12 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 07:36
---
Investigating.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assign
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 07:40
---
The 3.4 branch is closed and the 4.0 branch in deep sleep mode.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 07:44
---
Subject: Bug 28651
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Aug 11 07:44:45 2006
New Revision: 116079
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=116079
Log:
2006-08-11 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #15 from bjoern dot haase at de dot bosch dot com 2006-08-11
07:48 ---
I just realized that yesterday the subject line has been changed.
I'd like to suggest that this new subject line is mis-leading:
The compiler doesn't place ANY object in .rodata . It's not necessary to
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 07:52
---
Fixed for 4.1.2 and 4.2.0. No longer blocks PR26847. Unassigning.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #13 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 07:52
---
Subject: Bug 28651
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Aug 11 07:52:01 2006
New Revision: 116080
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=116080
Log:
2006-08-11 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
When I compile the small program I get an ICE.
By checking with older compiler versions I found this bug was introduced
between gcc-4.2-20060325 and gcc-4.2-20060401.
Michael Cieslinski
dwarf2out_bug.c:
typedef float FloatVect __attribute__((__vector_size__(16)));
static FloatVect Foo =
--- Comment #16 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 08:04
---
Non trivial is the wording used by the C++ standard which is why I used it.
(it is also called user defined constructor).
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE in rtl_for_decl_init, at|[4.2 Regression] ICE in
|dwarf2out.c
--- Comment #5 from paul dot richard dot thomas at cea dot fr 2006-08-11
08:06 ---
Try this one! No matter what you rename 'r' as, the order of execution is
wrong.
program runoptf90
implicit none
real :: x(10)
call simulated_annealing (x)
contains
subroutine simula
--- Comment #3 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-08-11 09:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=12062)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12062&action=view)
patch being tested
Tested so far by checking that it makes PR28651 resurface...
Being bootstrapped and tested on i686
--- Comment #64 from uros at kss-loka dot si 2006-08-11 09:18 ---
Slightly offtopic, but to put some numbers to comment #8 and comment #11,
equivalent SSE code now reaches only 50% of x87 single performance and 60% of
x87 double performance on AMD x86_64:
ALGORITHM NB REPS
--- Comment #8 from benjamin at smedbergs dot us 2006-08-11 10:19 ---
The documentation is incorrect. RTTI is not required to find the most-derived
class pointer, because the vtable contains this information natively and does
not need to know anything about the type. I'm making my point
--- Comment #4 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-08-11 10:22 ---
Except that PPC uses 12 registers f0 f6 f7 f8 f9 f10 f11 f12 f13 f29 f30 f31.
Not that we can blame GCC for using 12, but it is not a fair comparison. :-)
In fact, 8 registers are enough, but it is quite tricky to obtain t
--- Comment #9 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2006-08-11 11:01
---
Subject: Re: [4.2 regression] dynamic_cast disallowed too rigorously
with -fno-rtti
"benjamin at smedbergs dot us" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| The documentation is incorrect.
The documentation is what we
--- Comment #10 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 11:03 ---
the behaviour is conformant to the documentation
--
gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 11:14 ---
This one wiil get fixed with the merge of the ecj branch.
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #11 from benjamin at smedbergs dot us 2006-08-11 11:44 ---
I'm not claiming that the behavior isn't conformant to the docs, I'm claiming
that you regressed a construct that
1) doesn't need RTTI at all (in practice)
2) is used by a major software project
And that both the co
I'm running linux redhat, kernel 2.6.9-34.0.1.ELsmp, duel processor AMD Opteron
250. It's on a cluster where I only have write-rights in my user library and
thus need to compile my own version of gcc.
I downloaded gcc from
ftp://ftp.mpi-sb.mpg.de/pub/gnu/mirror/gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/releases/gcc-4
Hi,
I compile my code with -pedantic. My code includes inline assembler, which I
write using __asm__ to avoid warnings. The string literal containing the
inline code is longer than maximum length allowed by standard C and in GCC
3.4.4, it was possible to prefix the string with __extension__ to a
--- Comment #12 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2006-08-11 12:33
---
Subject: Re: [4.2 regression] dynamic_cast disallowed too rigorously
with -fno-rtti
"benjamin at smedbergs dot us" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| I'm not claiming that the behavior isn't conformant to the do
seen on redhat/gcc-4_1-branch, should be seen on upcoming classpath-0.92 merge
as well.
building a shared library avoids the direct dependency on libgcj.so.7 (only
libgcj_gc.so.1 is referenced as NEEDED).
i.e. gcj \
-O2 -g -Wl,-Bsymbolic -shared -fPIC -fjni -findirect-dispatch \
--- Comment #8 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-08-11 13:18 ---
taking this.
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc d
--- Comment #65 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-08-11 13:26 ---
Subject: Bug 27827
Author: bonzini
Date: Fri Aug 11 13:25:58 2006
New Revision: 116082
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=116082
Log:
2006-08-11 Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR target/27
--- Comment #4 from magsilva at gmail dot com 2006-08-11 13:27 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> --- config/i386/crtfastmath.c (revision 115987)
> +++ config/i386/crtfastmath.c (working copy)
> @@ -38,6 +38,9 @@
> #define SSE(1 << 25)
>
> static void __attribute__((constructor))
--- Comment #1 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 13:29 ---
Confirmed
--
dje at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #6 from paul dot richard dot thomas at cea dot fr 2006-08-11
14:08 ---
Created an attachment (id=12066)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12066&action=view)
Prototype fix
The attached runs the testcase below correctly and regtests, except for
gfortran.for
--- Comment #66 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-08-11 14:10 ---
(on bugzilla because I had problems sending mail to you)
> Just got your most recent update. From what I can tell, you have applied
> your patch to the 4.1 series, so that the next 4.1 release will have the fix?
Yes.
>
--- Comment #6 from vda dot linux at googlemail dot com 2006-08-11 14:17
---
Created an attachment (id=12067)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12067&action=view)
New version of the patch. 4.1.1 bootstraps with it.
--
vda dot linux at googlemail dot com changed:
--- Comment #13 from benjamin at smedbergs dot us 2006-08-11 14:21 ---
ok, leaving aside the pedantic issue of whether this is a "regression" or not,
can we get it fixed? I just posted a patch to gcc-patches which allows
dynamic_cast in cases where RTTI is not required, and adds a note t
--- Comment #2 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 14:33 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] Performace problem with
indexed load/stores on powerpc
Here is the reassoc patch that puts them in the right order at the tree
level.
Index: tree-ssa-reassoc.c
=
66 matches
Mail list logo
