--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-10 21:13
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-09 19:08
---
Well it does with cvs head gdb on linux, both stabs and dwarf2. If you'll
verify that you see something akin to
.stabs z:(0,7),128,0,0,-4
.stabs w:(0,9),128,0,0,-4
in your assembly file
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-09 21:06
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-09 21:07
---
Oh, and that's a WONTFIX for 3.4, in case anyone's interested.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20998
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-09 01:08
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-08 02:35
---
From the log, this was a gdb bug.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-08 02:42
---
A more severe example is gdb.base/call-ar-st.c wherein the local static variable
double_array is not put to the debug info at all. Not even its name as in the
example here.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-07 01:55
---
You could also disable the test for lp64, if you felt that better.
But then you should document that the various isa extension options
are non-functional.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-02 21:39
---
Actually, BACKTRACESPEC does make it into libgcj.spec via substitution.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23602
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-02 22:08
---
I'm sure that the patches listed in comments #6 and #7 are bogus.
But we've had problems before with unwinding with -mno-accumulate-outgoing-args
(implied by -mtune=i486, implied by i486-linux), plus -fomit
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: powerpc64-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-02 22:54
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] ICE: missing REG_EH_REGION note in the end of
bb
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 10:31:21PM -, kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
There is yet another missing REG_EH_REGION note
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-03 00:27
---
The true problem is in optimize_mode_switching. The code about line 605
that inserts code around (but not on) abnormal edges, is incorrect. This
is immediately obvious in this case because the emit_insn_after
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-01 15:49
---
Yes, I'm fine with that.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23506
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-01 16:08
---
Also reprodicible on ppc-linux.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-01 17:07
---
Proposed patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-09/msg00053.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23671
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-01 22:41
---
No, Geoff, look closer at the failure message. The biggest problem is that
you deleted the line that converted a PARALLEL to a CONST_VECTOR node.
Testing a fix now.
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-01 23:38
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-02 00:28
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-31 16:43
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-01 05:03
---
I know you're going to attach a preprocessed file for non-pa owners...
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-31 00:23
---
Possible fallout from PR23517.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23630
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-31 05:01
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23630
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-30 02:09
---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-30 02:46
---
That said, I can't get any test to fail when run by hand. libtool compile
and link line pasted out of the log, as well as the associated LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
What am I missing?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23601
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-26 22:16
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-25 16:29
---
Careful, Andrew. Things are not as cut-and-dried as you're making it out.
Indeed, this is yet another example of the big structure member aliasing
discussion we had earlier this year. I can't find
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-25 16:35
---
All that said, I personally would consider this a source code bug. If you
really meant to initialize two members of the structure, I think it makes
logical sense that you refer to the object as a whole
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-23 20:48
---
So, I fixed another case in which we could die in create_pre_exit having
to do with complex return values. But past that, there are failures that
are completely within optimize_mode_switching, e.g. execute
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-23 21:30
---
Actually, I lied about the CFG. It's actually 1-3 with 2-3 still forming
the loop. So LCM did the right thing, technically: for the case in which
the loop trip count is zero, we avoid the efpu insn
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-22 20:32
---
Doing the code review. I've got a local patch for the create_pre_exit ice.
I'm going to work to see this in 4.1.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19 18:32
---
I think it's caller-save's bug.
The use of fixup_abnormal_edges in reload and reg-stack is to move output
reloads to the fallthru edge. Well, the output reloads are not used on
the eh edge, because
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19 18:34
---
More, since you cannot insert insns on the abnormal EH edge, the fix to
caller-save needs to be of the form don't caller-save this variable.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23478
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-19 19:14
---
Maybe. I think you'll find that most of the time these edges *are* critical.
I don't think it's worth bothering to make the distinction.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23478
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11 16:59
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11 17:16
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-09 17:44
---
Yes, the funny cast is *intended* to alias all memory, and thus force anything
that might potentially alias the string to be written back. We don't have the
ability to conclude that __d3 won't be affected
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16613
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-08 17:32
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-08 18:09
---
(In reply to comment #9)
To summarize, the case does not work as is -- with =g and g. It does
not work with =rm and g.
Of course not! Have you forgotten what early-clobber means?
Please let me know
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-08 18:11
---
I'm sorry, this is Andrew's fault -- it's not a duplicate.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-08 21:47
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-08 22:10
---
Amusingly, the problem disappears when one translates this:
salt_len = (((strcspn (salt, $))(8))?(strcspn (salt, $)):(8));
to
salt_len = strcspn (salt, $);
if (salt_len 8)
salt_len = 8;
Note
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-08 22:31
---
I'm calling this one invalid. We've got:
eax __d0 early clobber
ebx pic
ecx __d1 early clobber
edx __s input
esi __res early clobber
edi __d2 early clobber
ebp frame
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-05 20:39
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|rth at gcc dot gnu dot org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu
||dot org
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-05 20:43
---
Then it'll stay broken at -O0 until we completely rewrite rtl expansion.
There are really very few ways around this problem...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23200
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-05 23:08
---
Fixed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21728
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-05 23:13
---
Problem occurs between user and keyboard.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-05 23:38
---
Front end bug.
error (return type %q#T is incomplete, TREE_TYPE (fntype));
/* Make it return void instead, but don't change the
type of the DECL_RESULT, in case we have a named return
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-04 20:48
---
The reason that we're rejecting the m alternative is that we've expanded
+mr(blen) to
(set (reg/v:SI 60 [ blen.25 ])
(asm_operands:SI () (=mr) 2 [
(mem
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-04 22:03
---
Andrew, can you have a look at why this isn't being TER'ed back into the
asm_expr? It's not a 100% ideal solution to this problem, but I'll guess
that it'll handle at least some of the cases including this one
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-05 02:34
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-05 03:14
---
No, because you still need to use Q to get a register that may be used
with a low-part. Even on i486.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-04 04:01
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02 20:46
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02 20:57
---
I think it's valid.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-28 17:16
---
I expect a could-not-split error to be a target bug, not rtl-opt.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-28 17:27
---
May be a duplicate of PR17692.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-28 20:55
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 17692 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-28 20:55
---
*** Bug 22462 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-28 20:56
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21588
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-28 21:28
---
Fixed, with http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-05/msg01811.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21362
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21362
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-29 00:57
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-25 18:18
---
Whatever you might think, this is not my bug.
This is the C++ front end calling ggc_collect in the middle of parsing a
function. I can't tell whether or not there is a ggc_push_context missing
when we begin
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-25 18:52
---
It's reproducible with the C front end with -fno-unit-at-a-time.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22626
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-20 00:11
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-20 05:27
---
Thanks for the reduction; I see the problem clearly now. For the record,
b$real_193 = CR.53_187;
b$imag_194 = CI.54_188;
c$real_195 = b$real_193;
c$imag_196 = b$imag_194;
we had a ring of copies
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-19 06:38
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
Bug 22055 depends on bug 22116, which changed state.
Bug 22116 Summary: [4.1 Regression] PRE of COMPLEX_EXPR causes ICE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22116
What|Old Value |New Value
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18 08:58
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-19 01:16
---
Danny, would you look at this? I have no idea why PRE is claiming to insert
an expression,
Created phi prephitmp.27_34 = PHI i_15(1), pretmp.26_35(3); in block 2
but then not actually doing it.
--
http
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-19 03:12
---
(In reply to comment #7)
It actually does.
Ah. I failed to add -vops to the dump and so mis-diagnosed the problem.
The first problem here is that PRE doesn't mark anything for renaming
because it's never
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-19 03:14
---
Mine.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-17 20:35
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-17 22:11
---
Fixed: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-06/msg01535.html
Although I didn't see this pr before writing the patch, I like my patch
better because not all paths go through loop peeling. Which means
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-16 18:16
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
401 - 500 of 970 matches
Mail list logo
