--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-27 07:46 ---
Subject: Bug 39309
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Feb 27 07:45:47 2009
New Revision: 144462
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=144462
Log:
2009-02-27 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/39309
* m
--- Comment #9 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-27 07:40 ---
Andreas, the patch you posted on gcc-patches is okay. Thanks very much!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39172
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-27 06:45 ---
Subject: Bug 39309
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Feb 27 06:44:59 2009
New Revision: 144461
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=144461
Log:
2009-02-27 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/39309
*
--- Comment #4 from rob1weld at aol dot com 2009-02-27 06:08 ---
# uname -m
x86_64
In addition to the lack of "-L..." this is also a 'spec' issue :
Original (head -2 ../lto_build/prev-gcc/specs) :
*asm:
%{v:-V} %{Qy:} %{!Qn:-Qy} %{n} %{T} %{Ym,*} %{Yd,*} %{Wa,*:%*} %{m32:--32}
%{m64:
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-02-27 03:37 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > Created an attachment (id=17368)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17368&action=view) [edit]
> > A patch
> > Does this patch make sense?
> It
--- Comment #3 from Joey dot ye at intel dot com 2009-02-27 02:53 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Created an attachment (id=17368)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17368&action=view) [edit]
> A patch
> Does this patch make sense?
It works fine.
--
http://gcc.gnu.or
--- Comment #3 from rob1weld at aol dot com 2009-02-27 01:29 ---
I'm running Debian Lenny 5.0 released 14 Feb 2009, with updates.
# ld --version
GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.18.0.20080103
# as --version
GNU assembler (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.18.0.20080103
Simply tossing in
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38944
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
Component|c |middle-end
h
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-27 00:34 ---
What as version are you using? This looks like a bug in the GNU binutils
rather than in GCC.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39317
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-27 00:33 ---
This is unrelated to those bug reports.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39317
# uname -a
Linux debian 2.6.26-1-amd64 #1 SMP Sat Jan 10 19:55:48 UTC 2009 x86_64
GNU/Linux
# gcc/xgcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc/xgcc
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../lto_trunk/configure --prefix=/usr/local/lto
--enable-languages=lto,c++ --enable-multilib --enab
--- Comment #1 from karl dot miller dot km at gmail dot com 2009-02-27
00:25 ---
The same code and cmd line arguments compile without problems for me.
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-suse-linux
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --infodir=/usr/share/info
--mandir
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-27 00:00 ---
The fortran front-end needs to be able to tell the middle-end that the function
cannot be recursive and then the middle-end needs to use that info.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 23:59 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
--- Comment #1 from rob1weld at aol dot com 2009-02-26 23:44 ---
This Bug Report is about the failure to detect that the proper
headers and libraries are present _before_ building can be attempted.
Even after the extra effort to install libelf (to ensure that
the scripts would work) st
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major |normal
Component|c |target
http:
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 23:35 ---
BB is a copy acronym in computer science. And Basic block is a common term in
compilers. Really this warning is not useful for most users anyways.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 23:34 ---
This is not a bug in GCC, GCC does not provide dlopen.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #11 from regehr at cs dot utah dot edu 2009-02-26 23:29 ---
Subject: Re: [avr] ICE on function attribute syntax for
main()
Great!
John
jxyang at cs dot utah dot edu wrote:
> --- Comment #10 from jxyang at cs dot utah dot edu 2009-02-26 23:24
> ---
> Created an
--- Comment #10 from jxyang at cs dot utah dot edu 2009-02-26 23:24 ---
Created an attachment (id=17370)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17370&action=view)
patch for bug 34299
DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME has a side effect of setting assembler_name for functions
if that attri
--- Comment #6 from rob1weld at aol dot com 2009-02-26 23:01 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Any chance you could narrow this down? The revision stated as problematic has
> nothing to do with libstdc++. The file implicated, cfenv, has not had a change
> in 3 months.
>
> Was this a tempor
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 23:01 ---
Actually more likely the locale is UTF8 and not the codepage which was being
thought of.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from hpa at zytor dot com 2009-02-26 22:56 ---
Any interest in this at all? This is a major missing feature for me at the
moment.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34455
It is my Request for Enhancement that the 'Configury' detect if
there is enough elf support to build gcc - in a similar manner that
gmp, mpfr, PPL and CLooG are tested for.
The configury is waiting until it gets past configuring the gcc directory,
and even detecting that gelf.h is not present, bef
--- Comment #13 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 22:01 ---
Subject: Bug 39308
Author: spop
Date: Thu Feb 26 22:00:53 2009
New Revision: 144455
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=144455
Log:
2009-02-26 Sebastian Pop
PR middle-end/39308
*
--- Comment #12 from il dot basso dot buffo at gmail dot com 2009-02-26
20:57 ---
Affirmative, this patch seems to do the trick. Thanks!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39308
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-02-26
20:32 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-complex-1.c
> --- Comment #7 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2009-02-26 09:57 ---
> In slp-7.c all the three loops get vectorized, including the loop that
> re
--- Comment #10 from sebpop at gmail dot com 2009-02-26 20:10 ---
Subject: Re: ICE when compiling with -O[s123]
-floop-interchange
Hi,
Can you try this patch. It should fix your problem. I will bootstrap
and test the
patch and send it for review.
Thanks,
Sebastian Pop
--
A
Hi,
Can you try this patch. It should fix your problem. I will bootstrap
and test the
patch and send it for review.
Thanks,
Sebastian Pop
--
AMD - GNU Tools
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 13:46, il dot basso dot buffo at gmail dot com
wrote:
>
>
> --- Comment #9 from il dot basso dot buffo at
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-02-26 20:00 ---
Fixed.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #7 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 19:59 ---
Subject: Bug 37789
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Feb 26 19:59:38 2009
New Revision: 144451
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=144451
Log:
gcc/cp
2009-02-26 H.J. Lu
PR c++/37789
* parser.
--- Comment #9 from il dot basso dot buffo at gmail dot com 2009-02-26
19:46 ---
Thanks, Sebastian. I followed your directions, except I used -O1 instead of
-O2. Here's the backtrace:
#0 is_gimple_val (t=0x0) at ../.././gcc/gimple.c:2853
#1 0x0055dec4 in force_gimple_operand
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-02-26 19:36 ---
Jason, can you review the patch at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-02/msg01073.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #8 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 19:22 ---
I tried with the following compiler:
$ ./xgcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../configure --enable-languages=c,fortran --disable-bootstrap
: (reconfigured) : (reconfigured)
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 19:22 ---
Also on i386-apple-darwin9.6.0 the FPEs are thrown correctly.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39314
--- Comment #7 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 19:20 ---
Your testcase works for me too on trunk rev 144404.
I suggest that you do the following:
$ gdb build/gcc/cc1
(gdb) run -O2 -floop-interchange .../huffman.c.pre
...
(gdb) bt
and report the backtrace you get on the ICE
--- Comment #6 from il dot basso dot buffo at gmail dot com 2009-02-26
18:53 ---
Richard, can you post your `gcc -v` so I can make sure my config options are
the same as yours? Also, are you using cloog-ppl from git? I am using 0.15
from ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/infrastructure/ .
-
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 18:45 ---
Fixed on trunk.
I am not going to fix 4.2 but will do 4.3 in a few days.
Cheers
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 18:44 ---
Subject: Bug 39295
Author: pault
Date: Thu Feb 26 18:43:50 2009
New Revision: 19
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=19
Log:
2009-02-26 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/39295
* int
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 18:05 ---
Or maybe libc's acos is broken In which case this is not a GCC bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39314
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 18:03 ---
Confirm: Here, I get the same result with -m64 on Linux (NaN and no SIGFPE),
but with -m32 (with both -mfpmath=sse and -mfpmath=387) I get the SIGFPE.
The FPE settings are used in libgfortran/config/*; maybe fpu-387.
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-02-26 17:13 ---
Created an attachment (id=17368)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17368&action=view)
A patch
Does this patch make sense?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39315
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-02-26 17:01 ---
Gcc 4.3 generates aligned move since it doesn't check the
alignment attribute.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39315
--- Comment #5 from il dot basso dot buffo at gmail dot com 2009-02-26
17:00 ---
Vanilla SVN, no patching. Still getting ICE segfault.
./configure --prefix=/usr/local
--bindir=/usr/local/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-bin/4.4.0-pre
--includedir=/usr/local/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.0
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39315
[...@gnu-6 pr]$ cat x.c
typedef float __m128 __attribute__ ((__vector_size__ (16), __may_alias__));
extern void bar (__m128 *);
void
foo (__m128 *x)
{
__m128 b = *x;
bar (&b);
}
[...@gnu-6 pr]$ make x.s
/export/build/gnu/gcc-work/build-x86_64-linux/gcc/xgcc
-B/export/build/gnu/gcc-work/build-x8
--- Comment #1 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 16:56 ---
Created an attachment (id=17367)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17367&action=view)
Fix for is_member_function_pointer and GCC
Rather, the test should pass, but we need to fix is_member_function_po
--- Comment #12 from law at redhat dot com 2009-02-26 16:53 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression] GCSE-optimization
causes enormous binary size increase (~20 times !)
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #10 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-21 16:09
> ---
--- Comment #8 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-26 15:48 ---
Subject: Re: libada parsing of multilib options
I'll ping Marcello Presulli to submit his patch.
Paolo
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39172
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 15:45 ---
Sorry, forgot to specify the target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 15:35 ---
What target?
Works for me on FreeBSD.
laptop:kargl[23] ~/work/bin/gfortran -static -o z -ffpe-trap=invalid j.f90
laptop:kargl[24] ./z
Floating exception (core dumped)
laptop:kargl[25] cat j.f90
real :: x = 1.0
print
The following produces an FPE when compiled with -ffpe-trap=invalid:
real :: x = 1.0
print *, sqrt(-1.0*x)
However, using acos or asin does not:
real :: x = 1.0
print *, acos(5.0*x)
print *, asin(5.0*x)
Instead it just prints out "NaN". The FPE is missing both in 4.3 and on trunk.
--
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 15:10 ---
BOZ are allowed in data statements only in Fortran 95.
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 15:09 ---
*** Bug 39313 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39312
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 15:09 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 39312 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu
2009-02-26 15:09 ---
Subject: Re: parameter (constant) and initialization with hex values
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 02:59:05PM -, rvatne at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> running:
> >gfortran -g -std=f95 -ffree-form -fra
--- Comment #2 from rvatne at gmail dot com 2009-02-26 14:59 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> You need to give some details, including a small program,
> the compiler command line you used, and the output of
> gfortran -v.
>
> Because it works for me.
>
> laptop:kargl[6] cat > a.f
>
How can initialization of a parameter (constant) with hex values be done?
I.e. I would like to write "parameter (xx = z'ff')"
or
integer, parameter :: zz=z'022'
but the compiler complains over "BOZ used outside a data statement"
--
Summary: parameter (constant) and initialization w
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 14:42 ---
You need to give some details, including a small program,
the compiler command line you used, and the output of
gfortran -v.
Because it works for me.
laptop:kargl[6] cat > a.f
program z
integer j
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 14:40 ---
Still works for me. I suggest you file a bug with Gentoo, they may have local
patches applied.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39308
How can initialization of a parameter (constant) with hex values be done?
I.e. I would like to write "parameter (xx = z'ff')"
or
integer, parameter :: zz=z'022'
but the compiler complains over "BOZ used outside a data statement"
--
Summary: parameter (constant) and initialization w
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 14:28 ---
In C signed overflow invokes undefined behavior so the compiler assumes signed
operations do not overflow. Use -fwrapv or -fno-strict-overflow if you like
to program in DWIM-C.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from il dot basso dot buffo at gmail dot com 2009-02-26
14:27 ---
$ gcc -O1 -floop-interchange -c huffman.c.pre
huffman.c: In function 'BZ2_hbCreateDecodeTables':
huffman.c:170: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocesse
Sorry, I'm unable to figure out how to fill in "Host triplet", "Traget
triplet", and "Build triplet". I only have one triplet: "i486-linux-gnu".
You'll find the detailed output of "gcc -v -save-temps -O2 -o foo foo.c" below.
--
The following code worked fine with gcc-3.4 and g++-3.4 but
not wit
In the test file
libstdc++-v3/testsuite/tr1/4_metaprogramming/is_member_function_pointer/value.cc,
the test
VERIFY( (test_category(true)) );
should not PASS IMO.
It passes today because of a bug in gcc. More on this in some comments to come
below.
Why shouldn't it PASS ?
Consider:
struct remove_
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 13:17 ---
Created an attachment (id=17366)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17366&action=view)
Draft patch (untested, not even compiled)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39309
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 12:27 ---
This is the same as PR20896, isn't it? Maybe I should pick that up once
more
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #7 from schwab at suse dot de 2009-02-26 11:07 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> That's fine, or you can probably add a...@awk@ in
> gcc/ada/gcc-interface/Makefile.in. That was the patch I was meaning to
> test.
I agree, this is a much simpler patch. Unfortunately there is mo
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 10:22 ---
Confirmed.
This scared the pants off me by apparently causing regressions and then a build
failure in libgomp.
Cheers
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 10:21 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Not fixed on the branch. If you don't want to fix it there please adjust
> the target milestone appropriately.
>
Duuuh!
No, that's fine. I'll give it a few days on trunk and then fix it
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 10:11 ---
Fixed on alias-improvements branch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39299
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 10:11 ---
Subject: Bug 39299
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Feb 26 10:10:52 2009
New Revision: 16
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=16
Log:
2009-02-26 Richard Guenther
PR tree-optimization/
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 10:05 ---
Works for me. What is the ICE?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2009-02-26 09:57 ---
In slp-7.c all the three loops get vectorized, including the loop that requires
vector multiplication for shorts. This patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-07/msg00044.html added ARM to
vect_int_mult, but not to
In order to not trigger a compilation cascade, gfortran only overwrites a .mod
file when its MD5 sum has changed.
Seemingly, the mod-file versioning has the side effect that the MOD file is not
overwritten if there are no other changes but the version number, which causes
the version-mismatch erro
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 09:37 ---
Not fixed on the branch. If you don't want to fix it there please adjust
the target milestone appropriately.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 09:34 ---
Fixed on trunk.
Thanks for the report, Richard
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #11 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-26 09:12 ---
I remember seeing this kind of insertion in very old GCCs too (inserting all
sort of loads at the end of every branch of a switch statement). I like
Steven's patch, even though it's a bit brute force.
--
http://gcc.gn
--- Comment #9 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-26 09:09 ---
comment #6 suggests that it is at least a regression *from 4.2 to 4.3*?
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #25 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 08:26
---
> Also, you can have the same problem with this kind of code without threads.
> Imagine, for example, if the 'shared_variable' may be in read-only memory and
> 'can_write' indicates this case.
Then it must be de
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 08:16
---
*** Bug 39306 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 08:16
---
> fstack-check is known to be broken on x86 GNU/Linux, see PR 13757.
Yes, the current implementation is non-functional on x86{-64}/Linux.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 13757 ***
--
ebotcaz
84 matches
Mail list logo
