http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #12 from Michael Zolotukhin <michael.v.zolotukhin at gmail dot com> 2011-11-22 16:54:35 UTC --- > Do you have a patch for those C++ and Java regressions? What regressions do you mean exactly? I managed to fix the bootstraps (with sse_loop enabled again), but there are still some fails, so I don't send the patch. Currently I don't have a fix that solves all the problems - the attached to previous letter patch fixes some of them, but there are other fails (in 27_io and in some specs2k). I'm continuing debugging and hope to finish fixes soon. On 22 November 2011 20:34, hjl.tools at gmail dot com <gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134 > > --- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-11-22 16:34:54 > UTC --- > (In reply to comment #10) >> Created attachment 25882 [details] >> Patch for new memset/memcpy implementation >> >> (In reply to comment #9) >> > Regressions caused by the new memset/memcpy expansion are >> > >> > FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/wchar_t/1.cc execution test >> > FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekpos/wchar_t/9874.cc execution test >> > FAIL: 27_io/manipulators/basefield/char/1.cc execution test >> > FAIL: 27_io/manipulators/basefield/wchar_t/1.cc execution test >> > FAIL: 27_io/objects/wchar_t/12.cc execution test >> > FAIL: 27_io/objects/wchar_t/13.cc execution test >> > FAIL: events run >> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/cleanup-1.c execution test >> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/cleanup-2.c execution test >> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (internal compiler error) >> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (internal compiler error) >> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (test for excess errors) >> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (test for excess errors) >> > FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 execution, -O2 >> > -fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions -funroll-loops >> >> With the attached patch fails on PR34077 and arrayarg.f90 are fixed, fails on >> cleanup-tests are probably caused by incorrect testcase (see >> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49503). > > Do you have a patch for those C++ and Java regressions?
