[Bug fortran/40011] Problems with -fwhole-file

--- Comment #20 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2009-05-25 06:13 --- (In reply to comment #19) > It's good news that cp2k is now OK - did the performance improve? I didn't check that, I suspect that, since everything is module based, it needs the stuff for module procedure inlining first

[Bug middle-end/40240] [4.5 regression] ICE in execute_cse_reciprocals, at tree-ssa-math-opts.c:469

-- jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0 Version|4.4.0 |4.5.0 http://gcc.

[Bug middle-end/40240] New: [4.5 regression] ICE in execute_cse_reciprocals, at tree-ssa-math-opts.c:469

current trunk (version 147837, known good is 147824) ICEs on CP2K: /data/vondele/gcc_bench/cp2k/makefiles/../src/realspace_grid_types.F: In function 'rs_pw_transfer_replicated': /data/vondele/gcc_bench/cp2k/makefiles/../src/realspace_grid_types.F:583: internal compiler error: in execute_cse_recipr

[Bug fortran/35732] -fbounds-check: LHS/RHS size mismatch: Misleading error message

--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-25 03:07 --- Subject: Bug 35732 Author: jvdelisle Date: Mon May 25 03:07:00 2009 New Revision: 147842 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=147842 Log: 2009-05-24 Jerry DeLisle Dominique Dhumie

[Bug fortran/39872] Bounds check off by one

--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-25 03:07 --- Subject: Bug 39872 Author: jvdelisle Date: Mon May 25 03:07:00 2009 New Revision: 147842 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=147842 Log: 2009-05-24 Jerry DeLisle Dominique Dhumie

[Bug target/40235] -mstackrealign causes internal compiler error on x86_64

--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-05-25 01:53 --- (In reply to comment #3) > Created an attachment (id=17912) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17912&action=view) [edit] > patch > > The mechanical patch that fixes the failure. However - do we need

[Bug target/40171] GCC does not pass -mtune and -march options to assembler!

--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-25 00:55 --- (In reply to comment #2) > This is very odd? What is the assembler doing that the compiler isn't? different processors have better nops for different sizes. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40171

[Bug target/40171] GCC does not pass -mtune and -march options to assembler!

--- Comment #2 from sabre at nondot dot org 2009-05-25 00:46 --- This is very odd? What is the assembler doing that the compiler isn't? -- sabre at nondot dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug c++/40239] New: Aggregate initialization requires copy constructor

GCC 4.4.0 (and earlier) requires a copy constructor for elements that are not explicitly initialized using a non-empty aggregate initializer list. Thus the following fails struct B { B() { } private: B(B const&); }; struct A { int a; B b; }; int main() { A a = { 0 }; } main.cpp: In function

[Bug target/40171] GCC does not pass -mtune and -march options to assembler!

--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 21:17 --- Confirmed. But properly supporting this is a bit of a hassle because we need to support assemblers other than GNU as. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |

[Bug tree-optimization/40238] [4.5 Regression] ICE in gimple_verify_flow_info, at tree-cfg.c:4603

--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 21:14 --- Confirmed. Ira, another case of a stale bb->aux field after SLP vectorization. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug c/40238] ICE in gimple_verify_flow_info, at tree-cfg.c:4603

--- Comment #1 from marcus at jet dot franken dot de 2009-05-24 20:56 --- Created an attachment (id=17913) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17913&action=view) ahd_bayer.i gcc -c -O3 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40238

[Bug c/40238] New: ICE in gimple_verify_flow_info, at tree-cfg.c:4603

gcc -c -O3 ahd_bayer.i ahd_bayer.i: In function 'xgp_ahd_interpolate': ahd_bayer.i:3: internal compiler error: in gimple_verify_flow_info, at tree-cfg.c:4603 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See for instructions. --

[Bug fortran/36275] Binding label can be any scalar char initialisation expression

--- Comment #8 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 20:08 --- PR38838 has additional testcases: subroutine test() bind(c, name=trim("Hello ")) end and subroutine test() bind(c, name=1_"name") end -- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What

[Bug fortran/38838] BIND(C): Binding name expressions are wrongly rejected

--- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 20:07 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 36275 *** -- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug fortran/36275] Binding label can be any scalar char initialisation expression

--- Comment #7 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 20:07 --- *** Bug 38838 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug target/40235] -mstackrealign causes internal compiler error on x86_64

--- Comment #3 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-05-24 20:06 --- Created an attachment (id=17912) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17912&action=view) patch The mechanical patch that fixes the failure. However - do we need a realignment at all on x86_64? -- http:

[Bug target/40235] -mstackrealign causes internal compiler error on x86_64

--- Comment #2 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-05-24 19:30 --- There is a typo hiding somewhere, we should have "and:DI" instead of "and:SI". Confirmed on 4.3.4. -- ubizjak at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug target/40236] i386: request a single option to turn off all instructions which can cause #TS

--- Comment #4 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-05-24 19:19 --- (In reply to comment #1) > I don't see why adding -mno-mmx is a problem (that disables all of the MMX and > SSE instructions). -mno-mmx will always disabling all of the future subsets > too. No, MMX and SSE are handled se

[Bug c/40237] Internal compiler error building Cuba library

--- Comment #3 from pashev dot igor at gmail dot com 2009-05-24 19:11 --- Good :-) Will upgrade. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40237

[Bug c/37985] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] unsigned char shift lacks "statement with no effect" warning

--- Comment #5 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 19:03 --- Switching the "known to fail" versions around to make this bug appear on the 4.5.0 regression list... maybe this will work. -- tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug c/40237] Internal compiler error building Cuba library

--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 19:00 --- Fixed in at least 4.3.3. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c/40237] Internal compiler error building Cuba library

--- Comment #1 from pashev dot igor at gmail dot com 2009-05-24 18:55 --- Created an attachment (id=17911) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17911&action=view) the preprocessed file gcc -O3 --save-temps -ffast-math -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I./src/common -I. -I. -I./src/divon

[Bug c/40237] New: Internal compiler error building Cuba library

http://www.feynarts.de/cuba/ Cuba 1.6 from 10 of may 2009 # ./configure checking for gcc... gcc checking for C compiler default output file name... a.out checking whether the C compiler works... yes checking whether we are cross compiling... no che

[Bug target/40236] i386: request a single option to turn off all instructions which can cause #TS

--- Comment #3 from hpa at zytor dot com 2009-05-24 18:26 --- I guess I would request that this be added to the documentation. Keep in mind, though, that this should include x87, MMX, SSE, and AVX. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40236

[Bug target/40236] i386: request a single option to turn off all instructions which can cause #TS

--- Comment #2 from hpa at zytor dot com 2009-05-24 18:26 --- If that's the official word, then that's good enough for us. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40236

[Bug target/40236] i386: request a single option to turn off all instructions which can cause #TS

--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 18:22 --- I don't see why adding -mno-mmx is a problem (that disables all of the MMX and SSE instructions). -mno-mmx will always disabling all of the future subsets too. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4023

[Bug target/40236] New: Request a single option to turn off all instructions which can cause #TS

In the Linux kernel, we use (except in certain very restricted contexts) only the subset of the x86 instruction set that can never cause #TS faults and thus doesn't use the FSAVE/FXSAVE/XSAVE state. It appears that we need to add new -mno- options (-mno-sse -mno-sse2 -mno-sse3...) as gcc starts us

[Bug c++/40085] [4.5 Regression] ICE compiling libmudflap.c++/fail24-frag.cxx

--- Comment #4 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 17:22 --- Although this bug doesn't seem to currently trigger on i686 or x86_64 linux, it is still failing on hppa-unknown-linux-gnu. -- danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug tree-optimization/40233] [4.5 Regression] Test failures with "alignment of array elements is greater than element size"

--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 16:13 --- Subject: Bug 40233 Author: rguenth Date: Sun May 24 16:12:58 2009 New Revision: 147835 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=147835 Log: 2009-05-24 Richard Guenther PR middle-end/40233

[Bug tree-optimization/40233] [4.5 Regression] Test failures with "alignment of array elements is greater than element size"

--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 16:13 --- Fixed. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c/40235] -mstackrealign causes internal compiler error on x86_64

--- Comment #1 from olivier dot grisel at ensta dot org 2009-05-24 14:44 --- Created an attachment (id=17910) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17910&action=view) the generated .i tmp file -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40235

[Bug c/40235] New: -mstackrealign causes internal compiler error on x86_64

Compiling the following program named crash_stackrealign.c with content: #include #include int main(void) { float x = 42; return 0; } gives the following error when using the flag -mstackrealign on x86_64 (no problem on i686 or without the mstackrealign flag): ogri...@blackbo

[Bug middle-end/40234] [4.5 Regression] Revision 147829 caused extra failuires

--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 13:49 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 40233 *** -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug tree-optimization/40233] [4.5 Regression] Test failures with "alignment of array elements is greater than element size"

--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 13:49 --- *** Bug 40234 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug middle-end/40234] New: [4.5 Regression] Revision 147829 failed gcc.target/i386/sse-recip-vec.c

On Linux/x86-64, revision 147829: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-05/msg00806.html caused: FAIL: g++.dg/torture/stackalign/eh-alloca-1.C -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer (test for excess errors) FAIL: g++.dg/torture/stackalign/eh-alloca-1.C -O3 -g (test for excess errors) FAIL: g++.dg/torture/sta

[Bug tree-optimization/40233] [4.5 Regression] Test failures with "alignment of array elements is greater than element size"

--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 12:11 --- Testcase: typedef int aligned __attribute__((aligned(64))); struct Frame { aligned i; }; void foo(struct Frame *p) { aligned *q = &p->i; *q = 0; } -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40233

[Bug tree-optimization/40233] [4.5 Regression] Test failures with "alignment of array elements is greater than element size"

--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 11:49 --- Mine. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned

[Bug target/36482] ICE in copyprop_hardreg_forward_1, at regrename.c:1613

--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 11:48 --- Hm, also see PR23424. HP - time to revisit these? -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug target/40220] Compile error after r147534

--- Comment #2 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-05-24 11:48 --- Fixed (I didn't know of the PR so I didn't include it in the changelog; it's r147832). -- bonzini at gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug target/36482] ICE in copyprop_hardreg_forward_1, at regrename.c:1613

--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 11:46 --- PR39685 also looks related, but with a different instruction kind -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36482

[Bug target/36482] cris gcc 4.2.3 -Os causes internal compiler error (-O0 works)

--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 11:43 --- *** Bug 40232 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug target/40232] ICE compiling linux kernel with gcc for cris

--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 11:43 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 36482 *** -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug middle-end/39765] internal compiler error: in copyprop_hardreg_forward_1

--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 11:42 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 36482 *** -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug target/36482] cris gcc 4.2.3 -Os causes internal compiler error (-O0 works)

--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-24 11:42 --- *** Bug 39765 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug tree-optimization/40233] New: Test failures with "alignment of array elements is greater than element size"

The following tests fail with "error: alignment of array elements is greater than element size": FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/stackalign/nested-2.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer (test for excess errors) WARNING: gcc.dg/torture/stackalign/nested-2.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer compilation failed to produce exec

[Bug target/40226] gcc emits bad opcode 'ffreep' even if march=geode

--- Comment #3 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-05-24 09:11 --- (In reply to comment #2) > what's wrong ? no more details were put e.g. here: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37179 This was different problem, with -march=native. And according to [1], -march=geode works O

[Bug rtl-optimization/40086] [4.5 Regression]: cris-elf gfortran.dg/forall_1.f90 -O1 execution

--- Comment #16 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-05-24 08:04 --- Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression]: cris-elf gfortran.dg/forall_1.f90 -O1 execution I'll note that, even though the bug is very rare and no testcase is known in general, it affects every target with delay slots -- so

[Bug target/40232] New: ICE compiling linux kernel with gcc for cris

Hi all, Using gcc 4.3.3 compiling linux kernel 2.6.30-rc6 I get the followig error: CC [M] net/mac80211/mlme.o net/mac80211/mlme.c: In function 'ieee80211_rx_mgmt_assoc_resp': net/mac80211/mlme.c:1445: error: insn does not satisfy its constraints: (insn 1200 259 1201 30 net/mac80211/mlme.c:135