--- Comment #1 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:21 ---
Ok, although we should only do this on Solaris 10 and up. At the moment, only
very few specialized libraries are affected since compatibility links exist in
/usr/lib.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-28 19:21 ---
I did not filled the triplets since I see the ICE on *-darwin-* and *-linux-*
as well.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43924
--- Comment #25 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-28 19:27 ---
The following change applied on top of revision 158827 is enough to reach stage
3 (and probably to bootstrap -answer tomorrow):
--- ../_gcc_clean/gcc/ifcvt.c 2010-04-22 13:23:31.0 +0200
+++
--- Comment #2 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:28 ---
On SPARC, I only see this when configuring with gas and gld, which isn't
apparent
in your g++ -v output.
On x86, I see the error with Sun as and gas with Sun ld and gas with GNU ld.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE 2010-04-28
19:30 ---
Subject: Re: preprocessor fails with myassertion
Maybe Eric has a sparcv9 compiler around and can easily check this?
I only have 4.3.5, 4.5.1 and 4.6.0 compilers for sparc64-sun-solaris2.x at the
--- Comment #26 from bernds at codesourcery dot com 2010-04-28 19:33
---
Ah! I think that makes sense. For some reason I only looked at the other use of
df_simulate_find_noclobber_defs.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43858
--- Comment #12 from dougmencken at gmail dot com 2010-04-28 19:36 ---
$ objdump -T /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 | grep GetIPI
# i.e. nothing
$ objdump -T /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 | grep Unwind
00010a80 gDF .text 0244 GCC_3.0 _Unwind_Find_FDE
bd78 gDF .text 0008
--- Comment #2 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:40 ---
It's pretty much impossible to deal with PRs that bundle dozens of different
issues together (or with postings to gcc-testresults that have almost as much
boilerplate, comments and explantions as actual results).
Many
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:41
---
Preprocessed source is embedded in the original submission.
Yes, that's precisely why I asked to attach it instead.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39883
--- Comment #6 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:47 ---
Please try this with an absolute path to configure. Perhaps we should simply
document that relative paths aren't supported here.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #15 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:50 ---
Re. comment #14, this is obviously related to LTO but we (gcc) don't do
anything with relocations. I'll try to reproduce this problem, but I suspect it
is an assembler or linker bug.
--
--- Comment #7 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:54 ---
Created an attachment (id=20509)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20509action=view)
preprocessed test case, copied from comment #0
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39883
--- Comment #7 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:55 ---
As long as there are any Solaris 2/x86 versions supported with 32-bit kernels,
we'll need to keep the i386-pc-solaris2* configurations, which handles creating
64-bit binaries just fine. Adding an additional 64-bit
--- Comment #8 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:56 ---
As stated: closing as WONTFIX.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from dougmencken at gmail dot com 2010-04-28 19:57 ---
Created an attachment (id=20510)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20510action=view)
./powerpc-gnu-linux-uclibc/libstdc++-v3/config.log
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43911
--- Comment #7 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:00 ---
As I've said before: please file *clear individual bug reports* for each single
issue you find. Dealing with reports like this, with dozens of issues and non-
issues mixed, is close to impossible.
--
ro at gcc dot
--- Comment #3 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:04 ---
Mine.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc
--- Comment #4 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:06 ---
Fixed for 4.5.0.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|
--- Comment #14 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:08 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
$ g++ -v test.c\+\+
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/libexec/gcc/powerpc-gnu-linux-uclibc/4.5.0/lto-wrapper
Target: powerpc-gnu-linux-uclibc
Configured
--- Comment #2 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:10 ---
Confirmed. At least Solaris 2 target is affected.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:11 ---
Reopened ...
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|VERIFIED
--- Comment #10 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:12 ---
... to close as FIXED.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:12 ---
Reopened ...
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|VERIFIED
--- Comment #6 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:13 ---
... to close as FIXED.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #20 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:13 ---
Reopened ...
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|VERIFIED
--- Comment #21 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:14 ---
... to close as FIXED.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:15 ---
Reopened ...
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|VERIFIED
--- Comment #13 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:15 ---
... to close as FIXED.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:16 ---
Reopened ...
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|VERIFIED
--- Comment #4 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:16 ---
... to close as INVALID.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:27 ---
Dup of PR other/43445.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 43445 ***
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:27 ---
*** Bug 38685 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:32 ---
Mine.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc
--- Comment #6 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:34 ---
Fixed for 4.5.1, 4.6.0.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #5 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:40 ---
Unless there are very important reasons (and I don't see any since the
underlying
libthread and libpthread implementation on Solaris 2 is identical, just the
interfaces differ), please stick with the default, posix.
--- Comment #24 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:43 ---
Subject: Bug 18918
Author: burnus
Date: Wed Apr 28 20:43:18 2010
New Revision: 158843
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158843
Log:
2010-04-28 Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de
PR
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:43 ---
Subject: Bug 43919
Author: burnus
Date: Wed Apr 28 20:43:18 2010
New Revision: 158843
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158843
Log:
2010-04-28 Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de
PR
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:43 ---
FIXED on the trunk.
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from dougmencken at gmail dot com 2010-04-28 20:46 ---
(In reply to comment #14)
$ ../gcc-4.5.0.srcpkg/configure --prefix=/usr --sysconfdir=/etc
--mandir=/usr/share/man \
--with-system-zlib --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran \
--disable-nls --disable-werror
--- Comment #4 from pluto at agmk dot net 2010-04-28 20:51 ---
to mark 'as fixed'...
--
pluto at agmk dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED
--- Comment #5 from pluto at agmk dot net 2010-04-28 20:51 ---
fixed/dup.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 37454 ***
--
pluto at agmk dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from pluto at agmk dot net 2010-04-28 20:51 ---
*** Bug 28845 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pluto at agmk dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
gcc -g -fkeep-inline-functions -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual
-Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-format-attribute -pedantic
-Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros -Wno-overlength-strings
-Wold-style-definition -Wc++-compat -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DGENERATOR_FILE -o
--- Comment #5 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:54 ---
Mine.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc
--- Comment #9 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:54 ---
*** Bug 30726 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:54 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 39150 ***
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 21:02 ---
Mine.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc
--- Comment #11 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 21:03 ---
*** Bug 20730 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 21:03 ---
Dup of PR libffi/26048.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26048 ***
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
On Linux/x86, revision 158788 gave
FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_11.f90 -O3 -g (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_11.f90 -O3 -g (test for excess errors)
Revision 158783 is OK.
--
Summary: [4.6 Regression] FAIL:
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-04-28 21:18 ---
It may be caused by revision 158788:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-04/msg00895.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from darlingm at gmail dot com 2010-04-28 21:27 ---
Looks good, thanks!
No more internal compiler error, and now nicely says error: '' is not
captured, where is of course the name of the uncaptured variable.
--
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 21:35 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 43924 ***
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 21:35 ---
*** Bug 43928 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from justin dot lebar+bug at gmail dot com 2010-04-28 21:56
---
Is there a workaround for this, short of writing inline assembly?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43118
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-04-28 22:01 ---
It is caused by revision 158788:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-04/msg00895.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43924
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 22:09
---
Adding an additional 64-bit default configuration
(like amd64-pc-solaris2* or whatever) doubles the testing burden on me for no
real benefit. In fact, I believe that the sparcv9-sun-solaris2 configurations
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE 2010-04-28
22:17 ---
Subject: Re: Configure scripts have no 64-Bit Solaris defined (only
i386-solaris*).
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 22:09
---
While the advantages of
--- Comment #3 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2010-04-28 22:20 ---
Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] FAIL:
gfortran.dg/array_constructor_11.f90
Looks like latent problem that we fail when optimiznig for size.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43928
--- Comment #8 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 22:31
---
Thanks, Steven.
So, one year later, ...
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
On Linux/x86-64, revision 158830:
FAIL: 30_threads/condition_variable_any/members/2.cc execution test
Revision 158810 is OK.
--
Summary: [4.6 Regression] FAIL:
30_threads/condition_variable_any/members/2.cc execution
test
Product:
--- Comment #9 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 22:42
---
The never ending story of qsort on Solaris 8:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x000100bb7204 in allocno_priority_compare_func (v1p=0x102f3d268,
v2p=0x102f3d278) at
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-04-28 22:47
---
Then this is a miscompilation isn't it? I don't think we should categorize it
as libstdc++...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43929
--- Comment #14 from bergner at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 22:53
---
Subject: Bug 41081
Author: bergner
Date: Wed Apr 28 22:52:57 2010
New Revision: 158846
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158846
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2009-08-23 Alan
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 23:06 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] FAIL:
gfortran.dg/array_constructor_11.f90
Looks like latent problem that we fail when optimiznig for size.
It appears to be an in-lining
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 23:07 ---
Comment propagated from the duplicate PR.
It appears to be an in-lining issue. This reduced case
program main
implicit none
call build (77)
contains
subroutine build (order)
integer :: order, i, j
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #3 from davek at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 23:49 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Quoting RG from the gcc list:
[ ... ] Or you fix collect2 to do processing of archives and hand
lto1 the required information (it expects archive components
with LTO bytecode like
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-04-29 00:23
---
And in any case I can't reproduce it. I also tried running the testcase (both
-m32/-m64) outside the testsuite tens of times.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43929
--- Comment #15 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-04-29 01:20
---
Revision 139756:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2008-08/msg01321.html
also contributed to this regression.
[...@gnu-26 rrs]$ ./131573/usr/bin/gcc -O3 pr43884.c
[...@gnu-26 rrs]$ time ./a.out 45
#include string.h
#include stdio.h
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
short i = 1;
int n = (int)(i 16);
fprintf(stderr, %d\n, n);
return 0;
}
always 65536
it must to 0
--
Summary: gcc handle short overflow failed
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
--- Comment #69 from t dot artem at mailcity dot com 2010-04-29 02:12
---
(In reply to comment #64)
Subject: Bug 40838
This patch is not sufficient, some applications still crash after I've applied
it to GCC 4.4 branch (to be more precise gcc-4.4-20100427.tar.bz2).
I still wonder
--- Comment #16 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-04-29 02:20
---
This patch:
diff --git a/gcc/predict.c b/gcc/predict.c
index eb5ddef..a05e796 100644
--- a/gcc/predict.c
+++ b/gcc/predict.c
@@ -120,7 +120,8 @@ maybe_hot_frequency_p (int freq)
if (cfun-function_frequency
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 28, 2010, at 6:58 PM, cnstar9988 at gmail dot com gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org
wrote:
#include string.h
#include stdio.h
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
short i = 1;
int n = (int)(i 16);
fprintf(stderr, %d\n, n);
return 0;
}
always 65536
it must to 0
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2010-04-29 02:23 ---
Subject: Re: New: gcc handle short overflow failed
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 28, 2010, at 6:58 PM, cnstar9988 at gmail dot com
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org
wrote:
#include string.h
#include stdio.h
int main(int
--- Comment #4 from carrot at google dot com 2010-04-29 02:23 ---
It is not only good to code size, but also benefit performance. For any path to
any successor block, the same number of taken branch executed, but less alu
instructions executed.
It may be difficult to calculate the
--- Comment #2 from justin at mattair dot net 2010-04-29 02:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=20511)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20511action=view)
patch for patch-xmega
It looks like possibly a copy-paste error was made in the patch-xmega file. The
following
--- Comment #4 from davek at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-29 05:28 ---
Created an attachment (id=20512)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20512action=view)
Extends GNU LD to parse archives for LTO.
(In reply to comment #3)
Ow. I think we need to get LD to help us
101 - 179 of 179 matches
Mail list logo
