--- Comment #8 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-02 23:00
---
The root of the problem is plus_constant wrapping up a TLS symbol in a CONST:
(const:DI (plus:DI (symbol_ref:DI (m) [flags 0x1a] var_decl m)
(const_int 4 [0x4])))
what the SPARC back-end doesn't like
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-31 17:36
---
I cannot reproduce with a cross, neither on mainline nor 4.4 branch. Could you
post the command line passed to cc1? Do you have relevant local patches?
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-29 15:24
---
There is something strange: the report is about a native i386 compiler built on
x86-64 but the configure line is for a native x86-64 compiler. Which one is
correct? Does the base compiler target i386 or x86-64
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-29 15:56
---
So given the above, I still think the patch from comment 7 will help.
Because I don't have any access to a non-Linux platform I cannot try
it myself and thus can only rely on others to test it for me. I'll
--- Comment #8 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-29 19:29
---
I then try to build GCC4.4.2[x86_64-apple-darwin10.2.0] using
GCC4.4.2[i386-apple-darwin10.2.0], with the reported results.
[...]
I've been using --build=x86_64-apple-darwin10.2.0 to indicate that I want
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-27 14:43
---
It may be caused by revision 147716:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-05/msg00693.html
Same trigger as the other so the same partial reversion works:
Index: tree-scalar-evolution.c
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-26 19:44
---
Jan, you're responsible for fixing things you broke. There is a reduced
testcase and the ICE can be reproduced with a cross on x86_64-linux.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |major
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42068
--- Comment #15 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-05 11:34
---
The attached change seems to fix the Array_3 linux fail. Testing a
similar change for hpux. However, need to fix the following warnings:
../../../gcc/libjava/prims.cc:178:1: warning: unused parameter
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-05 12:11
---
Reopening, this happens on Solaris 8 as well:
This GDB was configured as sparc-sun-solaris2.8...
(gdb) set args libgcc2.i -O
(gdb) run
Starting program: /nile.build/botcazou/gcc-head/sparc-sun-solaris2.8/gcc/cc1
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-05 12:12
---
Reopened.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-05 12:39
---
The problem is that the comparison of types is not anti-symmetrical:
(gdb) call compare_access_positions(access_vec-base.vec[2],
access_vec-base.vec[3])
$37 = 1
(gdb) call compare_access_positions(access_vec
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |major
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42157
--- Comment #17 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-05 18:32
---
Patch installed.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-04 09:52
---
The catch for the first null pointer exception in libjava.lang/Array_3
is not caught but I don't know why.
Very likely because of the adjustment made in libjava/pa-signal.h:
#define MAKE_THROW_FRAME
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-04 09:58
---
Very likely because of the adjustment made in libjava/pa-signal.h:
libjava/hppa-signal contains a slight variant:
#define MAKE_THROW_FRAME(_exception)\
do
--- Comment #12 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-04 10:18
---
That's not true if you set fs-signal_frame to 1 in the fallback routine.
And I need to do the same clean-up in include/dwarf2-signal.h and
include/sparc-signal.h for SPARC...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 18:53
---
Dave, do you happen to have a java-enabled build around? If so, could you
attach the assembly generated for libjava.lang/Array_3 since it's very likely
the problematic test?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #16 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 22:08
---
The issue with the boolean_type_node is that the middle-end does not have
a type for a comparison result but implicitly assumes boolean_type_node.
So for
D._16 = (boolean) D._6
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-29 17:15
---
I have forgotten to say that the failure occurs only with -funroll*-loops,
-O[1-3], and -m64 options.
Without -funroll*-loops the test pass. BTW I do not see any loop in the code.
Very likely revision 154688
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-25 11:01
---
Subject: Bug 42170
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Nov 25 11:01:26 2009
New Revision: 154646
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=154646
Log:
PR ada/42170
* ada/acats/run_acats: Bump
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-25 11:03
---
Thanks for reporting this.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-25 19:55
---
Subject: Bug 10127
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Nov 25 19:55:11 2009
New Revision: 154650
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=154650
Log:
PR target/10127
PR ada/20548
PR
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-25 19:55
---
Subject: Bug 42004
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Nov 25 19:55:11 2009
New Revision: 154650
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=154650
Log:
PR target/10127
PR ada/20548
PR
--- Comment #46 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-25 19:55
---
Subject: Bug 20548
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Nov 25 19:55:11 2009
New Revision: 154650
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=154650
Log:
PR target/10127
PR ada/20548
PR
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-25 19:58
---
At last.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-24 22:51
---
All but six of the fails go away if I increase the stack limit in
run_acats to 16384
OK, thanks, I'll try and increase it.
The remaining six are:
FAIL: c52103x
FAIL: c52104x
FAIL: c52104y
FAIL
--- Comment #20 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 11:02
---
Really fail to see how this is more convenient or useful for anyone involved
but oh well, what do I know?
Attaching a lot of files is indeed inconvenient, that's why
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs
section Detailed
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 17:09
---
Presumably, thanks Laurent.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-19 12:26
---
Created an attachment (id=19048)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19048action=view)
Reduced testcase
To be gnatchop-ed and cross-compiled.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-19 12:31
---
This is most likely due to one of Jan's recent commits.
Right, r154121 changed
gcc_assert ((!DECL_WEAK (vnode-decl) || DECL_COMMON (vnode-decl))
|| TREE_PUBLIC (vnode-decl
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-19 15:11
---
For not doing the boolean_type_node fixing we'd need to not pre-load the
streamer chache with (selected) builtin type nodes but instead stream them
with every unit and function and pass them through
--- Comment #70 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-17 11:19
---
It seems that variables produced by the Ada front-end no longer have any
non-trivial range information associated with them. Without knowing the
range information
type S is range 0 .. 100;
type T
--- Comment #13 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-16 17:23
---
CCing one the of ARM maintainers.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-16 17:51
---
I can reproduce with mainline on a bi-processor machine (Sun-Fire-V240) running
Solaris 10 but neither on a bi-processor machine (Sun-Fire-V240) runnning
Solaris 9 nor on a quadri-processor machine (Sun-Fire-V440
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-13 17:37
---
This is an interesting suggestion. However, the results in doing
this are mixed. It fixes the current testcase on hpux but not linux.
Yes, you additionally need this for Linux:
2009-11-12 Eric Botcazou
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-13 17:55
---
Investigating.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-11 08:25
---
On Linux/ia32, revision 154079:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-11/msg00300.html
caused:
FAIL: g++.dg/torture/stackalign/unwind-2.C -O1 execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/torture/stackalign/unwind-2.C
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-10 08:24
---
Was the patch posted on gcc-patches@ at some point?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37945
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-10 08:26
---
What happened to this patch?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37309
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-10 08:29
---
No feedback.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-10 08:32
---
Fixed in 4.4
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-10 08:34
---
These sub-types are gone in 4.5.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-10 08:41
---
We regularly have Ada results for SPARC64/Linux.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-10 08:43
---
No feedback.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-10 09:00
---
Not realistically fixable.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-10 09:07
---
Not a bug.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #43 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-10 11:24
---
Subject: Bug 20548
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Nov 10 11:23:54 2009
New Revision: 154061
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=154061
Log:
PR ada/20548
* explow.c
--- Comment #44 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-10 12:38
---
Subject: Bug 20548
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Nov 10 12:37:56 2009
New Revision: 154063
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=154063
Log:
PR ada/20548
* system-linux-alpha.ads
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-10 20:45
---
Subject: Bug 10127
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Nov 10 20:45:25 2009
New Revision: 154079
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=154079
Log:
PR target/10127
PR ada/20548
--- Comment #45 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-10 20:45
---
Subject: Bug 20548
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Nov 10 20:45:25 2009
New Revision: 154079
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=154079
Log:
PR target/10127
PR ada/20548
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-09 17:11
---
I see that it fails on HP-UX as well. That's probably because there is
something missing in the fallback routines in config/pa, namely:
fs-signal_frame = 1;
just before
return _URC_NO_REASON;
--
http
--- Comment #42 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-07 10:05
---
As I understand it, there is still a patch pending for i386?
Yes, the current stack checking method is not bullet-proof and can fail to
detect stack overflows; a warning should be issued in that case though
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-04 11:19
---
I see the same on x86_64-linux
That would be surprising, nothing has changed since they were installed. Are
you sure it's not gnat.dg/stack_check1.adb instead? It passes on my machine,
both 32-bit and 64-bit
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-04 11:57
---
Running target unix//-m32
FAIL: gnat.dg/null_pointer_deref1.adb execution test
the 64bit variant passes.
the log just states
raised STORAGE_ERROR : stack overflow (or erroneous memory access)
OK
--- Comment #39 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-04 21:46
---
Subject: Bug 20548
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Nov 4 21:45:54 2009
New Revision: 153918
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=153918
Log:
PR target/10127
PR ada/20548
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-04 21:46
---
Subject: Bug 10127
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Nov 4 21:45:54 2009
New Revision: 153918
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=153918
Log:
PR target/10127
PR ada/20548
--- Comment #40 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-04 21:49
---
Tentatively on mainline.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-03 18:49
---
Somewhat expected, see the comment in the test. A patch to disable it on this
platform (sparc*-*-solaris2.11) is pre-approved.
The failure very likely means that the 64-bit pattern matching code of the
fallback
--- Comment #38 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-03 22:49
---
Subject: Bug 20548
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Nov 3 22:49:37 2009
New Revision: 153877
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=153877
Log:
PR target/10127
PR ada/20548
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|2006-03-19 09:00:55 |2009-11
--- Comment #9 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-03 22:52
---
At long last.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-03 22:49
---
Subject: Bug 10127
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Nov 3 22:49:37 2009
New Revision: 153877
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=153877
Log:
PR target/10127
PR ada/20548
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-02 19:34
---
Laurent is working on it.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-31 09:38
---
Thanks for your quick response. I would like to point out that on every
compiler and machine I've used, the behavior of signed overflow may not be
defined -- but it's always been consistent.
Consistency
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-29 19:10
---
Investigating.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-30 00:23
---
Fixed by http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-10/msg01756.html :-)
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #18 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-26 20:41
---
Fixed on Solaris 10 by http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-10/msg00629.html
There is still a problem in the testsuite though:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-10/msg02530.html
Executing on build
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |major
Last reconfirmed|2009-07-22 00:02:48 |2009-10-19
--- Comment #19 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-16 17:35
---
When testing this, I've noticed a major problem with Ada, supposedly on the
trunk as well when using latest binutils.
Thanks for the heads up.
The problem is that gnat_init_gcc_eh which can change
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-15 10:20
---
The problem comes from cp/layout_class_type: it creates the version of the
class to be used for virtual bases before laying out the virtual base classes
of the class itself, in particular its alignment is set
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-13 17:47
---
Reclassifying. You need an ARM maintainer to debug this.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #17 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-12 06:10
---
Present on Solaris versions 10.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-12 17:59
---
It is caused by revision 147716:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-05/msg00693.html
Yep, but it's Richard's fault. ;-) The bug is exposed by the change requested
in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-11 20:06
---
Subject: Bug 33743
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Sun Oct 11 20:06:12 2009
New Revision: 152648
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=152648
Log:
PR target/33743
* config/i386/sol2.h
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-11 20:49
---
Subject: Bug 33743
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Sun Oct 11 20:48:46 2009
New Revision: 152649
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=152649
Log:
PR target/33743
* config/sparc/sol2.h
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-11 20:51
---
This now should work on Solaris 8, 9 and 10.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-09 12:45
---
Subject: Bug 40071
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri Oct 9 12:44:59 2009
New Revision: 152585
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=152585
Log:
PR tree-optimization/40071
* tree-vect
--- Comment #12 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-09 12:53
---
This particular ICE shouldn't occur anymore. However, there is a couple of
ACATS failures at -O3 on x86 again related to vectorization:
=== acats tests ===
FAIL: cxa4016
FAIL: cxb3007
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-06 07:38
---
Not set for gnat1 (Ada):
LTO doesn't work for Ada because of the sizetype issue. I have a patch to make
it sort of work for pure Ada code, but mixed-language support is out of
question for the time being
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 10:00
---
The ChangeLog entry is wrong.
And folks from Google shouldn't feel entitled to break a freeze imposed by
other folks from Google even if, yes, it is annoyingly long. :-)
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 17:48
---
Subject: Bug 41511
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Mon Oct 5 17:48:09 2009
New Revision: 152459
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=152459
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/41511
* combine.c
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-04 08:15
---
Do not use -O3 with Ada yet.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 40071 ***
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-04 08:15
---
*** Bug 41563 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #27 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-04 11:01
---
Not a GCC bug.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-03 10:31
---
It has been fixed on trunk by commit 134020. The fix will be in GCC 4.5.0.
2008-04-08 Javier Miranda mira...@adacore.com
Robert Dewar de...@adacore.com
Ed Schonberg schonb
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-03 11:21
---
I ran into it on i586 as well.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #18 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-29 05:05
---
Thank you Olivier.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-25 16:40
---
OK, that's a known issue, unfortunately not straightforward to solve. We'll
probably need to resort to a workaround for 4.4.x at least.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41100
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-25 17:20
---
Thanks for your analysis! I'm curious at what's going wrong: it looks scary to
have wrong code in such a simple use case :)
See utils2.c:maybe_wrap_malloc and maybe_wrap_free for the story about the
super
--- Comment #13 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-25 18:20
---
Oh, I didn't realize Test_Extension'Alignment was 16, I wonder what causes it
to be super-aligned, I see no obvious candidate from -gnatR2...
A pointer to unconstrained array forces double-word alignment
--- Comment #14 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-25 18:24
---
Eric, in comment #8, did you mean a workaround inside the compiler, or a
workaround in user code? Because the latter is impractical for Debian which
contains more than 2 million lines of Ada, with 350k more
libiberty
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: x86_64
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 09:55
---
Likewise on i586.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
GCC build
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 10:06
---
See the dwarf2out.c part of
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-09/msg01017.html
which fixes this.
Strange, the same builds (with RTL checking) passed yesterday.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #9 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-17 16:58
---
in gcc/Makefile.in, which means it was lacking $(CONFIG_H) thus lacking
dependency on auto-host.h. This was fixed in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-07/msg01022.html
and glancing at that patch
--- Comment #59 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-13 21:31
---
Is there a separate PR or should I reopen this one?
This one is already overloaded, I'd suggest opening a new one.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41241
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-11 06:37
---
Yes our build works on solaris 8.
If the exact same operation works on Solaris 8 but not on Solaris 10, you may
have run into a limitation of GNU ld on Solaris 10. The workaround is probably
to build a GCC
--- 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
301 - 400 of 2613 matches
Mail list logo
