http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #20 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 13:56:05
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
H.J., I agree with what you write in comment 16. But unless we are sure that
the problematic composition will never be generated
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49922
--- Comment #1 from PcX xunxun1982 at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 14:00:26 UTC
---
Change to lto component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49957
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #21 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 14:05:06
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #20)
and it still has massive failures:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-08/msg00264.html
You broke exceptions. Similar
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47744
--- Comment #40 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
14:07:36 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Aug 3 14:07:32 2011
New Revision: 177271
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=177271
Log:
Add testcases for PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 14:10:25
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Created attachment 24899 [details]
Proposed patch that exploits addr32.
H.J., can you please test this patch on mx32.
The patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49962
Summary: internal compiler error when using type-bounded
function returning vector
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49962
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2011-08-03
14:22:47 UTC ---
With gfortran 4.6.1 and trunk, the code compiles and gives at run time
1 2 3
but I get the ICE with 4.5.3. So the bug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49962
--- Comment #2 from wangmianzhi wangmianzhi1 at linuxmail dot org 2011-08-03
14:24:19 UTC ---
On 2011年08月03日 10:23, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49962
--- Comment #1 from Dominique
-shared
--enable-languages=c,c++ --with-dwarf2 --disable-lto
Thread model: single
gcc version 4.7.0 20110803 (experimental) (GCC)
GNU C (GCC) version 4.7.0 20110803 (experimental) (avr)
compiled by GNU C version 4.3.2 [gcc-4_3-branch revision 141291], GMP
version 5.0.1, MPFR version 3.0.0-p8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49964
Summary: Bootstrap failed with AVX turned on
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49964
--- Comment #1 from Yukhin Kirill kirill.yukhin at intel dot com 2011-08-03
14:28:55 UTC ---
Started from here
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/2011-08/msg00051.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49957
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
14:41:49 UTC ---
The patch now makes us vectorize
shell_lam.f:303: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
shell_lam.f:262: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
shell_lam.f:205: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47383
--- Comment #17 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
14:44:59 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Aug 3 14:44:54 2011
New Revision: 177277
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=177277
Log:
Add a testcase for PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #9 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 14:45:40
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
Created attachment 24899 [details]
Proposed patch that exploits addr32.
H.J., can you please test this patch on mx32.
The
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #22 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 14:48:09
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
H.J., I agree with what you write in comment 16. But unless we are sure that
the problematic composition will never be generated
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49900
Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49965
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49740
--- Comment #2 from Douglas Mencken dougmencken at gmail dot com 2011-08-03
14:56:23 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Did it recover?
What shall I try? gcc-4.7-20110730? svn checkout? Some patch? (Nothing has been
attached or reported.)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49965
Summary: libgomp.c++/reduction-4.C and libgomp.c++/task-8.C
FAIL on Solaris 11/SPARC
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #10 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 15:01:10
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
(In reply to comment #8)
Created attachment 24899 [details]
Proposed patch that exploits addr32.
H.J., can you please
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30282
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49965
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
15:10:13 UTC ---
for task-8.C, error is a function on linux, so please replace it by errval
or err_atomic or similar instead if err doesn't work on Solaris.
Fur reduction-4.C,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1773
--- Comment #102 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-08-03 15:12:29 UTC ---
--- Comment #101 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2011-08-03 10:02:44 UTC ---
Thanks Marc. Thus, it seems
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49955
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49957
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49961
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49962
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49946
--- Comment #1 from Igor Zamyatin izamyatin at gmail dot com 2011-08-03
15:26:57 UTC ---
Used compiler:
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.7.0 20110802 (experimental) (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49963
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49963
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
15:27:36 UTC ---
Probably fails on any 32bit HWI platform.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49966
Summary: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr45034.c execution timeouts
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #12 from Hin-Tak Leung htl10 at users dot sourceforge.net
2011-08-03 15:29:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
Did you use an absolute path for the source dir? There have been
problems with relative paths in the past.
Tried
-apple-darwin11
Generated with...
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/darwin_objdir/gcc/xgcc
-B/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/darwin_objdir/gcc/
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/gcc-4.7-20110803/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr45034.c
-w -O2 -lm -m32 -o
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
Hin-Tak Leung htl10 at users dot sourceforge.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.6.1
-darwin11 at
-O2
Created with...
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/darwin_objdir/gcc/xgcc
-B/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/darwin_objdir/gcc/
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/gcc-4.7-20110803/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr45034.c
-w -O2 -lm -m32 -o
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
Hin-Tak Leung htl10 at users dot sourceforge.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.6.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
--- Comment #17 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-08-03 15:42:46 UTC ---
Invalid flag usage: Wl,-rpath, -Wx,-option must appear after
-_SYSTYPE_SVR4
What I do see is that if you add some -W
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 15:44:59
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
This additional patch prevents zero_extend when we deal with
wider-than-word-size moves. These moves need offsetable_operand, which
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49963
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-08-03
15:45:06 UTC ---
Eh, my way of fixing it would be removing the assert ;) Seriously, too bad, I
can try to look a bit into it but help is welcome of course, I don't think
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1773
--- Comment #103 from Marc Glisse marc.glisse at normalesup dot org
2011-08-03 15:52:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #102)
What would help enormously for this would be a complete justification
for the individual fixes:
Of course. I tried to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #12 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 16:08:47
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
gcc.dg/torture/pr47744-2.c compiled with
-mx32 -O3 -std=gnu99 -ftree-vectorize -funroll-loops
generates codes like
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 16:18:45
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
This additional patch prevents zero_extend when we deal with
wider-than-word-size moves. These moves need offsetable_operand, which
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49949
--- Comment #2 from Ilker R Capoglu begovic79 at gmail dot com 2011-08-03
16:20:53 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
An attachment is missing. Please try to create a small self-contained
testcase using complex.
Sorry, I think it didn't get
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49965
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-08-03 16:26:45 UTC ---
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
15:10:13 UTC ---
for task-8.C, error is a function on
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49949
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
16:27:23 UTC ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/A_guide_to_testcase_reduction is useful
if you can't reduce it then using gzip or bzip2 might make it small enough to
attach
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49950
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49949
--- Comment #4 from Ilker R Capoglu begovic79 at gmail dot com 2011-08-03
16:32:47 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/A_guide_to_testcase_reduction is useful
if you can't reduce it then using gzip or bzip2 might make it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49949
--- Comment #5 from Ilker R Capoglu begovic79 at gmail dot com 2011-08-03
16:34:31 UTC ---
Created attachment 24906
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24906
The preprocessed file with the STL and blitz++ headers. (bzip2'd)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49965
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
16:37:36 UTC ---
So what values it printed? Did it print -2.0 and 9.0 in some iterations?
The final merging is done in a critical section between GOMP_atomic_start and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #14 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 16:47:09
UTC ---
Created attachment 24907
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24907
A testcase
[hjl@gnu-33 delta]$
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49967
Summary: The -static-libstdc++ does not work on HP-UX (IA64
B.11.23, probably others)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #15 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 16:49:12
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
(In reply to comment #10)
This additional patch prevents zero_extend when we deal with
wider-than-word-size moves. These moves
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49965
--- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-08-03 16:50:27 UTC ---
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
16:37:36 UTC ---
So what values it printed? Did it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49935
Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49968
Summary: ICE in calls.c:3141 / assert after emit_stack_restore
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49968
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49969
Summary: not vectorized: data ref analysis failed
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49964
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49923
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
17:39:05 UTC ---
Søren, can you please verify this patch fixes the problem for you?
It's based on trunk but should apply well to the 4.6 branch too.
Thanks.
Index:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49970
Summary: make prefix=... install doesn't work
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libfortran
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49968
--- Comment #2 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
18:00:21 UTC ---
Created attachment 24908
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24908
proposed patch
I believe this will solve the problem.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49968
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49964
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49638
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03 18:36:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
A check for different ranks can be added like this:
This will reject the following variant of the original test case, which is
accepted up to now:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49970
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49948
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
18:49:43 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Aug 3 18:49:40 2011
New Revision: 177291
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=177291
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47453
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49638
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03 18:53:17 UTC ---
I think in general we may also have to reject differing non-constant string
lengths (at least that's what ifort does), as in:
module world
implicit none
type :: world_1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49948
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
18:56:05 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Aug 3 18:56:02 2011
New Revision: 177292
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=177292
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49963
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com 2011-08-03 18:59:33 UTC ---
I think this is a case for a function absu_hwi or similar that returns an
unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT value.
(Actually it's a case for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49970
--- Comment #2 from jimis jimis at gmx dot net 2011-08-03 19:01:51 UTC ---
I use it casually for packages that use autotools to configure the build, it
always works fine. And for gcc it has worked for me plenty of times for i386
C-frontend only
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49970
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com 2011-08-03 19:03:24 UTC ---
This is a bug in libtool. See bug 46607. It will need to be fixed in
upstream libtool (see bug 46607 comment 10 for what might be the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49970
--- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
2011-08-03 19:09:22 UTC ---
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 07:01:55PM +, jimis at gmx dot net wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49970
--- Comment #2 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49964
--- Comment #4 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
19:11:48 UTC ---
It's a bug in the i386 backend:
(call_insn 28 27 136 2 (parallel [
(parallel [
(call (mem:QI (mem/f:SI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 73
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47453
--- Comment #7 from Johannes Schaub schaub.johannes at googlemail dot com
2011-08-03 19:17:04 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
You can define it as follows to make it work in both cases
#define PTHREAD_COND_INITIALIZER {}
I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49970
--- Comment #5 from jimis jimis at gmx dot net 2011-08-03 19:32:09 UTC ---
DESTDIR is supported just fine, but it is not prefix, it serves different
purposes. In particular it installs in /$DESTDIR/$prefix but installed package
would search
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43746
Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||schlie at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21018
Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49638
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03 19:41:17 UTC ---
The simple constant-length example in comment #0 can be rejected by extending
the resolve.c part of the patch in comment #3 into:
Index: gcc/fortran/resolve.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49772
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
19:57:06 UTC ---
Hmm, we should never make the cgrpah point to inline variant in this case, so
rest of compilation should go smoothly after the error is output. I don't think
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49735
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
20:00:22 UTC ---
Hmm, it looks like recursive_inlining_p predicate broke with presence of
aliases. I will take a look.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49735
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49500
--- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
20:11:16 UTC ---
It seems that I never submitted the patch. It is posted now.
Honza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1773
Andrew Paprocki andrew at ishiboo dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49638
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03 20:17:49 UTC ---
I wonder whether the right thing to do would be to add a general expression
comparison routine like the one below (just a rough sketch so far).
a) Do we have something like
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1773
--- Comment #105 from Andrew Paprocki andrew at ishiboo dot com 2011-08-03
20:26:17 UTC ---
$ uname -a
SunOS sun 5.10 Generic_137111-08 sun4v sparc SUNW,T5240 Solaris
$ CC -V
CC: Sun C++ 5.10 SunOS_sparc 128228-10 2010/08/18
$ g++ -dumpversion
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49963
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-08-03
20:29:51 UTC ---
Created attachment 24909
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24909
Draft patch
I'm attaching a patch which tries to implement what
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49964
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 20:51:22
UTC ---
Created attachment 24910
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24910
A patch
I am testing this.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49923
--- Comment #6 from Søren Holm sgh at sgh dot dk 2011-08-03 21:00:06 UTC ---
As far as my isolated test-case goes the patch works. :D
I will report back after a test on the target tomorrow.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49968
--- Comment #3 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
21:21:32 UTC ---
The patch did indeed fix the testcase, thanks!
Running a full regression now ...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49638
Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49964
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #24910|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49964
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-03 21:46:22
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Created attachment 24911 [details]
full patch
Your patch misses several patterns.
This bootstraps, but I don't have an avx cpu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1773
--- Comment #106 from Marc Glisse marc.glisse at normalesup dot org
2011-08-03 21:51:53 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #96)
I could trace this to g++ defining __STRICT_ANSI__ for
-std=c++98/c++0x. sys/feature_tests.h defines _STRICT_STDC in this
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48841
--- Comment #6 from Hin-Tak Leung htl10 at users dot sourceforge.net
2011-08-03 22:26:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Please follow the directions I gave in that PR. Start with a standard
configure; make setup, no bootstrap-lean4, no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34888
--- Comment #5 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-03
22:57:25 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Wed Aug 3 22:57:22 2011
New Revision: 177300
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=177300
Log:
PR target/34888
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34888
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48841
Hin-Tak Leung htl10 at users dot sourceforge.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.4.5,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49964
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-08-04 00:18:27
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Created attachment 24911 [details]
full patch
Your patch misses several patterns.
This bootstraps, but I don't have an avx cpu
1 - 100 of 156 matches
Mail list logo
