[Bug fortran/52347] New: -Wno-tabs -Wall -Wno-tabs still warns about tabs

2012-02-23 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52347 Bug #: 52347 Summary: -Wno-tabs -Wall -Wno-tabs still warns about tabs Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: diagnostic

[Bug fortran/52347] -Wno-tabs -Wall -Wno-tabs still warns about tabs

2012-02-23 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52347 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug rtl-optimization/37516] ~(-2 - a) is not being optimized into a + 1

2012-02-23 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37516 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/37516] ~(-2 - a) is not being optimized into a + 1

2012-02-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37516 --- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de 2012-02-23 08:47:55 UTC --- On Thu, 23 Feb 2012, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37516 > > Andrew Pinski changed: > >What|Removed

[Bug libgomp/52348] New: [4.5/4.6] OpenMP incorrectly parallelizes loops (wrong iteration count)

2012-02-23 Thread ua_gcc_bugzi...@binary-island.eu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52348 Bug #: 52348 Summary: [4.5/4.6] OpenMP incorrectly parallelizes loops (wrong iteration count) Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.5.3 Status: UNCONFI

[Bug libgomp/52348] [4.5/4.6/4.7] OpenMP incorrectly parallelizes loops (wrong iteration count)

2012-02-23 Thread ua_gcc_bugzi...@binary-island.eu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52348 --- Comment #1 from Matthias Dahl 2012-02-23 09:21:51 UTC --- Before this causes any confusion: The path64 compiler does currently only support OpenMP up to and including 2.5. That's why I stated only the OpenMP < 3.0 part works.

[Bug c++/52343] [C++11] alias-definition dont work in `template` params type

2012-02-23 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52343 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Status|UNCONF

[Bug go/52349] New: [4.7 Regression] go doesn't bootstrap

2012-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52349 Bug #: 52349 Summary: [4.7 Regression] go doesn't bootstrap Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code S

[Bug libgomp/52348] OpenMP incorrectly parallelizes loops (wrong iteration count)

2012-02-23 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52348 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug go/52349] [4.7 Regression] go doesn't bootstrap

2012-02-23 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52349 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/52350] New: Parse error calling a template method in a template class

2012-02-23 Thread joseph at mirriad dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52350 Bug #: 52350 Summary: Parse error calling a template method in a template class Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.5.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libgomp/52348] OpenMP incorrectly parallelizes loops (wrong iteration count)

2012-02-23 Thread ua_gcc_bugzi...@binary-island.eu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52348 --- Comment #3 from Matthias Dahl 2012-02-23 10:21:53 UTC --- The warning with gcc 4.3.x is correct because of the lack of support for OpenMP 3.0. Starting with 4.4, gcc supports OpenMP 3.0 which allows unsigned iteration variables.

[Bug c++/52350] Parse error calling a template method in a template class

2012-02-23 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52350 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug go/52349] [4.7 Regression] go doesn't bootstrap

2012-02-23 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52349 --- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2012-02-23 10:31:59 UTC --- Type built in // Create a placeholder for a pointer type. Btype* Gcc_backend::placeholder_pointer_type(const std::string& name, Location loca

[Bug libgomp/52348] [4.5/4.6/4.7] OpenMP incorrectly parallelizes loops (wrong iteration count)

2012-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52348 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Last reconfirmed|2012-02-23 00

[Bug libgomp/52348] [4.5/4.6/4.7] OpenMP incorrectly parallelizes loops (wrong iteration count)

2012-02-23 Thread ua_gcc_bugzi...@binary-island.eu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52348 --- Comment #5 from Matthias Dahl 2012-02-23 10:38:51 UTC --- I am a bit short on time, so I cannot check on the OpenMP 2.5 related matter but closing this bug is a bit premature imho. There is still the issue with the OpenMP 3.0 part which has b

[Bug fortran/52351] New: Wrong bounds when passing an array section to an intent-in pointer dummy

2012-02-23 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52351 Bug #: 52351 Summary: Wrong bounds when passing an array section to an intent-in pointer dummy Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONF

[Bug fortran/52351] Wrong bounds when passing an array section to an intent-in pointer dummy

2012-02-23 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52351 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug libstdc++/43813] [DR1234] vector(3, NULL) fails to compile

2012-02-23 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43813 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC|gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu.org | --- Comment #11 from Paolo Carlini 2012

[Bug target/52352] New: [x32] - Wrong code to access addresses 0x80000000 to 0xFFFFFFFF using registers

2012-02-23 Thread steffen-schmidt at siemens dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52352 Bug #: 52352 Summary: [x32] - Wrong code to access addresses 0x8000 to 0x using registers Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.3 Status:

[Bug tree-optimization/52019] [4.7 Regression] tree-ssa/ipa-split-5.c fails with -fno-tree-sra because of CLOBBERS

2012-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52019 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/52352] [x32] - Wrong code to access addresses 0x80000000 to 0xFFFFFFFF using registers

2012-02-23 Thread steffen-schmidt at siemens dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52352 --- Comment #1 from Steffen Schmidt 2012-02-23 11:38:50 UTC --- Created attachment 26728 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26728 Generated -mx32 -O3 assembler

[Bug target/52352] [x32] - Wrong code to access addresses 0x80000000 to 0xFFFFFFFF using registers

2012-02-23 Thread steffen-schmidt at siemens dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52352 --- Comment #2 from Steffen Schmidt 2012-02-23 11:39:26 UTC --- Created attachment 26729 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26729 Generated -mx32 -O1 assembler

[Bug target/52352] [x32] - Wrong code to access addresses 0x80000000 to 0xFFFFFFFF using registers

2012-02-23 Thread steffen-schmidt at siemens dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52352 --- Comment #3 from Steffen Schmidt 2012-02-23 11:40:01 UTC --- Created attachment 26730 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26730 Generated -m64 -O3 assembler

[Bug target/52352] [x32] - Wrong code to access addresses 0x80000000 to 0xFFFFFFFF using registers

2012-02-23 Thread steffen-schmidt at siemens dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52352 --- Comment #4 from Steffen Schmidt 2012-02-23 11:40:41 UTC --- Created attachment 26731 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26731 Generated -m64 -O1 assembler

[Bug libstdc++/43813] [DR1234] vector(3, NULL) fails to compile

2012-02-23 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43813 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|unassigned at

[Bug libffi/52223] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] libffi's man page install breaks with multilibs and overridden mandir

2012-02-23 Thread mikpe at it dot uu.se
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52223 --- Comment #7 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-02-23 12:47:33 UTC --- Patch has been posted: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-02/msg01173.html

[Bug middle-end/52353] New: -ftrapv -fnon-call-exceptions does not work

2012-02-23 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52353 Bug #: 52353 Summary: -ftrapv -fnon-call-exceptions does not work Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-code Se

[Bug middle-end/52353] -ftrapv -fnon-call-exceptions does not work

2012-02-23 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52353 --- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2012-02-23 13:05:30 UTC --- Created attachment 26732 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26732 patch Patch that fixes my issue and works until rtl_dce, which still removes the call, even thoug

[Bug middle-end/52354] New: [4.7 regression] libgo fails to build (error: non-function in gimple call)

2012-02-23 Thread doko at gcc dot gnu.org
: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org ReportedBy: d...@gcc.gnu.org seen with r184500 from the trunk, building libgo: libtool: compile: /home/packages/gcc/4.7/gcc-4.7-4.7-20120223/build/./gcc

[Bug tree-optimization/23286] missed fully redundant expression

2012-02-23 Thread aldot at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286 --- Comment #40 from Bernhard Reutner-Fischer 2012-02-23 13:34:37 UTC --- The ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED of do_hoist_insertion can be removed. diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-pre.c b/gcc/tree-ssa-pre.c index 0f777b4..bfc7a92 100644 --- a/gcc/tree-ssa-pre.c +++

[Bug c/52355] New: [4.7 regression] address difference between array elements is not considered to be a compile time constant anymore

2012-02-23 Thread siarhei.siamashka at gmail dot com
lla/attachment.cgi?id=26733 test.c gcc version 4.7.0 20120223 (experimental) (GCC) $ cat test.c void f(char a[16][16][16]) { asm volatile ("" : : "i" (&a[1][0][0] - &a[0][0][0])); } int main(void) { char a[16][16][16]; f(a); return 0; } $ gcc -O2 test.c test

[Bug middle-end/52354] [4.7 regression] libgo fails to build (error: non-function in gimple call)

2012-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52354 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c/52355] [4.7 regression] address difference between array elements is not considered to be a compile time constant anymore

2012-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52355 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/49748] char * const * cannot be assigned to char const * const *

2012-02-23 Thread tim.ruehsen at gmx dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49748 Tim Ruehsen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tim.ruehsen at gmx dot de --- Comment #3 fr

[Bug middle-end/52354] [4.7 regression] libgo fails to build (error: non-function in gimple call)

2012-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52354 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelin

[Bug go/52349] [4.7 Regression] go doesn't bootstrap

2012-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52349 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||doko at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 fr

[Bug go/52349] [4.7 Regression] go doesn't bootstrap

2012-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52349 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-23 14:13:40 UTC --- The #c2 patch bootstrapped/regtested just fine on both x86_64-linux and i686-linux.

[Bug go/52349] [4.7 Regression] go doesn't bootstrap

2012-02-23 Thread ian at airs dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52349 --- Comment #5 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-02-23 14:16:41 UTC --- Richi's patch is approved (I'm testing it myself, but go ahead and commit if it looks fine to you). Thanks.

[Bug bootstrap/52287] [4.7 regression] ICE in ready_remove_first, at haifa-sched.c:1927

2012-02-23 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52287 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #26684|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug tree-optimization/52019] [4.7 Regression] tree-ssa/ipa-split-5.c fails with -fno-tree-sra because of CLOBBERS

2012-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52019 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-23 14:43:48 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Thu Feb 23 14:43:43 2012 New Revision: 184508 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184508 Log: PR tree-optimization/52019 * ipa-split.c (f

[Bug go/52349] [4.7 Regression] go doesn't bootstrap

2012-02-23 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52349 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c/52283] "error: case label does not reduce to an integer constant" for constant folded cast expr

2012-02-23 Thread chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52283 --- Comment #22 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-23 15:06:12 UTC --- thanks, no regression with your patch on the 4.6 and trunk branches. OK to commit on both ?

[Bug middle-end/52355] [4.7 regression] address difference between array elements is not considered to be a compile time constant anymore

2012-02-23 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52355 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Component|c

[Bug boehm-gc/52179] boehm-gc incompatible with aslr on darwin11

2012-02-23 Thread howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52179 --- Comment #12 from Jack Howarth 2012-02-23 15:07:17 UTC --- (In reply to comment #11) > Ah, the better way to do that would be to have: > > AC_CHECK_FUNCS([pthread_get_stackaddr_np]) > > in configure.ac, and then just have > > #ifdef HAVE_PT

[Bug boehm-gc/52179] boehm-gc incompatible with aslr on darwin11

2012-02-23 Thread iains at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52179 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/52355] [4.7 regression] address difference between array elements is not considered to be a compile time constant anymore

2012-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52355 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-23 15:18:07 UTC --- I think PR51730 is similar, but there it wasn't about inline asm. Perhaps we want to fold harder for "i" or something.

[Bug tree-optimization/52019] [4.7 Regression] tree-ssa/ipa-split-5.c fails with -fno-tree-sra because of CLOBBERS

2012-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52019 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug bootstrap/52287] [4.7 regression] ICE in ready_remove_first, at haifa-sched.c:1927

2012-02-23 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52287 --- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou 2012-02-23 15:23:44 UTC --- This reproduces only on Solaris 8 because the sort of the ready list isn't stable in the presence of debug insns, given that rank_for_schedule isn't anti-symmetrical: if (MAY_HAVE_D

[Bug boehm-gc/52179] boehm-gc incompatible with aslr on darwin11

2012-02-23 Thread patrick.marlier at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52179 --- Comment #14 from Patrick Marlier 2012-02-23 15:32:31 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #8) > > This change bootstraps fine with current gcc trunk on x86_64-apple-darwin11. > It > almost fixes the failures in the boehm-

[Bug bootstrap/52287] [4.7 regression] ICE in ready_remove_first, at haifa-sched.c:1927

2012-02-23 Thread bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52287 --- Comment #9 from Bernd Schmidt 2012-02-23 15:41:49 UTC --- (In reply to comment #8) > This reproduces only on Solaris 8 because the sort of the ready list isn't > stable in the presence of debug insns, given that rank_for_schedule isn't > anti

[Bug boehm-gc/52179] boehm-gc incompatible with aslr on darwin11

2012-02-23 Thread patrick.marlier at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52179 --- Comment #16 from Patrick Marlier 2012-02-23 15:49:26 UTC --- Created attachment 26735 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26735 proposal fix I have also started a patch (not tested at all) but I am more extreme in the approac

[Bug boehm-gc/52179] boehm-gc incompatible with aslr on darwin11

2012-02-23 Thread howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52179 --- Comment #15 from Jack Howarth 2012-02-23 15:49:06 UTC --- I notice in boehm-gc/include/private/gcconfig.h we are already setting... # ifdef DARWIN # define OS_TYPE "DARWIN" # define DYNAMIC_LOADING # if defined(__ppc64__) #

[Bug bootstrap/52287] [4.7 regression] ICE in ready_remove_first, at haifa-sched.c:1927

2012-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52287 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-23 15:52:23 UTC --- I don't think INSN_UID is right for that, I think you want to preserve the original order of debug insns in that case, and INSN_UID can jump up and down. So what about if (MAY_HAVE_

[Bug middle-end/52355] [4.7 regression] address difference between array elements is not considered to be a compile time constant anymore

2012-02-23 Thread siarhei.siamashka at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52355 --- Comment #4 from Siarhei Siamashka 2012-02-23 15:56:24 UTC --- Now I wonder if multidimensional array is still treated as the same array in "When two pointers are subtracted, both shall point to elements of the same array object, or one past t

[Bug bootstrap/52287] [4.7 regression] ICE in ready_remove_first, at haifa-sched.c:1927

2012-02-23 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52287 --- Comment #11 from Eric Botcazou 2012-02-23 16:00:58 UTC --- Created attachment 26736 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26736 Tentative fix

[Bug c/52290] [4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] internal compiler error: tree check: expected function_decl, have var_decl in start_function, at c-decl.c:7712

2012-02-23 Thread uros at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52290 --- Comment #3 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-23 16:34:15 UTC --- Author: uros Date: Thu Feb 23 16:34:02 2012 New Revision: 184511 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184511 Log: PR c/52290 * c-decl.c (start_functio

[Bug rtl-optimization/52356] New: expr.c:emit_move_multi_word() can overwrite address register

2012-02-23 Thread jon at beniston dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52356 Bug #: 52356 Summary: expr.c:emit_move_multi_word() can overwrite address register Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/52352] [x32] - Wrong code to access addresses 0x80000000 to 0xFFFFFFFF using registers

2012-02-23 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52352 Uros Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com --- Comment #5 f

[Bug target/52352] [x32] - Wrong code to access addresses 0x80000000 to 0xFFFFFFFF using registers

2012-02-23 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52352 --- Comment #6 from Uros Bizjak 2012-02-23 16:47:00 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > H.J. probably needs to backport a patch or two from mainline. BTW: Please report problems with non-FSF branches directly to their respective authors. There i

[Bug c/51905] ICE at sysklogd compilation for powerpc-linux-gnuspe with -O3

2012-02-23 Thread mranostay at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51905 Matt Ranostay changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mranostay at gmail dot com --- Comment #1

[Bug go/52357] New: 64bit-out.go and go.test/test/cmplxdivide.go time out on Solaris/SPARC

2012-02-23 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52357 Bug #: 52357 Summary: 64bit-out.go and go.test/test/cmplxdivide.go time out on Solaris/SPARC Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIR

[Bug go/52358] New: math FAILs on Solaris 8 and 9

2012-02-23 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52358 Bug #: 52358 Summary: math FAILs on Solaris 8 and 9 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug target/52146] [x32] - Wrong code to access addresses 0x80000000 to 0xFFFFFFFF

2012-02-23 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52146 --- Comment #18 from Andrew Pinski 2012-02-23 17:27:29 UTC --- *** Bug 52352 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug target/52352] [x32] - Wrong code to access addresses 0x80000000 to 0xFFFFFFFF using registers

2012-02-23 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52352 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug go/52359] New: time test is too load-sensitive

2012-02-23 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52359 Bug #: 52359 Summary: time test is too load-sensitive Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c/52290] [4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] internal compiler error: tree check: expected function_decl, have var_decl in start_function, at c-decl.c:7712

2012-02-23 Thread uros at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52290 --- Comment #4 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-23 17:38:20 UTC --- Author: uros Date: Thu Feb 23 17:38:13 2012 New Revision: 184514 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184514 Log: PR c/52290 * c-decl.c (start_functio

[Bug go/52360] New: time and net/http FAIL on Solaris 8 and 9

2012-02-23 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52360 Bug #: 52360 Summary: time and net/http FAIL on Solaris 8 and 9 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority

[Bug testsuite/52297] [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/trans-mem-1 c_lto_trans-mem-1_0.o-c_lto_trans-mem-1_1.o link, -flto -fgnu-tm

2012-02-23 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52297 --- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou 2012-02-23 17:54:26 UTC --- > This looks like a regression brought about by: > > +2012-02-13 Eric Botcazou > + > + * gcc.c (LINK_COMMAND_SPEC): Deal with -fgnu-tm. > + (GTM_SELF_SPECS): Define if

[Bug c/52361] New: gcc.dg/pr48141.c times out

2012-02-23 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52361 Bug #: 52361 Summary: gcc.dg/pr48141.c times out Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 C

[Bug c/52290] [4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] internal compiler error: tree check: expected function_decl, have var_decl in start_function, at c-decl.c:7712

2012-02-23 Thread uros at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52290 --- Comment #5 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-23 18:01:54 UTC --- Author: uros Date: Thu Feb 23 18:01:45 2012 New Revision: 184517 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184517 Log: PR c/52290 * c-decl.c (start_functio

[Bug tree-optimization/52361] gcc.dg/pr48141.c times out with checking enabled

2012-02-23 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52361 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||compile-time-hog Component|c

[Bug c/52290] [4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] internal compiler error: tree check: expected function_decl, have var_decl in start_function, at c-decl.c:7712

2012-02-23 Thread uros at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52290 --- Comment #6 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-23 18:03:47 UTC --- Author: uros Date: Thu Feb 23 18:03:33 2012 New Revision: 184518 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184518 Log: PR c/52290 * c-decl.c (start_functio

[Bug c/52290] [4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] internal compiler error: tree check: expected function_decl, have var_decl in start_function, at c-decl.c:7712

2012-02-23 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52290 Uros Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED URL|

[Bug ada/52362] New: gnat.dg/lto8.adb FAILs with gas/gld

2012-02-23 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52362 Bug #: 52362 Summary: gnat.dg/lto8.adb FAILs with gas/gld Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug tree-optimization/52286] [4.6 Regression] wrong code bug

2012-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52286 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-23 18:20:26 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Thu Feb 23 18:20:19 2012 New Revision: 184520 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184520 Log: Backported from trunk 2012-02-20 Georg-Jo

[Bug boehm-gc/52179] boehm-gc incompatible with aslr on darwin11

2012-02-23 Thread howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52179 --- Comment #17 from Jack Howarth 2012-02-23 18:24:16 UTC --- Created attachment 26737 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26737 reduced patch

[Bug boehm-gc/52179] boehm-gc incompatible with aslr on darwin11

2012-02-23 Thread howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu
but boehm-gc.c/thread_leak_test.c execution test still hangs on occasion at -m64. This appears as... Leaked composite object at 0x10a908fe0 (/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1/gcc-4.7-20120223/boehm-gc/testsuite/boehm-gc.c/thread_leak_test.c:12, sz=4, NORMAL) Leaked composite object at 0x10a908ec0 (/sw

[Bug boehm-gc/52179] boehm-gc incompatible with aslr on darwin11

2012-02-23 Thread howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52179 --- Comment #19 from Jack Howarth 2012-02-23 18:37:40 UTC --- (In reply to comment #13) > I've not had time to investigate - but suspect it is related to operating > close to stack limits -- if you try reducing the number of recursions (like >

[Bug c++/52363] New: Presence/absence of -pedantic compilation affects run-time behavior

2012-02-23 Thread wb at fnal dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52363 Bug #: 52363 Summary: Presence/absence of -pedantic compilation affects run-time behavior Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug boehm-gc/52179] boehm-gc incompatible with aslr on darwin11

2012-02-23 Thread mikestump at comcast dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52179 --- Comment #20 from Mike Stump 2012-02-23 18:45:28 UTC --- > Where do you want the second change made? Let me repeat myself: the code is in boehm-gc/include/private/gcconfig.h, so the patch should change the ifdef DARWIN block there. In the

[Bug boehm-gc/52179] boehm-gc incompatible with aslr on darwin11

2012-02-23 Thread howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52179 --- Comment #21 from Jack Howarth 2012-02-23 18:50:21 UTC --- (In reply to comment #20) > > Where do you want the second change made? > > Let me repeat myself: > > the code is in boehm-gc/include/private/gcconfig.h, so the patch should change >

[Bug boehm-gc/52179] boehm-gc incompatible with aslr on darwin11

2012-02-23 Thread patrick.marlier at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52179 --- Comment #22 from Patrick Marlier 2012-02-23 18:52:56 UTC --- (In reply to comment #21) > (In reply to comment #20) > > > Where do you want the second change made? > > > > Let me repeat myself: > > > > the code is in boehm-gc/include/private

[Bug boehm-gc/52179] boehm-gc incompatible with aslr on darwin11

2012-02-23 Thread mikestump at comcast dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52179 --- Comment #23 from Mike Stump 2012-02-23 18:56:31 UTC --- I think the patch in 17 is Ok.

[Bug target/52364] New: The unnecessary second form in *movabs_[12]

2012-02-23 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52364 Bug #: 52364 Summary: The unnecessary second form in *movabs_[12] Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priori

[Bug c++/52363] Presence/absence of -pedantic compilation affects run-time behavior

2012-02-23 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52363 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/52261] [avr] Add support for AVR Xmega cores

2012-02-23 Thread gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52261 --- Comment #6 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-02-23 19:26:06 UTC --- Author: gjl Date: Thu Feb 23 19:26:00 2012 New Revision: 184522 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184522 Log: PR target/52261 * config/avr/lib1funcs.S (

[Bug boehm-gc/52179] boehm-gc incompatible with aslr on darwin11

2012-02-23 Thread howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52179 --- Comment #24 from Jack Howarth 2012-02-23 20:13:06 UTC --- Created attachment 26739 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26739 fix both PR52179 and revert hack from PR49461 I propose the following patch which both fixes PR52179

[Bug libffi/52221] [libffi] r183675,r184021 needs to be fixed.

2012-02-23 Thread ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52221 --- Comment #15 from Kai Tietz 2012-02-23 21:02:32 UTC --- Author: ktietz Date: Thu Feb 23 21:02:27 2012 New Revision: 184526 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184526 Log: PR libffi/52221 * src/x86/ffi.c (ffi_

[Bug libffi/52221] [libffi] r183675,r184021 needs to be fixed.

2012-02-23 Thread ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52221 Kai Tietz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/52365] New: Procedure interface wrongly imported into interface without IMPORT

2012-02-23 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52365 Bug #: 52365 Summary: Procedure interface wrongly imported into interface without IMPORT Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/52286] [4.6 Regression] wrong code bug

2012-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52286 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug boehm-gc/52179] boehm-gc incompatible with aslr on darwin11

2012-02-23 Thread mikestump at comcast dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52179 --- Comment #25 from Mike Stump 2012-02-23 21:53:04 UTC --- Ok.

[Bug boehm-gc/52179] boehm-gc incompatible with aslr on darwin11

2012-02-23 Thread howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52179 --- Comment #26 from Jack Howarth 2012-02-23 21:55:57 UTC --- Posted to gcc-patches as http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-02/msg01209.html.

[Bug c++/52366] New: [c++11] static constexpr function cant initialize static constexpr

2012-02-23 Thread trashyankes at wp dot pl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52366 Bug #: 52366 Summary: [c++11] static constexpr function cant initialize static constexpr Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug rtl-optimization/37516] ~(-2 - a) is not being optimized into a + 1

2012-02-23 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37516 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski 2012-02-23 22:15:05 UTC --- > Maybe get away with these old-stylish names ('tree' and 'fold') and > make it match reality, gimple-ssa-combine.c ;) That sounds like a good idea. I have done that. > > Still ha

[Bug bootstrap/52287] [4.7 regression] ICE in ready_remove_first, at haifa-sched.c:1927

2012-02-23 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52287 --- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou 2012-02-23 22:15:53 UTC --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Thu Feb 23 22:15:44 2012 New Revision: 184531 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184531 Log: PR bootstrap/52287 * haifa-sched.c (ra

[Bug bootstrap/52287] [4.7 regression] ICE in ready_remove_first, at haifa-sched.c:1927

2012-02-23 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52287 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/52351] Wrong bounds when passing an array section to an intent-in pointer dummy

2012-02-23 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52351 --- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-23 22:34:31 UTC --- The issue seems to be in gfc_conv_array_parameter - or rather in the called gfc_conv_expr_descriptor. There, one has: full = gfc_full_array_ref_p (info->ref, NULL); if (

[Bug fortran/52335] [4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] I/O: -std=f95 rejects valid DELIM= in OPEN

2012-02-23 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52335 --- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-23 22:53:58 UTC --- Author: burnus Date: Thu Feb 23 22:53:54 2012 New Revision: 184534 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=184534 Log: 2012-02-23 Tobias Burnus PR fortran/52

  1   2   >