Please treat the GCC 4.0 branch as frozen as of this time. All
non-documentation changes now need my explicit approval.
I'll spin prerelease bits soon.
Thanks,
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(916) 791-8304
Hi, fromm gcc-testresults here is where we stand on 4.0/Ada after
the tree-sra Ada patch. I'm looking for results for platforms where I
believe Ada could work:
powerpc-linux
powerpc-darwin
x86-cygwin (may be in -mno-cygwin too?)
sparc-solaris
So if you have access to one of these platforms, plea
> no FAIL:
> sparc-linux
> s390-linux
> x86-linux
sparc-sun-solaris is clean, for all supported versions of Solaris, except
maybe 10.
> x86_64-linux
> FAIL: cxa5012
I think this one is an artifact (sometimes an error is reported when
chopping/building/running the test). x86_64-linux is clean
On Sat, 2005-04-09 at 11:54 +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > no FAIL:
> > sparc-linux
> > s390-linux
> > x86-linux
>
> sparc-sun-solaris is clean, for all supported versions of Solaris, except
> maybe 10.
Ok thanks for the information!
> > x86_64-linux
> > FAIL: cxa5012
>
> I think this one is
> Ok thanks for the information!
I'll post formal results for Solaris 2.5.1, 2.6, 7, 8 and 9 later today.
> > > x86_64-linux
> > > FAIL: cxa5012
> >
> > I think this one is an artifact (sometimes an error is reported when
> > chopping/building/running the test). x86_64-linux is clean too.
>
> U
Hi,
We would like to know if there is some way to find the true and false
branches of a conditional jump in RTL. In the tree CFG, we have two
edge flags for that, EDGE_{TRUE,FALSE}_VALUE, but those flags have no
meaning for the RTL CFG. So our question is, is there some other way
to tell what ed
I agree, in principle. The C++ FE should not set TREE_READONLY on
variables that require dynanmic initialization. Until now, that's not
been a problem, and it does result in better code. But, it's now
becoming a problem, and we have others way to get good code coming down
It would be good to have a way to mark things as "write once, then
readonly" IMO. It's very common, and you can do some of the same
optimizations on such things that you can do on true Readonly objects.
We used to do this in RTL and it caused all sorts of problems.
One is that suppos
> Hi,
>
> We would like to know if there is some way to find the true and false
> branches of a conditional jump in RTL. In the tree CFG, we have two
> edge flags for that, EDGE_{TRUE,FALSE}_VALUE, but those flags have no
> meaning for the RTL CFG. So our question is, is there some other way
> t
> > FAIL: cxa5012
>
> I think this one is an artifact (sometimes an error is reported when
> chopping/building/running the test). x86_64-linux is clean too.
Unfortunately this is a real core dump while running the test on my
machine (glibc-2.3.3-118 SuSE 9.2) at -O2 or
==+
| 4.1.0 20050409 (experimental) (sparc-unknown-linux-gnu) GCC error: |
| tree check: accessed operand 2 of view_convert_expr with 1 operands |
|in visit_assignment, at tree-ssa-ccp.c:1074 |
| Error detected at make.adb:7263:23
Jan Hubicka wrote:
Hi,
We would like to know if there is some way to find the true and false
branches of a conditional jump in RTL. In the tree CFG, we have two
edge flags for that, EDGE_{TRUE,FALSE}_VALUE, but those flags have no
meaning for the RTL CFG. So our question is, is there some other
Christian Joensson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> +===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
> | 4.1.0 20050409 (experimental) (sparc-unknown-linux-gnu) GCC error: |
> | tree check: accessed operand 2 of view_convert_expr with 1 operands
On Saturday 09 April 2005 9:02 am, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> Please treat the GCC 4.0 branch as frozen as of this time. All
> non-documentation changes now need my explicit approval.
I've reported a bug on gcc-help list, but nooone seem to be interested in.
That's really sad, because I rely on this
It contains this line:
orig_lhs = TREE_OPERAND (orig_lhs, 1);
But orig_lhs is a VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR which has only one operand.
That's certainly a typo. But I recall that that code has to go anyway.
On Sat, Apr 09, 2005 at 04:27:52PM +0200, Christian Parpart wrote:
> I've reported a bug on gcc-help list, but nooone seem to be interested in.
>
Bugs ought to be reported at http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla.
Diego.
On Sat, Apr 09, 2005 at 12:18:09PM +0200, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> Unfortunately this is a real core dump while running the test on my
> machine (glibc-2.3.3-118 SuSE 9.2) at -O2 or -O0, and this does not
> reproduce under GDB, see below. I don't know about valgrind on x86_64,
> is it available?
No
On Saturday 09 April 2005 4:42 pm, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 09, 2005 at 04:27:52PM +0200, Christian Parpart wrote:
> > I've reported a bug on gcc-help list, but nooone seem to be interested
> > in.
>
> Bugs ought to be reported at http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla.
I was asking a bit shy on th
Ok the bug is trivial once I peek into the core dump:
(gdb) f 0
#0 0x004212e5 in cxa5012__test_block__discrete_pack__value.779
() at a-nudira.adb:237
237 while Coded_State (Stop) /= ',' loop
(gdb) l
232 Start : Positive := Coded_State'First;
233 Stop : Posit
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 08:08:15AM -0400, Geert Bosch wrote:
> These issues can be fixed by not adding/subtracting 0.5, but Pred (0.5).
An interesting idea. Usually I see libraries switch to chopped
rounding instead, which also avoids the problem described.
r~
> Richard Kenner wrote:
>>It would be good to have a way to mark things as "write once, then
>>readonly" IMO. It's very common, and you can do some of the same
>>optimizations on such things that you can do on true Readonly objects.
>
> We used to do this in RTL and it caused all sorts
Ok the bug is trivial once I peek into the core dump:
No, you're missing it, I think. When you're in GDB, what it does is
raises an explicit constraint error due to Int'Value, which is what's
expected. However, for some reason when not under GDB, the handling
of the exception causes some SIG
On Sat, 2005-04-09 at 13:22 -0400, Richard Kenner wrote:
> Ok the bug is trivial once I peek into the core dump:
>
> No, you're missing it, I think. When you're in GDB, what it does is
> raises an explicit constraint error due to Int'Value, which is what's
> expected. However, for some reaso
Laurent GUERBY writes:
> Hi, fromm gcc-testresults here is where we stand on 4.0/Ada after
> the tree-sra Ada patch. I'm looking for results for platforms where I
> believe Ada could work:
>
> powerpc-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-03/msg01875.html
Thanks, Andreas Jaeger just sent a more recent run:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-04/msg00631.html
=== acats Summary ===
# of expected passes2320
# of unexpected failures0
Native configuration is powerpc64-suse-linux-gnu
Just perfect :)
Laurent
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-03/msg01875.html
A bit outdated. Most of them should be gone as of today.
--
Eric Botcazou
On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 17:57 -0700, James E Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 17:34, Diego Novillo wrote:
> > Another thing, has our library code base (libjava, libstdc++)
> > grown significantly lately?
>
> I was doing full builds, except for Ada. I should have mentioned that.
> Ada doesn't
y/work/gcc/version-head/gcc/ada/errout.adb -o ada/errout.o
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.1.0 20050409 (experimental) (i686-pc-linux-gnu) GCC error: |
| tree check: accessed operand 2 of view_convert_expr with 1 operands |
|in visi
Laurent GUERBY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Should I replace ",1" by ",0" or is something more ambitious needed?
I tried that on ia64, and the result was a miscompiled stage2 compiler.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nü
Snapshot gcc-4.0-20050409 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.0-20050409/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.0 CVS branch
with the following options: -rgcc-ss-4_0-20050409
You'll
al definitions of the old
+ statement will likely disappear from the IL. Mark them to have
+ their SSA form updated. */
+ FOR_EACH_SSA_TREE_OPERAND (def, stmt, iter, SSA_OP_VMAYDEF)
+mark_sym_for_renaming (SSA_NAME_VAR (def));
return true;
}
Index: testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/20050
fomit-frame-pointer -gnatpg -gnata -I--I. -Iada
> -I/home/guerby/work/gcc/version-head/gcc/ada
> /home/guerby/work/gcc/version-head/gcc/ada/errout.adb -o ada/errout.o
> +===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
> | 4.1.0 20050409 (exper
32 matches
Mail list logo
