[Bug c++/21447] internal compiler error: output_operand
--- Additional Comments From zxpmyth at yahoo dot com dot cn 2005-05-08 07:30 --- (In reply to comment #1) > *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21275 *** I have patched GCC 4.0.0 with http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005- 05/msg9.html. The problem is still there. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21447
[Bug c++/21312] [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] Access violation diagnostic given twice
--- Additional Comments From lerdsuwa at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 08:12 --- Confirmed -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-05-08 08:12:29 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21312
[Bug c++/21312] [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] Access violation diagnostic given twice
--- Additional Comments From lerdsuwa at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 08:13 --- Got it -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |lerdsuwa at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21312
[Bug inline-asm/21396] inline asm doesn't compile with -O2 optimization
--- Additional Comments From gleb76 at gmail dot com 2005-05-08 08:16 --- (In reply to comment #1) > Fixed for 4.0.0 and above. I know it works in 4.0.0 but 3.4.3 is a default compiler shiped by RedHat. Is this going to be fixed in 3.4 line of compilers? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21396
[Bug libmudflap/21023] mudflap reports errors for external array variable with no size specified
-- What|Removed |Added Summary|mudflap reports errors for |mudflap reports errors for |external variables |external array variable with ||no size specified http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21023
[Bug inline-asm/21396] inline asm doesn't compile with -O2 optimization
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 08:18 --- (In reply to comment #2) > I know it works in 4.0.0 but 3.4.3 is a default compiler shiped by RedHat. Is > this going to be fixed in 3.4 line of compilers? No because it is not a regression. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21396
Re: gcc 4.0.0 on amd64: problem with -O2?
On May 8, 2005, at 2:21 AM, Harald Dunkel wrote: Andrew Pinski wrote: Wrong, try again. Violating aliasing rules cause undefined behavior so seg faulting is an okay thing to do. But producing a warning message and bad code is not OK. Either using a "type-punned pointer" should be treated as a fatal error, because gcc would create bad code, or gcc should create working code. If gcc knows that the code is bad, why does it continue? Undefined code is required to compile. There is a C defect report about undefined and erroring out. The code is undefined at runtime and not at compile time. So GCC is not producing bad code at all, your code/X11R6's code is bad. -- Pinski
[Bug target/21416] wrong code for __builtin_isless, __builtin_islessequal
--- Additional Comments From rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 09:40 --- Now fixed on mainline. Backports for 4.0 and 3.4 are in the works. -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2005-05-06 14:21:22 |2005-05-08 09:40:28 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21416
[Bug target/16925] ICE when building a m68hc11 cross-compiler on 64-bit architectures
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 10:09 --- Subject: Bug 16925 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Branch: gcc-3_4-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-08 10:08:50 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog gcc/config/m68hc11: m68hc11.c Log message: PR target/16925 * config/m68hc11/m68hc11.c (m68hc11_gen_highpart): Handle split of 64-bit constants on 64-bit hosts. (m68hc11_split_logical): Simplify. (m68hc11_split_move): Likewise. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-3_4-branch&r1=2.2326.2.854&r2=2.2326.2.855 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/m68hc11/m68hc11.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-3_4-branch&r1=1.91.6.6&r2=1.91.6.7 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16925
Re: gcc 4.0.0 on amd64: problem with -O2?
Harald Dunkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Andrew Pinski wrote: >> Wrong, try again. Violating aliasing rules cause undefined behavior >> so seg faulting is an okay thing to do. > > But producing a warning message and bad code is not OK. Either > using a "type-punned pointer" should be treated as a fatal > error, because gcc would create bad code, or gcc should create > working code. > > If gcc knows that the code is bad, why does it continue? It doesn't know that. The warning is for the *creation* of the type-punned pointer, which is still perfectly fine. Gcc is too stupid to notice whether you actually dereference it. -- Falk
[Bug target/16925] ICE when building a m68hc11 cross-compiler on 64-bit architectures
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 10:14 --- Subject: Bug 16925 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Branch: gcc-4_0-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-08 10:14:31 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog gcc/config/m68hc11: m68hc11.c Log message: PR target/16925 * config/m68hc11/m68hc11.c (m68hc11_gen_highpart): Handle split of 64-bit constants on 64-bit hosts. (m68hc11_split_logical): Simplify. (m68hc11_split_move): Likewise. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=2.7592.2.227&r2=2.7592.2.228 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/m68hc11/m68hc11.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.111&r2=1.111.8.1 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16925
[Bug target/16925] ICE when building a m68hc11 cross-compiler on 64-bit architectures
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 10:23 --- Subject: Bug 16925 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-08 10:23:40 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog gcc/config/m68hc11: m68hc11.c Log message: PR target/16925 * config/m68hc11/m68hc11.c (m68hc11_gen_highpart): Handle split of 64-bit constants on 64-bit hosts. (m68hc11_split_logical): Simplify. (m68hc11_split_move): Likewise. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.8655&r2=2.8656 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/m68hc11/m68hc11.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.114&r2=1.115 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16925
[Bug target/16925] ICE when building a m68hc11 cross-compiler on 64-bit architectures
--- Additional Comments From ciceron at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 10:29 --- Fixed in 3_4 (3.4.4?), 4_0 (4.0.1), and mainline. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16925
[Bug target/21389] optimized code seg faults due to double load on sparcV9
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 10:58 --- > Then what is the point of the -munaligned-doubles flag? Is this simply > ignored? I understand your point about malloc, but what if we have > casts to buffers that are not mod8-aligned? Isn't that what > -munaligned-doubles is for? Excerpt from the manual: With `-munaligned-doubles', GCC assumes that doubles have 8 byte alignment only if they are contained in another type, or if they have an absolute address. Otherwise, it assumes they have 4 byte alignment. Specifying this option avoids some rare compatibility problems with code generated by other compilers. It is not the default because it results in a performance loss, especially for floating point code. So -munaligned-doubles cannot do anything for your invalid code and the bus error is to be expected. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21389
[Bug target/21416] wrong code for __builtin_isless, __builtin_islessequal
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 11:57 --- Subject: Bug 21416 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Branch: gcc-4_0-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-08 11:57:01 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog gcc/config/mips: mips.c mips.md Log message: PR target/21416 * config/mips/mips.c (mips_emit_compare): Don't reverse UNGE and UNGT comparisons. * config/mips/mips.md (swapped_fcond): New code macro and attribute. (sgt_, sge_): Generalize to all members of swapped_fcond, including sunge_ and sungt_. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=2.7592.2.228&r2=2.7592.2.229 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/mips/mips.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.486.2.4&r2=1.486.2.5 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/mips/mips.md.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.313.4.1&r2=1.313.4.2 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21416
[Bug target/21416] wrong code for __builtin_isless, __builtin_islessequal
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 12:06 --- Subject: Bug 21416 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Branch: gcc-3_4-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-08 12:06:33 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog gcc/config/mips: mips.c mips.md Log message: PR target/21416 * config/mips/mips.c (mips_emit_compare): Don't reverse UNGE and UNGT comparisons. * config/mips/mips.md (sungt_df, sunge_df, sungt_sf, sunge_sf): New patterns. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-3_4-branch&r1=2.2326.2.855&r2=2.2326.2.856 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/mips/mips.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-3_4-branch&r1=1.362.4.16&r2=1.362.4.17 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/mips/mips.md.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-3_4-branch&r1=1.211.4.10&r2=1.211.4.11 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21416
[Bug target/21416] wrong code for __builtin_isless, __builtin_islessequal
--- Additional Comments From rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 12:14 --- Fixed in 3.4, 4,0 and 4.1. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |3.4.4 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21416
[Bug c++/21405] Template inlines have global visibility
--- Additional Comments From chris at bubblescope dot net 2005-05-08 12:18 --- Out of interest, where do the docs say that? (I'm not being sarcastic, just interested) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21405
[Bug c++/21405] Template inlines have global visibility
--- Additional Comments From mike at navi dot cx 2005-05-08 12:38 --- http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/abi.html See the "testing multi-abi binaries" section at the bottom: A "C" application, dynamically linked to two shared libraries, liba, libb. The dependent library liba is C++ shared library compiled with gcc-3.3.x, and uses io, exceptions, locale, etc. The dependent library libb is a C++ shared library compiled with gcc-3.4.x, and also uses io, exceptions, locale, etc. [ ... snip ... ] This resulting binary, when executed, will be able to safely use code from both liba, and the dependent libstdc++.so.6, and libb, with the dependent libstdc++.so.5. A C++ program linked indirectly (via a C library) against another C++ library is exactly the same scenario. This is the whole point of symbol versioning. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21405
[Bug rtl-optimization/18081] [3.4 regression] Infinite memory allocation on -O3
--- Additional Comments From gtolstolytkin at ru dot mvista dot com 2005-05-08 13:50 --- I've done a build for i686-unknown-linux-gnu (3.4.4-20050506, glibc 2.3.2, linux 2.6.8). It seems to work fine too. Thanks, Grigory. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18081
[Bug bootstrap/21355] [3.4 regression] ada bootstrap comparision failure
--- Additional Comments From debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org 2005-05-08 13:54 --- turned out as a side effect of the gpc build. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21355
[Bug tree-optimization/21451] New: Missed constant propagation
This test case is not fully optimized on mainline:
typedef int (*objc_typed_write_func) (void *, const char *, int);
typedef struct objc_typed_stream
{
void *physical;
objc_typed_write_func write;
} TypedStream;
int
foo (struct objc_typed_stream *stream, unsigned int val)
{
unsigned char buf[sizeof (unsigned int) + 1];
int len;
if ((val & 0x1fU) == val)
{
buf[0] = val | 0x20U;
len = 1;
}
else
{
int c, b;
buf[0] = 0x40U;
for (c = sizeof (int); c != 0; c -= 1)
if (((val >> (8 * (c - 1))) % 0x100) != 0)
break;
buf[0] |= c;
for (b = 1; c != 0; c--, b++)
{
buf[b] = (val >> (8 * (c - 1))) % 0x100;
}
len = b;
}
return (*stream->write) (stream->physical, buf, len);
}
---> (in the .optimized dump):
# BLOCK 3
# PRED: 2 [95.0%] (false,exec)
:;
cD.1575_38 = cD.1575_46 - 1;
ivtmp.25D.1650_58 = ivtmp.25D.1650_18 - 8;
if (cD.1575_38 != 0) goto ; else goto ;
# SUCC: 2 [89.0%] (dfs_back,true,exec) 9 [11.0%] (loop_exit,false,exec)
(...)
# BLOCK 9
# PRED: 3 [11.0%] (loop_exit,false,exec)
Invalid sum of outgoing probabilities 0.0%
Invalid sum of incoming frequencies 1045, should be 0
# cD.1575_13 = PHI ;
:;
D.1592_60 = (signed charD.9) cD.1575_13;
D.1593_61 = D.1592_60 | 64;
D.1594_62 = (unsigned charD.10) D.1593_61;
# bufD.1573_63 = V_MAY_DEF ;
bufD.1573[0] = D.1594_62;
goto ();
# SUCC: 8 (fallthru,exec)
cD.1575_13 is equal to 0 on entry of basic block 9. We don't propagate
this constant until GCSE CPROP1.
Maybe the new pass order from the tree-cleanup-branch will fix this,
which is why I've added Diego to the CC list.
--
Summary: Missed constant propagation
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization, TREE
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: dnovillo at redhat dot com,gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot
org,kazu at cs dot umass dot edu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21451
[Bug c/21452] insn does not satisfy its constraints
--- Additional Comments From m dot blizinski at wsisiz dot edu dot pl 2005-05-08 14:57 --- Created an attachment (id=8838) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8838&action=view) preprocessed file ic_predict.i -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21452
[Bug c/21452] New: insn does not satisfy its constraints
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/src/MPlayer-1.0pre7/libfaad2$ gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 3.3.4
System type: GNU/Linux Slackware 10.1 on Celeron M 1500MHz
Hardware: Fujitsu-Siemens Amilo Pro V2000D
Complete gcc command that triggers the error.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/src/MPlayer-1.0pre7/libfaad2$ LC_ALL=C make
cc -c -I. -I../libvo -I../../libvo -I/usr/X11/include -fno-PIC -O3
-march=pentium3 -save-temps -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer -mfpmath=sse -D_REENTRANT
-D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -o ic_predict.o ic_predict.c
cc: warning: -pipe ignored because -save-temps specified
ic_predict.c: In function `ic_predict':
ic_predict.c:81: error: insn does not satisfy its constraints:
(insn 622 495 228 6 0x4030823c (set (reg/v:SF 29 emm0 [72])
(const_double:SF 0 [0x0] 0.0 [0x0.0p+0])) 61 {*movsf_1} (nil)
(nil))
ic_predict.c:81: internal compiler error: in build_def_use, at regrename.c:782
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
make: *** [ic_predict.o] Error 1
--
Summary: insn does not satisfy its constraints
Product: gcc
Version: 3.3.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: m dot blizinski at wsisiz dot edu dot pl
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: i486-slackware-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21452
[Bug c/21453] New: Assignments to conditional expressions
/*
This code fragment triggers an error at 4.1.0 complaining about an invalid
lvalue
(in the assignment) but is compiled cleanly with older gcc version. No
special flags
are required. This causes troubles with binutils compiled for
"i386-pc-mingw32msvc" as "ld" sources for that platform contain expressions
like the one below.
*/
int main(void)
{
int *p;
int *q;
int *r;
int i;
(i?p:q)=r;
return(0);
}
--
Summary: Assignments to conditional expressions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jozef dot behran at krs dot sk
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21453
[Bug middle-end/21309] internal compiler error: in expand_mult_const, at expmed.c:2884
--- Additional Comments From matt at 3am-software dot com 2005-05-08 15:32
---
This bug is to due to struct mult_cost having its member defined as shorts.
Since MAX_COST is defined to be INT_MAX, when a cost value is moved from div_mod
to mult_cost, the upper bits are truncated and the 0x7fd9 cost becomes
0xffd9. This results is a negative cost and causes a premature to happen in
synth_mult due to:
if (cost_limit->cost < 0
|| (cost_limit->cost == 0 && cost_limit->latency <= 0))
return;
And so the algorithm fails to be set resulting in the eventual call to
gcc_unreachable.
Simply changing the members of mult_cost from short to int causes the ICE to be
avoided.
--- expmed.c27 Apr 2005 16:02:33 - 1.228
+++ expmed.c8 May 2005 15:32:04 -
@@ -2315,8 +2315,8 @@ enum alg_code { alg_unknown, alg_zero, a
leaves and rtx_cost(op) + max(latency(a), latency(b)) otherwise. */
struct mult_cost {
- short cost; /* Total rtx_cost of the multiplication sequence. */
- short latency; /* The latency of the multiplication sequence. */
+ int cost; /* Total rtx_cost of the multiplication sequence. */
+ int latency; /* The latency of the multiplication sequence. */
};
/* This macro is used to compare a pointer to a mult_cost against an
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21309
[Bug target/16925] ICE when building a m68hc11 cross-compiler on 64-bit architectures
-- What|Removed |Added Known to work||3.4.4 4.0.1 4.1.0 Target Milestone|--- |3.4.4 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16925
[Bug target/21452] insn does not satisfy its constraints
-- What|Removed |Added Component|c |target Keywords||ice-on-valid-code, ssemmx http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21452
[Bug c/21453] Assignments to conditional expressions
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 15:41 --- This was an extension in GCC before 4.0.0. It was removed. Though this is valid C++, this is not valid C. This is a bug in binutils, the way to fix it would be like: if (i) p = r; else q = r; -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21453
[Bug c++/21454] New: const array doesn't live in the rodata section in C++
Consider:
static const int array[] = { 0, 1, 2, 3 };
int
foo (unsigned int i)
{
return array[i];
}
I get:
.file "test.cc"
.text
.align 2
.p2align 2,,3
.globl _Z3fooj
.type _Z3fooj, @function
_Z3fooj:
.LFB2:
movl4(%esp), %eax
movlarray(,%eax,4), %eax
ret
.LFE2:
.size _Z3fooj, .-_Z3fooj
.data
.align 4
.type array, @object
.size array, 16
array:
.long 0
.long 1
.long 2
.long 3
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 4.1.0 20050508 (experimental)"
.section.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
Note ".data". We could use ".rodata" for this array.
--
Summary: const array doesn't live in the rodata section in C++
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: kazu at cs dot umass dot edu
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21454
[Bug c++/21427] [3.4/4.0 only] Failure in make_thunk, cp/method.c:145 when compiling with multiply-inherited members
-- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |nathan at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2005-05-06 22:33:07 |2005-05-08 16:27:49 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21427
[Bug rtl-optimization/11825] Redundant move in some cases (dead code before return) for long long on 32bit targets
-- What|Removed |Added Keywords||ra Last reconfirmed|2005-02-06 18:50:24 |2005-05-08 16:46:36 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11825
[Bug target/20529] m6811-elf-g++ ICE
--- Additional Comments From ciceron at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 16:49 --- Mine. -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |ciceron at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20529
[Bug middle-end/14840] [tree-ssa] fold tree_code_type[CST] and tree_code_length[CST] in GCC itself
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 17:00 --- (In reply to comment #5) > In *.final_cleanup of cc1-i files with --enable-checking, I see > > 1308 occurrences of tree_code_type[CST] On PPC-darwin I get about 1251. Next up the patch for tree_code_length. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14840
[Bug target/19051] m6811-elf-gcc ICE
--- Additional Comments From ciceron at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 17:03 --- Mine. -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |ciceron at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19051
[Bug target/21281] ICE with building newlib
--- Additional Comments From ciceron at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 17:20 --- The problem was introduced by the switch to "predicates.md" where the "splitable_operand" predicate is not correctly defined in the description: it accepts a subreg, reg, or mem but it must also accept a constant. -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |ciceron at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21281
[Bug target/21281] [4.1 Regression] ICE with building newlib
-- What|Removed |Added Summary|ICE with building newlib|[4.1 Regression] ICE with ||building newlib Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21281
[Bug tree-optimization/21451] Missed constant propagation
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 17:35 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-05-08 17:35:38 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21451
[Bug tree-optimization/19905] Extra V_MAY_DEF on a static variable whose address is not taken (we should be able to move the load out of the loop)
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 17:40 --- oh, why is d considered call clobbered when it cannot be: Variable: d.0, UID 0, float Variable: d, UID 1, float, is global, call clobbered, default def: d_4 -- What|Removed |Added CC||dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Last reconfirmed|2005-04-16 17:04:43 |2005-05-08 17:40:26 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19905
[Bug target/19051] m6811-elf-gcc ICE
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08
17:42 ---
Subject: Bug 19051
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-08 17:42:45
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/m68hc11: m68hc11.md
Log message:
PR target/19051
* config/m68hc11/m68hc11.md ("mulqi3"): Use general_operand for operand
1 and fix constraints.
("mulqihi3"): Use general_operand for operand 2.
Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-3_4-branch&r1=2.2326.2.856&r2=2.2326.2.857
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/m68hc11/m68hc11.md.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-3_4-branch&r1=1.54.10.7&r2=1.54.10.8
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19051
[Bug target/19051] m6811-elf-gcc ICE
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08
17:48 ---
Subject: Bug 19051
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-08 17:48:20
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/m68hc11: m68hc11.md
Log message:
PR target/19051
* config/m68hc11/m68hc11.md ("mulqi3"): Use general_operand for operand
1 and fix constraints.
("mulqihi3"): Use general_operand for operand 2.
Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=2.7592.2.229&r2=2.7592.2.230
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/m68hc11/m68hc11.md.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.67&r2=1.67.28.1
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19051
[Bug tree-optimization/19719] missed optimization on boolean operation with boolean arguments
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 17:49 --- On the mainline we get: xorl%eax, %eax movzbl 8(%esp), %edx cmpb$0, 4(%esp) je .L4 testb %dl, %dl setne %al .L4: movzbl %al, %eax ret One thing to improve this is to change: testb %dl, %dl setne %al to: movl%edx, %eax -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19719
[Bug target/19051] m6811-elf-gcc ICE
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08
17:52 ---
Subject: Bug 19051
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-08 17:52:23
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/m68hc11: m68hc11.md
Log message:
PR target/19051
* config/m68hc11/m68hc11.md ("mulqi3"): Use general_operand for operand
1 and fix constraints.
("mulqihi3"): Use general_operand for operand 2.
Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.8658&r2=2.8659
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/m68hc11/m68hc11.md.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.68&r2=1.69
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19051
[Bug target/19051] m6811-elf-gcc ICE
--- Additional Comments From ciceron at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 17:53 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19051
[Bug tree-optimization/20701] [tcb] VRP does not eliminate a redundant "if" statement.
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 17:56 --- Any news on this? -- What|Removed |Added Version|unknown |4.1.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20701
[Bug target/19051] m6811-elf-gcc ICE
-- What|Removed |Added Known to fail|3.4.4 4.0.0 |3.4.3 4.0.0 Known to work||3.4.4 4.0.1 4.1.0 Target Milestone|--- |3.4.4 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19051
[Bug tree-optimization/18076] Missed jump threading optimization
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 18:04 --- Fixed both the DSE and the threading issue. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18076
[Bug tree-optimization/19794] [meta-bug] Jump threading related bugs
-- Bug 19794 depends on bug 18076, which changed state. Bug 18076 Summary: Missed jump threading optimization http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18076 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19794
[Bug rtl-optimization/18081] [3.4 regression] Infinite memory allocation on -O3
--- Additional Comments From gtolstolytkin at ru dot mvista dot com 2005-05-08 18:07 --- I meant that 20050506 build still has the bug. And the build with the patch works fine for i686 too. I didn't mean that the bug was somehow fixed in 20050506 ;) Thanks, Grigory. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18081
[Bug tree-optimization/14495] [tree-ssa] Propagate range info into a switch statement
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 18:10 --- I think the issue is that we don't simulate anything besides COND_EXPR. -- What|Removed |Added CC||dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14495
[Bug tree-optimization/15357] [tree-ssa] combing if statements
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 18:17 --- I lost the code which I was using to do this so I am no longer working on this. -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot |unassigned at gcc dot gnu |org |dot org Status|ASSIGNED|NEW http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15357
[Bug tree-optimization/15017] [tree-ssa] compare (equal) with casts are not removed
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 18:20 --- I am too busy for this one. -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot |unassigned at gcc dot gnu |org |dot org Status|ASSIGNED|NEW http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15017
[Bug libffi/21285] gij fails to handle NullPointerException exception
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 18:26 --- It's the unwind info that should be changed, not the code. I'll do it. -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org | Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2005-05-06 22:47:26 |2005-05-08 18:26:58 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21285
[Bug libffi/21285] gij fails to handle NullPointerException exception
--- Additional Comments From tsv at solvo dot ru 2005-05-08 18:30 --- (In reply to comment #13) > It's the unwind info that should be changed, not the code. > I'll do it. Thank you very much. I just understand the code better than DWARF stuff. :) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21285
[Bug tree-optimization/15350] [tree-ssa] Convert if ((1 << a) & 1) into if (a == 0).
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 19:08 --- Hmm, we do optimize this with ashiftrt but not with ashift. We also fold ((1 << a) & 1) != 0 into ((1 >> a & 1) != 0) which gets optimized on the RTL level. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15350
[Bug tree-optimization/15457] [tree-ssa] Convert a sign bit testing into "a < 0"
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 19:12 --- (In reply to comment #2) > PR 15359 will fix foo and baa but not baz for some reason. I mean 15459. Also this is done on the RTL level at least on PPC. -- What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|19987 | nThis|| Keywords||TREE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15457
[Bug tree-optimization/15911] DOM optimization not performed
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 19:18 --- I am no longer working on this. -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot |unassigned at gcc dot gnu |org |dot org Status|ASSIGNED|NEW http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15911
[Bug target/21281] [4.1 Regression] ICE with building newlib
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 20:05 --- Subject: Bug 21281 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-08 20:04:52 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog gcc/config/m68hc11: predicates.md Log message: PR target/21281 * config/m68hc11/predicates.md (splitable_operand): An immediate is allowed. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.8660&r2=2.8661 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/m68hc11/predicates.md.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.2&r2=1.3 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21281
[Bug target/21281] [4.1 Regression] ICE with building newlib
--- Additional Comments From ciceron at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 20:18 --- Fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21281
Re: gcc 4.0.0 on amd64: problem with -O2?
Falk Hueffner wrote: > > It doesn't know that. The warning is for the *creation* of the > type-punned pointer, which is still perfectly fine. Gcc is too stupid > to notice whether you actually dereference it. > Yup. There are billions of this constructs in everbodies and his moms source files. By now (< 4.0.0) this did not hurt. Regards Harri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[Bug tree-optimization/14841] [tree-ssa] const_array[CST] is not folded
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 21:22 --- Subject: Bug 14841 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-08 21:22:21 Modified files: gcc: ChangeLog Makefile.in tree-ssa-ccp.c Added files: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa: pr14841.c Log message: gcc/ PR tree-optimization/14841, tree-optimization/15838 * tree-ssa-ccp.c (fold_const_aggregate_ref): New. (evaluate_stmt): Call it. testsuite/ PR tree-optimization/14841, tree-optimization/15838 * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr14841.c: New. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.8663&r2=2.8664 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/Makefile.in.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.1481&r2=1.1482 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/tree-ssa-ccp.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.69&r2=2.70 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr14841.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14841
[Bug c++/21455] New: type 'X' is not a base type for type 'X' in pointer to member conversion
testcase.ii:20253: error: type 'XMLFile' is not a base type for type 'XMLFile' testcase.ii:20253: error:in pointer to member conversion I think it's a reject of valid code. # gcc-4.0.1-20050507. -- Summary: type 'X' is not a base type for type 'X' in pointer to member conversion Product: gcc Version: 4.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: pluto at agmk dot net CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: i686-pld-linux GCC host triplet: i686-pld-linux GCC target triplet: i686-pld-linux http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21455
[Bug c++/21455] type 'X' is not a base type for type 'X' in pointer to member conversion
--- Additional Comments From pluto at agmk dot net 2005-05-08 21:27 --- Created an attachment (id=8840) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8840&action=view) testcase -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21455
[Bug regression/21456] New: compile time regression(s) after gcc-4.0-20050326, 4.0 (+300%) 4.1 (+500%)
i used the file compiletimetest2.cc from the attachment in http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16613 and noticed that compile time regressions were introduced after gcc-4.0-20050430 i added the timings for the 4.0 snapshots to http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16613 because there are also many older time reports. now here for gcc-4.1-20050508 > gcc-4.1-20050508 -v Using built-in specs. Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: ../gcc-4.1-20050508/configure --prefix=/opt/gcc-4.1-20050508 --program-suffix=-4.1-20050508 --enable-shared --enable-languages=c,c++ --enable-threads=posix --enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-clocale=gnu --disable-nls --disable-checking --with-arch=pentium3 Thread model: posix gcc version 4.1.0 20050508 (experimental) > time g++-4.1-20050508 -c -O3 -D __NDEBUG__ cotime g++-4.1-20050508 -c -O3 -D __DEBUG__ compiletimetest2.cc real1m47.056suser1m45.474s sys 0m1.392s > time g++-4.1-20050508 -c -O3 -D __DEBUG__ compiletimetest2.cc real1m53.201suser1m51.746s sys 0m1.319s > g++-4.1-20050508 -c -O3 -D __NDEBUG__ compiletimetest2.cc -save-temps > ls -al compiletimetest2.s -rw-r--r--1 login500 users 1602910 May 8 23:20 compiletimetest2.s the assembler file increased once more now 1.603 mb, gcc-3.4.3 (0.520mb), gcc-3.3.5 (0.355mb) gcc-3.4.3 did the whole thing in under 20s. gcc-3.3.5 under 11s i know i'm using -O3. But you see, this is almost a factor of 8.5. Regards Andre -- Summary: compile time regression(s) after gcc-4.0-20050326, 4.0 (+300%) 4.1 (+500%) Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: critical Priority: P2 Component: regression AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: andre dot maute at gmx dot de CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21456
[Bug tree-optimization/14841] [tree-ssa] const_array[CST] is not folded
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-05-08 21:30 --- Just checked in a patch. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14841
[Bug middle-end/14840] [tree-ssa] fold tree_code_type[CST] and tree_code_length[CST] in GCC itself
-- Bug 14840 depends on bug 14841, which changed state. Bug 14841 Summary: [tree-ssa] const_array[CST] is not folded http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14841 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14840
[Bug tree-optimization/8826] "a >> b" differs from "a.operator>>(b)" in that virtual function calls are not avoided
-- Bug 8826 depends on bug 14841, which changed state. Bug 14841 Summary: [tree-ssa] const_array[CST] is not folded http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14841 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8826
[Bug tree-optimization/15838] "Inline" value of static struct
-- Bug 15838 depends on bug 14841, which changed state. Bug 14841 Summary: [tree-ssa] const_array[CST] is not folded http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14841 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15838
[Bug tree-optimization/15838] "Inline" value of static struct
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-05-08 21:30 --- Just checked in a patch. -- What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15838
[Bug c++/18604] [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] Strong using lookup conflicts
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-05-08 22:13 --- Reconfirmed, still several failures in Boost because of this. -- What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2005-02-07 10:40:05 |2005-05-08 22:13:30 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18604
[Bug c/21457] New: ICE building glibc 2.3.5 nptl in gen_subprogram_die at dwarf2out.c:10913
So I get the above ICE (gen_subprogram_die at dwarf2out.c:10913) with debian's 3.4.4 shapshot (20050314). I'm currently building CVS top of branch to double check. It also happens with an older 20041116 build I have here. -- Summary: ICE building glibc 2.3.5 nptl in gen_subprogram_die at dwarf2out.c:10913 Product: gcc Version: 3.4.4 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: c AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: benh at kernel dot crashing dot org CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: powerpc-linux-gcc GCC host triplet: powerpc-linux-gcc GCC target triplet: powerpc-linux-gcc http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21457
[Bug c/21457] ICE building glibc 2.3.5 nptl in gen_subprogram_die at dwarf2out.c:10913
--- Additional Comments From benh at kernel dot crashing dot org 2005-05-08 22:46 --- Created an attachment (id=8841) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8841&action=view) Here is the .i file -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21457
[Bug c/21457] ICE building glibc 2.3.5 nptl in gen_subprogram_die at dwarf2out.c:10913
--- Additional Comments From benh at kernel dot crashing dot org 2005-05-08 22:47 --- Created an attachment (id=8842) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8842&action=view) And the half-generated .s file in case it's useful too -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21457
[Bug c/21457] ICE building glibc 2.3.5 nptl in gen_subprogram_die at dwarf2out.c:10913
--- Additional Comments From benh at kernel dot crashing dot org 2005-05-08 22:48 --- Oh, and sorry if I got the triplets wrong, I can never remember what are the "proper" ones ... -- What|Removed |Added Summary|ICE building glibc 2.3.5|ICE building glibc 2.3.5 |nptl in gen_subprogram_die |nptl in gen_subprogram_die |at dwarf2out.c:10913|at dwarf2out.c:10913 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21457
[Bug tree-optimization/21451] Missed constant propagation
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 23:18 --- Kazu and I discussed a plan for how to fix this, I'll try implementing it. -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |steven at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2005-05-08 17:35:38 |2005-05-08 23:18:48 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21451
[Bug c/21457] ICE building glibc 2.3.5 nptl in gen_subprogram_die at dwarf2out.c:10913
--- Additional Comments From benh at kernel dot crashing dot org
2005-05-08 23:19 ---
Ok, this is with a CVS checkout of today, without the debian patches (that
changes the line number a bit). I now get:
../elf/tst-execstack-mod.c:24: internal compiler error: in gen_subprogram_die,
at dwarf2out.c:10887
The program is simple:
/* Test module for making nonexecutable stacks executable
on load of a DSO that requires executable stacks. */
#include
#include
#include
void callme (void (*callback) (void));
/* This is a function that makes use of executable stack by
using a local function trampoline. */
void
tryme (void)
{
bool ok = false;
void callback (void) { ok = true; }
callme (&callback);
if (ok)
printf ("DSO called ok (local %p, trampoline %p)\n", &ok, &callback);
else
abort ();
}
void
callme (void (*callback) (void))
{
(*callback) ();
}
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21457
[Bug c/21457] ICE building glibc 2.3.5 nptl in gen_subprogram_die at dwarf2out.c:10913
--- Additional Comments From benh at kernel dot crashing dot org 2005-05-08 23:23 --- Hrm... smells a bit like 16676 ... It really needs to be fixed asap, it prevents building glibc in it's current state. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21457
[Bug libffi/21285] gij fails to handle NullPointerException exception
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 23:24 --- Subject: Bug 21285 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-08 23:23:51 Modified files: libffi : ChangeLog libffi/src/alpha: osf.S Log message: PR libffi/21285 * src/alpha/osf.S: Update unwind into to match code. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libffi/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.233&r2=1.234 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libffi/src/alpha/osf.S.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.9&r2=1.10 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21285
[Bug c/21457] ICE building glibc 2.3.5 nptl in gen_subprogram_die at dwarf2out.c:10913
--- Additional Comments From benh at kernel dot crashing dot org 2005-05-08 23:39 --- Same goes for iconvconfig.c:1244 in glibc too, so at least now 2 occurences of this bug preventing build of glibc. This one is a nested function too, so I suppose that is the real issue. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21457
[Bug target/21397] -march selects wrong arm_tune flags
--- Additional Comments From rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 23:47 --- The -march flag is not supposed to alter the tuning. Use -mtune or -mcpu, as appropriate, if you want to do that. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21397
[Bug c++/21455] type 'X' is not a base type for type 'X' in pointer to member conversion
--- Additional Comments From pluto at agmk dot net 2005-05-08 23:47 ---
reduced testcase:
class A;
typedef bool (A::*FuncPtr)();
class B {
public:
FuncPtr foo() const { return fp1; }
FuncPtr bar() const { return fp2; }
private:
FuncPtr fp1, fp2;
};
In member function 'bool (A::* B::bar() const)()':
error: type 'A' is not a base type for type 'A'
error:in pointer to member conversion
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21455
[Bug c++/21455] type 'X' is not a base type for type 'X' in pointer to member conversion
-- What|Removed |Added Attachment #8840 is|0 |1 obsolete|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21455
[Bug c++/21455] type 'X' is not a base type for type 'X' in pointer to member conversion
-- What|Removed |Added CC||mmazur at kernel dot pl http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21455
[Bug c++/21455] [4.0/4.1 Regression] type 'X' is not a base type for type 'X' in pointer to member conversion
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08
23:56 ---
Confirmed, reduced testcase:
class XMLFile;
typedef bool (XMLFile::*ParserFunctionPtr)();
struct ParserElement
{
ParserFunctionPtr getPreFunc() const { return preFunc; }
ParserFunctionPtr getPostFunc() const { return postFunc; }
ParserFunctionPtr preFunc;
ParserFunctionPtr postFunc;
};
This has been failing since "3.5.0 20040909".
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Keywords||rejects-valid
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-05-08 23:56:24
date||
Summary|type 'X' is not a base type |[4.0/4.1 Regression] type
|for type 'X' in pointer to |'X' is not a base type for
|member conversion |type 'X' in pointer to
||member conversion
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21455
[Bug tree-optimization/15838] "Inline" value of static struct
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-08 23:57 --- so closing as fixed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15838
[Bug tree-optimization/3713] Pointers to functions or member functions are not folded or inlined
-- Bug 3713 depends on bug 15838, which changed state. Bug 15838 Summary: "Inline" value of static struct http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15838 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3713
[Bug c/21457] ICE building glibc 2.3.5 nptl in gen_subprogram_die at dwarf2out.c:10913
-- What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21457
[Bug c/21457] ICE building glibc 2.3.5 nptl in gen_subprogram_die at dwarf2out.c:10913
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-09 00:03 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 16676 *** -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21457
[Bug debug/16676] [3.4 Regression] ICE in gen_subprogram_die with nested functions
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-09 00:03 --- *** Bug 21457 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added CC||benh at kernel dot crashing ||dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16676
[Bug c++/21454] const array doesn't live in the rodata section in C++
-- What|Removed |Added CC||pluto at agmk dot net http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21454
Re: gcc 4.0.0 on amd64: problem with -O2?
On May 8, 2005, at 4:17 PM, Harald Dunkel wrote: Falk Hueffner wrote: It doesn't know that. The warning is for the *creation* of the type-punned pointer, which is still perfectly fine. Gcc is too stupid to notice whether you actually dereference it. Yup. There are billions of this constructs in everbodies and his moms source files. By now (< 4.0.0) this did not hurt. That is not true, this has been an issue for people since 3.0.x (and also for 2.95, not 2.95.1 though). Just we did not do as much optimization as before as we do now. -- Pinski
[Bug c++/21454] const array doesn't live in the rodata section in C++
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-09 00:16 --- Confirmed. -- What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-05-09 00:16:12 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21454
[Bug rtl-optimization/15248] [4.0 Regression] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory
--- Additional Comments From mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-05-09 00:20 --- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] Reload may generate stores to read-only memory ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > --- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-07 > 16:52 --- > >>I don't know that I'm in a position to make a good decision here, but I >>do agree with Jeff -- it would be a lot more compelling to make the >>change if there was actually a demonstrable problem -- especially coming >>from non-synthetic code. > > > I presume you'd like to have a testcase that fails with 4.0.x? Because I can > hardly think of a more demonstrable problem than this one: Jeff's analysis for > 4.1.x was exactly the same as mine for 3.3.x and nothing has changed in the > code. Yes, a 4.0 testcase was what I had in mind. If you don't think it's easy to come up with one, but you are sure that people are likely to run into this bug, let me know. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
[Bug debug/16676] [3.4 Regression] ICE with nested functions and -g1, blocks glibc
--- Additional Comments From benh at kernel dot crashing dot org 2005-05-09 00:29 --- Note that the use of -g1 on glibc NPTL build is a debian rule, I don't know if anybody else does that and I don't know why they do that, some obscure comment seem to imply it is to get unwind informations. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16676
[Bug tree-optimization/21458] New: VRP does not remove a conditional in a loop
Consider
extern void g (void);
extern void bar (int);
int
foo (int a)
{
int i;
for (i = 1; i < 100; i++)
{
if (i)
g ();
}
/* Force VRP to run. */
if (a)
bar (a);
}
VRP does not remove the first "if" statement.
--
Summary: VRP does not remove a conditional in a loop
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: kazu at cs dot umass dot edu
CC: dnovillo at redhat dot com,gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot
org,steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21458
[Bug fortran/21459] New: Fortran runtime error: Unexpected end of format string
Consider the following test code
program format_string
implicit none
character(len=*), parameter :: rform='(F15.5)', &
cform="(' (', F15.5, ',' F15.5, ') ')"
call print_a_number(cform)
contains
subroutine print_a_number(style)
character(len=*) :: style
write(*, style) cmplx(0.0, 0.0)
end subroutine print_a_number
end program format_string
This program compiles fine. But gives a runtime error.
$gfortran-20050507-1 -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i486-linux
Configured with: ../src/configure -v
--enable-languages=c,c++,java,f95,objc,ada,treelang
--prefix=/usr/lib/gcc-snapshot --enable-shared --with-system-zlib --disable-nls
--program-suffix=-20050507-1 --enable-__cxa_atexit
--enable-libstdcxx-allocator=mt --enable-clocale=gnu --enable-libstdcxx-debug
--enable-java-gc=boehm --enable-java-awt=gtk --enable-mpfr --disable-werror
--disable-werror i486-linux
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.1.0 20050507 (experimental)
$gfortran format_string.f90 -o format_string
$./a.out
At line 10 of file format_string.f90
Fortran runtime error: Unexpected end of format string
(' (',
^
I am using Debian Sid distribution, gcc-snapshot 20050507-1 package.
The above program compiles and runs fine with Absoft Fortran 90/95 compiler and
with intel fortran compiler 8.1 Build 20040921. The interaction with Absoft
compiler looks as follows
$f90 format_string.f90
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/work/fortran/gfortran_bugs 28 527 11:21 PM
$./a.out
(0.0,0.0)
--
Summary: Fortran runtime error: Unexpected end of format string
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: kamaraju at gmail dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21459
[Bug c/16676] [3.4 Regression] ICE with nested functions and -g1, blocks glibc
-- What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |critical Component|debug |c http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16676
[Bug libfortran/21459] Fortran runtime error: Unexpected end of format string
-- What|Removed |Added Component|fortran |libfortran http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21459
[Bug tree-optimization/21460] New: Internal compiler error in calc_dfs_tree on valid code
When compiling a C++ file, gcc 4.0.0 and 4.0.1 20050507 prerelease report an internal compiler error: > /gcc-test/bin/g++ ice.cpp -O2 ice.cpp: In constructor 'SomeException::SomeException(const char*, ...)': ice.cpp:21: internal compiler error: in calc_dfs_tree, at dominance.c:376 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. > /gcc-test/bin/g++ -v Using built-in specs. Target: powerpc-linux Configured with: ../gcc-4.0-20050507/configure --enable-languages=c,c++ -- prefix=/gcc-test --with-gnu-as --with-gnu-ld --with-system-zlib --without- included-gettext --enable-threads=posix --enable-haifa --enable-sjlj-exceptions powerpc-linux Thread model: posix gcc version 4.0.1 20050507 (prerelease) When not using -O2 or when using -O2 -msoft-float, the ICE isn't reported. This points to /* Save FP registers if needed. */ if (DEFAULT_ABI == ABI_V4 && TARGET_HARD_FLOAT && TARGET_FPRS && ! no_rtl && next_cum.fregno <= FP_ARG_V4_MAX_REG) branch in gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c whose contents causes the problem (directly or indirectly). I have managed to create a minimal testcase for the problem and will attach it to this report. -- Summary: Internal compiler error in calc_dfs_tree on valid code Product: gcc Version: 4.0.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: tree-optimization AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: gcc-bugzilla at antony dot heightanxiety dot com CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: powerpc-unknown-linux GCC host triplet: powerpc-unknown-linux GCC target triplet: powerpc-unknown-linux http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21460
[Bug tree-optimization/21460] Internal compiler error in calc_dfs_tree on valid code
--- Additional Comments From gcc-bugzilla at antony dot heightanxiety dot com 2005-05-09 04:57 --- Created an attachment (id=8843) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8843&action=view) The isolated snippet causing the problem I'm including the .cpp file and not the .i file since it doesn't need to be preprocessed. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21460
