[Bug c++/41304] Building error while compiling gcc 4.3.2

--- Comment #16 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-10 06:52 --- > As mentioned by you the precompiled version of GCC on solaris 10 that we are > using is not the official compiler. So how do i fullfill this prerequisite Try with Sun Studio or with the genuine GCC: http://ww

[Bug c++/41304] Building error while compiling gcc 4.3.2

--- Comment #15 from vijay dot x dot jain at jpmchase dot com 2009-09-10 06:02 --- Please find attached stack trace of the segmentation fault GNU C (GCC) version 4.3.2 (sparc-sun-solaris2.10) compiled by GNU C version 4.3.2 (20090604) (gccfss), GMP version 4.3.1, MPFR version

[Bug c++/41313] g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation and execution test failures on *-apple-darwin*

--- Comment #4 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-09-10 03:52 --- Attached files were generated under r151584 with the command... /sw/src/fink.build/gcc45-4.4.999-20090909/darwin_objdir/gcc/testsuite/g++/../../g++ -B/sw/src/fink.build/gcc45-4.4.999-20090909

[Bug c++/41313] g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation and execution test failures on *-apple-darwin*

--- Comment #3 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-09-10 03:51 --- Created an attachment (id=18560) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18560&action=view) gcda file for g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation -g -fprofile-use -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bu

[Bug c++/41313] g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation and execution test failures on *-apple-darwin*

--- Comment #2 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-09-10 03:50 --- Created an attachment (id=18559) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18559&action=view) assembly file for g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation -g -fprofile-use -- http://gcc.gnu.or

[Bug c++/41313] g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation and execution test failures on *-apple-darwin*

--- Comment #1 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-09-10 03:49 --- Created an attachment (id=18558) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18558&action=view) preprocessed source for g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation -g -fprofile-use -- http://gcc.

[Bug fortran/41298] wrong-code: Default initializer C_NULL_PTR ignored

--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-10 02:43 --- (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > Thus the question is: Why is the last expr == NULL and not EXPR_VARIABLE of > > flavour FL_PARAMETER? > > gfc_match_rvalue replaces parameters with their values:

[Bug bootstrap/41324] [4.5 Regression] "make compare" failure

--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-09-10 01:10 --- It was introduced between revision 151561 and revision 151575. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41324

[Bug fortran/41298] wrong-code: Default initializer C_NULL_PTR ignored

--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-10 01:08 --- Features, features, features, always features... :) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41298

[Bug bootstrap/41324] [4.5 Regression] "make compare" failure

--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 23:52 --- Problem is also seen of i386-*-freebsd -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41324

[Bug bootstrap/41324] [4.5 Regression] "make compare" failure

--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 23:50 --- *** Bug 41326 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug bootstrap/41326] Bootstrap comparison failure: gcc/{coverage.o,gcov.o} on i386-unknown-freebsd

--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 23:50 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 41324 *** -- kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug bootstrap/41326] New: Bootstrap comparison failure: gcc/{coverage.o,gcov.o} on i386-unknown-freebsd

gmake[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/nabil-files/pfeifer/OBJ-0909-2216' Comparing stages 2 and 3 warning: gcc/cc1-checksum.o differs warning: gcc/cc1plus-checksum.o differs

[Bug c++/28293] ICE on invalid typedef

--- Comment #9 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 23:34 --- Fixed in mainline. -- paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/28293] ICE on invalid typedef

--- Comment #8 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 23:34 --- Subject: Bug 28293 Author: paolo Date: Wed Sep 9 23:33:38 2009 New Revision: 151581 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151581 Log: /cp 2009-09-09 Paolo Carlini PR c++/28293 * d

[Bug c++/28293] ICE on invalid typedef

--- Comment #7 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 23:32 --- Subject: Bug 28293 Author: paolo Date: Wed Sep 9 23:31:47 2009 New Revision: 151580 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151580 Log: /cp 2009-09-09 Paolo Carlini PR c++/28293 * d

[Bug c/37866] "passing argument from incompatible pointer type" warning cannot be passed to -Werror=

--- Comment #7 from rsc at swtch dot com 2009-09-09 23:30 --- There is a difference between warnings about things that might be wrong in your code and warnings about things that are definitely wrong. This is one of the latter, and it is a shame that it's not already an error by default.

[Bug target/41210] ICE with vsx_movv2df

--- Comment #1 from meissner at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 22:57 --- Created an attachment (id=18557) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18557&action=view) Patch to require vector addresses for GPRs to be a single register -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bu

[Bug ada/41325] New: ACATS c37105a wrong code on armv5tel

On trunk rev 151524 (+ Mikael patch) there is only one ACATS fail ,.,. C37105A ACATS 2.5 09-09-09 18:49:01 C37105A RECORDS WITH ONLY DISCRIMINANTS. * C37105A DISCRIMINANT-ONLY RECORDS DON'T WORK. C37105A FAILED . -- Summary: ACATS c37105a wro

[Bug rtl-optimization/41299] code size regression (from 4.3) with -Os and -mregparm=3

--- Comment #2 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 22:35 --- Register selection was slightly better in 4.3.5; mainline has a few extra move instructions. And for the record, "size test.o" avoids the need for the objcopy: textdata bss dec hex filename 66

[Bug target/41302] Cast of return value from uint32 to pointer cannot be optimized by a jump to called rtn.

--- Comment #1 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 22:14 --- This is almost certainly a bug in the m68k backend in that it doesn't check for the difference in return registers. Compare it's m68k_ok_for_sibcall_p function vs the i386 routine. -- rth at gcc dot gnu dot org chan

[Bug c++/28293] ICE on invalid typedef

--- Comment #6 from jason at redhat dot com 2009-09-09 21:52 --- Subject: Re: ICE on invalid typedef On 09/09/2009 12:25 PM, paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com wrote: > Jason, any chance you can have a look to the old patch of mine for this PR? The patch is OK. Jason -- http://

[Bug target/41246] should "sorry" when regparm=3 and nested functions are encountered

--- Comment #15 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 21:28 --- (In reply to comment #13) > Could this chain perhaps be moved to %edx? No, regparm(3) uses all of %eax, %edx, %ecx. There are no other available call-clobbered registers. Incidentally, fastcall functions are currentl

[Bug bootstrap/41324] New: [4.5 Regression] "make compare" failure

On Linux/ia32, revision 151575 gave: Comparing stages 2 and 3 warning: gcc/cc1plus-checksum.o differs warning: gcc/cc1obj-checksum.o differs warning: gcc/cc1-checksum.o differs Bootstrap comparison failure! gcc/gcov.o differs gcc/gcov-dump.o differs gcc/coverage.o differs make[5]: *** [compare] Er

[Bug target/41246] should "sorry" when regparm=3 and nested functions are encountered

--- Comment #14 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 21:23 --- Not working on it yet, but I think it should be possible to have the static chain pushed to the stack by the trampoline. Direct calls to the nested function would have to pass the static chain in a call saved register.

[Bug c/41323] New: Add new _mm_extract_epu16 intrinsic (resquest)

I suggest following code (or equivalent) should be added to immintrin.h (if SSE2 enabled). extern __inline unsigned _mm_extract_epu16 (__m128i const __A, int const __N) { unsigned __r; __asm__ ("pextrw\t%2,%1,%0" : "=g,m"(__r) : "x,x"(__A), "i,i"(__N)); return __r; } This behaves like _mm_extra

[Bug bootstrap/41322] [4.5 Regression] Failed to bootstrap

--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-09-09 20:52 --- Subject: Re: New: [4.5 Regression] Failed to bootstrap On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, hjl dot tools at gmail dot com wrote: > We aren't consistent where to report gcc bugs: > > [...@gnu-31 src-trunk]$ grep ttp://gcc.gnu.or

[Bug bootstrap/41322] [4.5 Regression] Failed to bootstrap

--- Comment #2 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-09-09 20:50 --- has already been reverted. -- bonzini at gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCON

[Bug fortran/41298] wrong-code: Default initializer C_NULL_PTR ignored

--- Comment #2 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 20:41 --- (In reply to comment #1) > Thus the question is: Why is the last expr == NULL and not EXPR_VARIABLE of > flavour FL_PARAMETER? gfc_match_rvalue replaces parameters with their values: case FL_PARAMETER: /* A

[Bug debug/41295] [4.5 Regression] gfortran.dg/loc_2.f90 -O3 -g fails on SH with orphaned debug_insn

--- Comment #5 from pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 20:23 --- Didn't mean to change the component when CC'ing myself, changing back. -- pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug fortran/41297] [4.5 Regression] Functions are called twice

--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 20:07 --- Fixed on trunk Thanks richi! Paul -- pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug bootstrap/41322] New: [4.5 Regression] Failed to bootstrap

On Linux/ia32, revision 151568 gave: cc1: warnings being treated as errors In file included from ../libdecnumber/gstdint.h:4:0, from ../../src-trunk/gcc/../libdecnumber/decContext.h:54, from ../../src-trunk/gcc/../libdecnumber/decNumber.h:37, from

[Bug fortran/41297] [4.5 Regression] Functions are called twice

--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 20:04 --- Subject: Bug 41297 Author: pault Date: Wed Sep 9 20:03:49 2009 New Revision: 151576 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151576 Log: 2009-09-09 Richard Guenther PR fortran/41297

[Bug bootstrap/41322] [4.5 Regression] Failed to bootstrap

--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-09-09 20:03 --- This may be caused by revision 151567: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-09/msg00314.html -- hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug fortran/41242] [4.5 Regression] procedure pointer rejected (related to user-defined assignment?)

--- Comment #6 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 19:27 --- (In reply to comment #5) > OK. It is definitely Daniel's r151140 that has introduced the regression. > Now > to try to understand why :-) If you've no luck with that, I should hopefully find some time over the week

[Bug rtl-optimization/39779] ICE shifting byte to the right with constant > 7FFFFFFF

--- Comment #5 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 19:25 --- Subject: Bug 39779 Author: uros Date: Wed Sep 9 19:25:31 2009 New Revision: 151573 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151573 Log: PR rtl-optimization/39779 * expr.c (convert_modes):

[Bug target/41315] frame.padding0 isn't treat in all cases of i386

--- Comment #3 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 19:10 --- Applied to 4.4.x branch at revision 151571, and to trunk at revision 151570. -- ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug fortran/41242] [4.5 Regression] procedure pointer rejected (related to user-defined assignment?)

--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 19:06 --- (In reply to comment #4) > Wierd! I think that this will require Daniel and Janus to go back over their > patches in the period concerned or to identify the specific revision. I will > try to do that tonight. OK.

[Bug c++/36993] g++ crashes with segfault upon wrong placement of case label

--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 18:53 --- Current mainline (151568) instead just accepts it. Is it now an accept-invalid? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36993

[Bug lto/41230] [LTO] Segfault using -flto with -fvar-tracking-assignments

--- Comment #9 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 18:42 --- (In reply to comment #3) > Hmm, dropping the stmt looks like it would be a "hack". Alex - if I just set > flag_var_tracking_assignments to 1 if I encounter a GIMPLE_DEBUG > is there sth else that I need to do to "en

[Bug ada/41321] Ada runtime not initializing fpu (finit)

--- Comment #2 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 17:57 --- Fixed on mainline. Patch needs to be backported. -- dje at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug target/40677] flag -mmultiple is ignored

--- Comment #9 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 17:49 --- See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-09/msg00592.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40677

[Bug target/40677] flag -mmultiple is ignored

--- Comment #8 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 16:59 --- Kumar, If you want this fixed then you or Edmar or someone at Freescale should fix the patch referenced in comment #6. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40677

[Bug tree-optimization/41089] [4.5 Regression] r147980 (New SRA) breaks stdargs

--- Comment #14 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 16:50 --- Subject: Bug 41089 Author: jamborm Date: Wed Sep 9 16:50:15 2009 New Revision: 151566 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151566 Log: 2009-09-09 Martin Jambor PR tree-optimization/4

[Bug ada/41321] Ada runtime not initializing fpu (finit)

--- Comment #1 from aran at 100acres dot us 2009-09-09 16:40 --- Created an attachment (id=18556) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18556&action=view) Adds __amd64__ to conditional code This includes asm("finit") for amd64 targets on NetBSD -- http://gcc.gnu.org/b

[Bug ada/41321] New: Ada runtime not initializing fpu (finit)

The function __gnat_init_float doesn't call asm("finit") when compiled on NetBSD for x86_64. It looks like Win32, Interix, emx, Lynx, FreeBSD, and OpenBDS have the same problem, but this is unconfirmed. -- Summary: Ada runtime not initializing fpu (finit) Product: gcc

[Bug middle-end/40893] ARM and PPC truncate intermediate operations unnecessarily

-- ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfir

[Bug c++/28293] ICE on invalid typedef

--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 16:25 --- Jason, any chance you can have a look to the old patch of mine for this PR? I have regtested again a slightly tweaked version of the original one. Note, the issue is rather annoying to the users, because curren

[Bug c++/28293] ICE on invalid typedef

--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 16:23 --- Created an attachment (id=18555) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18555&action=view) Slightly tweaked (only the testcase) patch -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28293

[Bug tree-optimization/41089] [4.5 Regression] r147980 (New SRA) breaks stdargs

--- Comment #13 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-09-09 16:23 --- (In reply to comment #12) > My attempts at cross-compiling these testcases seem to indicate that > no early SRA happens in gcc.dg/tree-ssa/stdarg-2.c (although ap gets > scalarized by late SRA in f15 but that is too late

[Bug tree-optimization/41089] [4.5 Regression] r147980 (New SRA) breaks stdargs

--- Comment #12 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 16:05 --- (In reply to comment #11) > (In reply to comment #10) > > > Thus I am now bootstrapping and testing the following patch on > > x86_64-linux. Uros, can you please test it on Alpha? Thanks. > > This patch fixes g

[Bug c++/41275] [4.5 Regression] ICE: expand_expr_real_1, at expr.c:8416

--- Comment #5 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 15:46 --- Oh, maybe an explanation: what is expected is that such decls (externs) either have no context set (global) or have the current function as context. For inlining (cloning/versioning all the same) this needs to be done

[Bug c++/41275] [4.5 Regression] ICE: expand_expr_real_1, at expr.c:8416

--- Comment #4 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 15:41 --- Even shorter: struct ErrmsgWindow { virtual ~ErrmsgWindow() { extern int _switch_mode_errorstr; _switch_mode_errorstr = 42; } }; void ShowErrorMessage(void) { ErrmsgWindow w; } The problem app

[Bug c++/40138] [4.5 Regression] ICE with invalid va_arg

--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 15:37 --- In fact, with checking disabled no ICE or any other user visible anomalous behavior, I'm not going to spend time on this. -- paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed

[Bug libstdc++/41316] [C++0x] forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules

--- Comment #21 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 15:25 --- Ok, thanks. I'm assigning the bug to you then. -- paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug target/39716] suboptimal MAX_EXPR expansion for Thumb

--- Comment #4 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-09-09 15:11 --- I don't see the reload failure anymore. The code is: push{r4, lr} mov r4, r0 mov r1, #0 bl __gesf2 cmp r0, #0 it lt movlt r4, #0 m

[Bug tree-optimization/41101] [4.4 Regression] ICE in compute_antic, at tree-ssa-pre.c:2419

--- Comment #24 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 15:05 --- Fixed on trunk. Let's wait a bit to watch for fallout before backporting it. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug tree-optimization/41101] [4.4/4.5 Regression] ICE in compute_antic, at tree-ssa-pre.c:2419

--- Comment #23 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 15:05 --- Subject: Bug 41101 Author: rguenth Date: Wed Sep 9 15:04:27 2009 New Revision: 151561 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151561 Log: 2009-09-09 Richard Guenther PR tree-optimizatio

[Bug tree-optimization/40641] gcc-4.4.0 does not honor the alway_inline attribute when using -Os

--- Comment #7 from florian at openwrt dot org 2009-09-09 15:04 --- Ping ? Anything else I should provide ? The bug is still present with gcc-4.4.1 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40641

[Bug tree-optimization/41320] XFAIL gcc.dg/tree-ssa/forwprop-1[12].c

--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 15:04 --- Mine. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/41320] XFAIL gcc.dg/tree-ssa/forwprop-1[12].c

--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 15:01 --- What is now needed is that forwprop takes a_12 = (int[0:D.2718] *) p_11(D); q_13 = (int *) a_12; D.2724_14 = q_13 + 4; D.2723_15 = *D.2724_14; and should propagate (int *) a_12 via q_13 + 4 into the derefer

[Bug tree-optimization/41320] New: [4.5 Regression] XFAIL gcc.dg/tree-ssa/forwprop-1[12].c

We no longer propagate &(*a)[0] into the dereference in int f(int *p, int n) { int (*a)[n] = (int (*)[n])p; int *q = &(*a)[0]; return q[1]; } because 1) the C frontend decomposes &(*a)[0] into address arithmetic and 2) because of the fix for PR41317 we no longer fold (int *)a to &(*a)[0].

[Bug c/41311] [4.5 regression] FFmpeg crashes when converting mpg to avi

--- Comment #9 from nospamname at web dot de 2009-09-09 14:54 --- ratecontrol.c line 624 cause crash in my source.assert is done by this command(should be fbngt) FBNLT _ff_rate_estimate_qscale+$716 ;118F015C q= get_qscale(s, rce, rate_factor, picture_number); printf("%f\n",q); // (is

[Bug libstdc++/41316] [C++0x] forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules

--- Comment #20 from 3dw4rd at verizon dot net 2009-09-09 14:46 --- (In reply to comment #19) > Ed, please let me know ASAP if you are going to work on this, otherwise I'll > do > it. Thanks. > I can do this. FWIW, I thought I had sort in the base class st some point. I'll look in m

[Bug tree-optimization/41089] [4.5 Regression] r147980 (New SRA) breaks stdargs

--- Comment #11 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-09-09 14:44 --- (In reply to comment #10) > Thus I am now bootstrapping and testing the following patch on > x86_64-linux. Uros, can you please test it on Alpha? Thanks. This patch fixes gcc.c-torture/execute/stdarg-4.c and gcc.dg/tr

[Bug libstdc++/41316] [C++0x] forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules

-- paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last re

[Bug libstdc++/41316] [C++0x] forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules

--- Comment #19 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 14:37 --- Ed, please let me know ASAP if you are going to work on this, otherwise I'll do it. Thanks. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41316

[Bug middle-end/41317] folding causes strict aliasing violation

--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 14:37 --- Subject: Bug 41317 Author: rguenth Date: Wed Sep 9 14:35:51 2009 New Revision: 151559 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151559 Log: 2009-09-09 Richard Guenther PR middle-end/41317

[Bug middle-end/41317] folding causes strict aliasing violation

--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 14:36 --- Fixed. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug libstdc++/41316] [C++0x] forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules

--- Comment #18 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 14:32 --- Fine, let's go with that. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41316

[Bug libstdc++/41316] [C++0x] forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules

--- Comment #17 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 14:31 --- As I said the proper fix would be to move _M_sort_after to _Fwd_list_node_base to be able to simply do void sort() { this->_M_impl._M_head._M_sort_after(std::less<_Tp>()); } instea

[Bug c++/41319] g++ : char not find by pointer

--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 14:09 --- Your code is broken. You want *(ps + 1) == 'z'. -- paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug c++/41304] Building error while compiling gcc 4.3.2

--- Comment #14 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 14:08 --- > I ran the same command on command line and got the same error > conftest.c:1: internal compiler error: Segmentation Fault > Please submit a full bug report, > with preprocessed source if appropriate. > See

[Bug c++/41319] g++ : char not find by pointer

--- Comment #1 from lxcc dot it dot gg at email dot it 2009-09-09 14:03 --- Created an attachment (id=18554) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18554&action=view) source, object, binary and log -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41319

[Bug c++/41319] New: g++ : char not find by pointer

The condition if ((1+*ps)=='z') . not have the same behavior of if ((1+*ps)=='b') . In the very simple attached file, you can reproduce it. for to reproduce, you will change 2 rows: 1) row 38 with row 37 2) row 30 with row 29 There is also a log file, so you can see how i compile it. Ot

[Bug libstdc++/41316] forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules

--- Comment #16 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 13:58 --- To be clear: I don't think we want to carry forward ugly, totally brittle, solutions only for the sake of the C++0x forward_list: this is experimental stuff, and there are no exported symbols involved. We guy

[Bug target/41315] frame.padding0 isn't treat in all cases of i386

--- Comment #2 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 13:43 --- Passed regression tests. Sent patch to ML at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-09/msg00593.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41315

[Bug c++/41304] Building error while compiling gcc 4.3.2

--- Comment #13 from vijay dot x dot jain at jpmchase dot com 2009-09-09 13:39 --- Created an attachment (id=18553) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18553&action=view) where gcc4.3.2 gnu compile is failing -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41304

[Bug c++/41304] Building error while compiling gcc 4.3.2

--- Comment #12 from vijay dot x dot jain at jpmchase dot com 2009-09-09 13:38 --- Created an attachment (id=18552) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18552&action=view) Solaris 8 config.log where gcc4.3.2 compiles sucessfully -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bu

[Bug libstdc++/41316] forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules

--- Comment #15 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-09-09 13:37 --- Subject: Re: forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com wrote: > --- Comment #14 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 > 13:18 ---

[Bug c/41318] Access to char * generates segmentation fault

--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 13:28 --- Your code is clearly invalid: str points to "test", but that memory itself is read-only, roughly speaking. More correctly, the Standard says that the effect of attempting to modify a string literal is undefined

[Bug middle-end/41257] [4.5 Regression] Bogus error '*.LTHUNK0' aliased to undefined symbol '_ZN1CD1Ev'

--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 13:28 --- This is because we now emit thunks for the (unused) destructor. The following seems to work for both testcases, testing is pending Index: cgraphunit.c ===

[Bug c/41318] New: Access to char * generates segmentation fault

I have stumbled upon a problem that, I believe, can be attributed to a bug in GCC. The following source code can be used to reproduce the problem: int foo(void) { char * str = "test"; str[1] = 'a'; return 0; } int main() { foo(); return 0; } On a Solaris 10 system, I can compile a

[Bug libstdc++/41316] forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules

--- Comment #14 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 13:18 --- (In reply to comment #12) > I need a reinterpret_cast because a regular static_cast would be an > access as _Fwd_list_node again - at least the FE (or maybe it is > fold after all) produces &this->D.1234 in t

[Bug c++/41304] Building error while compiling gcc 4.3.2

--- Comment #11 from vijay dot x dot jain at jpmchase dot com 2009-09-09 13:11 --- Following is the command on solaris 8 which compiles sucessfully /home/odyssey/f065093/gcc8/gcc8objdir/./gcc/xgcc -v -B/home/odyssey/f065093/gcc8/gcc8objdir/./gcc/ -B/home/odyssey/f065093/gcc8/gccinstall

[Bug middle-end/41257] [4.5 Regression] Bogus error '*.LTHUNK0' aliased to undefined symbol '_ZN1CD1Ev'

--- Comment #6 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 13:07 --- Well, now I can't link the following program anymore: === struct A { virtual ~A(); }; struct B : virtual A { virtual ~B() {} }; int main() { return 0; }

[Bug target/41288] [4.5 Regression] gcc.target/x86_64/abi/test_struct_returning.c regressions on *-apple-darwin* at -m64

--- Comment #12 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-09-09 13:02 --- Patch posted at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-09/msg00569.html. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41288

[Bug libstdc++/41316] forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules

--- Comment #13 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 12:25 --- I have a fix for PR41317. I'm also pretty sure I have seen this pattern in other container classes ... -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41316

[Bug middle-end/41317] folding causes strict aliasing violation

--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 12:16 --- Mine. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned

[Bug libstdc++/41316] forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules

--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-09-09 11:44 --- Subject: Re: forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com wrote: > --- Comment #10 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 > 11:36 ---

[Bug middle-end/41317] folding causes strict aliasing violation

--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 11:42 --- 4.4 rightfully complains: t.i: In function ‘main’: t.i:16: warning: dereferencing pointer ‘a.0’ does break strict-aliasing rules t.i:23: note: initialized from here -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?i

[Bug libstdc++/41316] forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules

--- Comment #11 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 11:41 --- Oops, restored the dependency. -- paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug libstdc++/41316] forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules

--- Comment #10 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 11:36 --- Ah, so, without moving _M_sort_after itself. By the way, I'm not sure to understand why you need an ugly reinterpret cast, aren't you just going from pointer to derived to pointer to base? I see the issue is t

[Bug middle-end/41317] New: folding causes strict aliasing violation

extern void abort (void); struct A { int i; }; struct B { struct A a; int j; }; static void foo (struct B *p) { ((struct A *)p)->i = 1; } int main() { struct A a; a.i = 0; foo ((struct B *)&a); if (a.i != 1) abort (); return 0; } Folding (struct A *)p to &p->a causes us t

[Bug c++/41304] Building error while compiling gcc 4.3.2

--- Comment #10 from vijay dot x dot jain at jpmchase dot com 2009-09-09 11:35 --- I have got the file | /* confdefs.h. */ | | #define PACKAGE_NAME "GNU C Runtime Library" | #define PACKAGE_TARNAME "libgcc" | #define PACKAGE_VERSION "1.0" | #define PACKAGE_STRING "GNU C Runtime Librar

[Bug libstdc++/41316] forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules

--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-09-09 11:30 --- Subject: Re: forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com wrote: > --- Comment #8 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 11:23 > --- >

[Bug libstdc++/41316] forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules

--- Comment #8 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 11:23 --- if I understand correctly what we would change, I'm not sure to like this casting from _Fwd_list_node_base* to _Fwd_list_node* inside _Fwd_list_node_base... -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4

[Bug libstdc++/41316] forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules

--- Comment #7 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-09-09 11:17 --- in the member moved to the base class, right? Sure, the ABI is fine. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41316

[Bug libstdc++/41316] forward_list::sort violates strict aliasing rules

--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 11:13 --- The trivial change I'd suggest (and that hasn't the chance to break the ABI) would be to cast all this->_M_next accesses properly like ((_Base *)this)->_M_next Introducing a _Base typedef to _Fwd_list_node. -- h

[Bug target/39716] [4.5 Regression][cond-optab] worse MAX_EXPR expansion for Thumb

--- Comment #3 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-09 11:08 --- There isn't a reload failure with trunk as of yesterday. Paolo can you explain this further ? -- ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --

  1   2   >