--- Comment #4 from gabriel at vibesec dot com 2010-01-27 07:11 ---
Created an attachment (id=19721)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19721&action=view)
self-contained pre-processed (Sets.ii) in TAR GZ format
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42871
Compile the following c++ code with options -march=armv7-a -mthumb -Os
struct A
{
bool v:1;
};
bool bar();
bool foo(struct A* p)
{
if (p->v)
return true;
return bar();
}
Gcc generates
_Z3fooP1A:
push{r3, lr}
.save {r3, lr}
.LCFI0:
ldrbr3, [r0, #0]@
--- Comment #15 from iwamatsu at nigauri dot org 2010-01-26 23:54 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> (In reply to comment #9)
> > So I took the opportunity to cleanup every other
> > occurrences of the same idioms in the file. OK ?
>
> OK. Thanks!
>
Thanks for your patch!
I confirmed th
--- Comment #1 from meissner at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 23:46
---
Created an attachment (id=19720)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19720&action=view)
Patch to fix my particular problem with builtins-58.c
This patch fixes the particular problem I ran into that
--- Comment #9 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 22:33 ---
The trunk powerpc64-linux --with-cpu=default32 bootstrap died too, this time in
libsupc++/eh_alloc.cc compilation with -m64, again because of .8byte .l...@toc
in .debug_loc.
I'm going to bootstrap/regtest the patches o
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 22:32 ---
We can't inline it. The sorry() is from
#0 sorry (
gmsgid=0x8be6a24 "function %q+F can never be copied because it uses
variable sized variables") at /home/richard/src/trunk/gcc/diagnostic.c:639
#1 0x087dde5e
ble-languages=c,c++ --with-win32-nlsapi=unicode --enable-tls
--d
isable-bootstrap --enable-shared --disable-sjlj-exceptions
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.5.0 20100126 (experimental) (GCC)
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-shared' '-o' 'test.dll' '-v' '-mtune=gene
--- Comment #6 from piotr dot wyderski at gmail dot com 2010-01-26 20:09
---
(In reply to comment #4)
> I assume the original version is also intended to work with non-empty
> captures,
> when operator() is non-static
Yes, that's the purpose of the first two specializations.
But that
--- Comment #2 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-01-26 19:41 ---
Since http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=155917
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42873
--- Comment #2 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-01-26 19:30 ---
Created an attachment (id=19718)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19718&action=view)
different reduced testcase
Reduced from gcc/builtins.c as well
This testcase started failing between r154830 and r154
--- Comment #4 from peter at empeg dot com 2010-01-26 19:29 ---
I get the same error on host=build=x86_64-linux, target=i586-mingw32. At least
in my case, this is a regression in 4.4.3, as 4.4.2 worked fine.
--
peter at empeg dot com changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #1 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-01-26 18:46 ---
Created an attachment (id=19717)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19717&action=view)
reduced testcase
Reduced from gcc/builtins.c
Command line:
gcc -O1 -fcompare-debug -c pr42878.c
--
http://gcc.gn
Command line:
gcc -O1 -fcompare-debug -c testcase.c
Tested revisions:
r156253 - crash
r155920 - crash
r155833 - crash
r155363 - crash
r154886 - crash
r154830 - OK
r153685 - OK
Output:
$ /mnt/svn/gcc-trunk/binary-156253-lto/bin/gcc -O1 -fcompare-debug -c
testcase.c
gcc: testcase.c: -fcompare-debug
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-01-26 18:12
---
My hope is that the problem with canonical types is the same and localized in
the C++0x bits of the front-end, across all the issues of this "family", thus,
to repeat, PR42082 and PR42737 too.
--
paolo dot
--- Comment #4 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-01-26 18:07
---
I assume the original version is also intended to work with non-empty captures,
when operator() is non-static
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42877
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-01-26 17:58
---
The below is enough. I'm adding in CC Jason, in case the fix for these three
open issues turns out to be safe enough for 4.5.0.
//
template struct toff;
template struct toff
{
typedef TR type
--- Comment #26 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 17:44 ---
ping.
Although nick's ChangeLog in
comment #c15
mentiones the "Use for MULTILIB_DEFAULTS" the hunk in comment #22 and #24 did
not end up in svn:
* config/arm/linux-elf.h (TARGET_ENDIAN_DEFAULT): Define based on
TARG
--- Comment #2 from piotr dot wyderski at gmail dot com 2010-01-26 17:35
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> probably a dup of Bug 42082 or Bug 42737
Yes, it could be the case.
BTW, Jason, is the presented way of
discovering of the lambda function's
return type correct in C++0x?
--
ht
--- Comment #1 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-01-26 17:29
---
probably a dup of Bug 42082 or Bug 42737
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42877
gcc-trunk (20100115)
template struct toff;
template struct toff {
typedef TR type;
};
template struct toff {
typedef TR type;
};
template struct toff {
typedef TR type;
};
template void dem(T op) {
typedef typename toff:
--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 17:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=19716)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19716&action=view)
gcc45-s390-delegitimize.patch
And s390 patch I'm bootstrapping/regtesting too.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 17:11 ---
Created an attachment (id=19715)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19715&action=view)
gcc45-ppc-delegitimize.patch
Updated ppc delegitimize patch (after the dwarf2out.c change there is no need
to dup
--- Comment #1 from christophe dot lyon at st dot com 2010-01-26 17:02
---
Created an attachment (id=19714)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19714&action=view)
Sample input code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42876
Hello,
With the attached sample program I would expect aliasing warnings from the
compiler (in function myfunc), which are not produced by GCC 4.4.3, as follows:
$ gcc -Wall -Wextra vbsl.c -o vbsl -O0
[no message]
$ ./vbsl
vec4:
vec[0]=0.00
vec[1]=0.00
vec4:
vec[0]=2.10
vec[1]=2.20
--- Comment #7 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE 2010-01-26
16:38 ---
Subject: Re: testsuite failures
> --- Comment #6 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 16:31 ---
> (In reply to comment #5)
>> I've found that the problem doesn't occur when assembler patch
--- Comment #6 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 16:33 ---
C1x anonymous structures and unions will likely require a fix for this.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4784
--- Comment #14 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 16:32 ---
C1x anonymous structures and unions will likely require a fix for this.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10676
--- Comment #6 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 16:31 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> I've found that the problem doesn't occur when assembler patch 118683-03 is
> installed.
If this issue is fixed, perhaps you could add a note to:
http://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html#x-x
--- Comment #13 from mat at lcs dot mit dot edu 2010-01-26 16:28 ---
This "bug" is causing me difficulty porting from an EDG-based compiler to
gcc-4.4.3. EDG implemented "assignment" and "initialization" as having the
same namespace.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 16:27 ---
Subject: Bug 42685
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jan 26 16:27:34 2010
New Revision: 156252
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156252
Log:
2010-01-26 Richard Guenther
PR rtl-optimization/4
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 16:27 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #12 from mat at lcs dot mit dot edu 2010-01-26 16:25 ---
*** Bug 42875 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
mat at lcs dot mit dot edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from mat at lcs dot mit dot edu 2010-01-26 16:25 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 10676 ***
--
mat at lcs dot mit dot edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #34 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2010-01-26 16:05 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] gcc 4.3.1 cannot compile big function
> The whole early-inlining stuff is made ugly because we jump through hoops
> to handle callgraph cycles where some callees may not yet be in SSA
gcc-4.4.3 lets you statically initialize named fields, and lets you assign to
anonymous union members, but you cannot statically initialize a named member of
an anonymous union. This inconsistency between assignment and initialization
is surprising, and breaks some code I am porting from an EDG-ba
The following testcase fails with:
sorry, unimplemented: function Âfoo can never be copied because it uses
variable sized variables
When compiled with at least -O1. It works fine with GCC 4.4.3.
void __attribute__ ((always_inline))
foo (const unsigned long *addr, unsigned long size)
{
typede
--- Comment #5 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 15:35 ---
I've found that the problem doesn't occur when assembler patch 118683-03 is
installed. If I compare the relocations produced by as from patch 118683-02
with
those produced by patch 118683-03, I find some differences (elf
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 15:15 ---
I have an extremely lame patch that fixes both testcases.
s/INSN_P/NONDEBUG_INSN_P/
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 15:10 ---
Subject: Bug 42806
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jan 26 15:09:43 2010
New Revision: 156249
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156249
Log:
2010-01-26 Richard Guenther
PR middle-end/42806
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 15:10 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Component|tree-optimization |debug
Ever Con
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42872
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de 2010-01-26 14:57 ---
Subject: Re: Revisit std::function for aliasing
issues
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010, paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #12 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-01-26
> 14:37 ---
> Are
--- Comment #12 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-01-26 14:37
---
Are you sure? The std version should be fine, via (remember the std
version is enabled *only* in C++0x mode).
I mean the "depends on" and "blocks" fields.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de 2010-01-26 14:34 ---
Subject: Re: Revisit std::function for aliasing
issues
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010, paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #10 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-01-26
> 14:25 ---
> I'm
--- Comment #10 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-01-26 14:25
---
I'm not completely sure that the tr1 version actually includes indirectly
std::swap. Please check that and in case just add bits/move.h, is enough and
works also in non-C++0x mode.
Otherwise, you are cleared
--- Comment #1 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-01-26 14:19 ---
Created an attachment (id=19713)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19713&action=view)
reduced testcase
Command line:
gcc -O3 -g -fgcse-sm -ftracer pr42873.c -c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug
This can be related to pr41371, but I think it is not duplicate. This one ends
in endless loop, as can be seen from -fdump-rtl-vartrack dumps - there are
about 50 lines periodically repeating.
I thought it's a dup of pr41371, but the compilation (of nonreduced testcase)
didn't finish even after one
--- Comment #5 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 14:12 ---
*** Bug 42820 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 14:12 ---
Indeed.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 42713 ***
--
dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 14:11 ---
Created an attachment (id=19712)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19712&action=view)
gcc45-constant_pool.patch
Patch that cures this issue.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42861
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 14:05 ---
Mine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 14:04 ---
Created an attachment (id=19711)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19711&action=view)
patch
Candidate fix.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42832
--- Comment #1 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2010-01-26 13:55 ---
Testing this:
Index: configure.ac
===
--- configure.ac(revision 156244)
+++ configure.ac(working copy)
@@ -146,7 +146,8 @@ case `echo $GFORTRAN
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 13:49 ---
Removing that special casing of CONSTANT_POOL_ADDRESS_P leads to invalid debug
info, which points to a bug in dwarf2out.c :(, he difference is:
.8byte .LVL7-.Ltext0 # Location list begin address (*.LLST3)
.8byte .LVL
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2010-01-26 13:06:30 |2010-01-26 13:45:02
date||
Targe
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42872
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Summary|"-fcompare-debug failure|[4.5 Regression] "
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 13:30 ---
Because unsplit_all_eh () does sth different for
# BLOCK 2
# PRED: ENTRY (fallthru,exec)
S2::m (this_1(D));
# SUCC: 4 (eh,exec) 3 (fallthru,exec)
# BLOCK 3
# PRED: 2 (fallthru,exec)
:
:
return;
# SU
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-01-26 13:26
---
Please provide a self-contained pre-processed (*.ii) file, per:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/#report
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |bonzini at gnu dot org
|dot org |
On Linux/ia32, revision 156232:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-01/msg00700.html
caused:
FAIL: libgomp.fortran/allocatable1.f90 -O0 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: libgomp.fortran/allocatable1.f90 -O1 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: libgomp.fortran/allocatable1.f90 -O2 (test for excess er
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 12:39 ---
Created an attachment (id=19710)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19710&action=view)
gcc45-ppc64-pr42861.patch
Untested patch that cures this testcase. Not sure if the constant pool special
casing
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 12:36 ---
We decided to do different inlining. Huh.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #33 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 12:33
---
The whole early-inlining stuff is made ugly because we jump through hoops
to handle callgraph cycles where some callees may not yet be in SSA form.
If we do not want to go the route to go into SSA for all functions
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 12:29 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 12:29 ---
Subject: Bug 42250
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jan 26 12:29:09 2010
New Revision: 156244
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156244
Log:
2010-01-26 Richard Guenther
PR tree-optimization/
--- Comment #2 from gabriel at vibesec dot com 2010-01-26 12:28 ---
The error occurs when building ACE (http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/ACE.html)
with gcc 4.4.3
--
gabriel at vibesec dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-01-26 12:24
---
Severity should be "normal" and a testcase is needed to reproduce the problem.
--
jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
Line causing the error:
g++ -fvisibility=hidden -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -W -Wall -Wpointer-arith
-O3 -ggdb -pipe -D_REENTRANT -DACE_HAS_AIO_CALLS -D_GNU_SOURCE
-I/home/gabriel/Vigilance/3rdParty/ace/ACE_wrappers -DACE_HAS_EXCEPTIONS
-D__ACE_INLINE__ -I../../.. -c -o .obj/Sets.o Sets.cpp
g+
--- Comment #9 from andriys at gmail dot com 2010-01-26 12:16 ---
Well, I have finally managed to build the trunk on Windows (mingw32). Now all
test cases work fine for me without any patches (as of revision 156168 at
least). Thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 12:14 ---
Note the http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-01/msg01282.html doesn't
bootstrap on the redhat/gcc-4_4-branch on ppc, while it bootstraps on the trunk
on x86_64-linux and i686-linux and on the branch on those arches
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |rtl-optimization
Keywords||miss
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 12:06 ---
Please check trunk.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Compon
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 12:04 ---
Please tell how you invoked gcc and what version works for you (and what
the correspoding output is).
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #32 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 11:44
---
Finally it finished. -O1:
inline heuristics : 810.76 (63%) usr 4.58 (24%) sys 957.16 (53%) wall
0 kB ( 0%) ggc
integrated RA : 115.69 ( 9%) usr 3.86 (20%) sys 290.09 (16%) wall
5979 kB
--- Comment #31 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 11:35
---
Updated timings and memory:
> ~/bin/maxmem2.sh /usr/bin/time gcc-4.5 -S -o /dev/null lgwam.c
32.62user 1.48system 0:34.41elapsed 99%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
0inputs+0outputs (0major+333822minor)pagefa
--- Comment #4 from mateusz at loskot dot net 2010-01-26 11:00 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> But really you did report it to us rather than Ubuntu first as
> both are modified versions of GCC. (...) And this bug is invalid.
I didn't know really. Thank you for the patient clarification
--- Comment #21 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 10:43
---
New timings (I suppose machines get faster ...):
GCC 4.3.4:
tree PRE : 2.18 (68%) usr 0.04 (33%) sys 2.23 (66%) wall
972 kB ( 7%) ggc
TOTAL : 3.22 0.12
--- Comment #1 from jojelino at gmail dot com 2010-01-26 10:41 ---
Created an attachment (id=19709)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19709&action=view)
given __attribute__ ((dllexport))
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42870
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42861
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42854
testcase
test.cpp
#ifdef FOOBAR
#define ATTRIBUTE __attribute__ ((dllexport))
#else
#define ATTRIBUTE __attribute__ ((visibility ("default")))
#endif
class ATTRIBUTE Sa {
public:
Sa()
{}
~Sa();
};
ATTRIBUTE Sa::~Sa()
{return;}
bool DllMain(void *a,void*b,int)
{
Sa s;
return true;
}
--- Comment #6 from uramakrishna at gmail dot com 2010-01-26 10:08 ---
This PR is perhaps related to http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42644";>PR42644 (equake
problem) and http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42130";>PR42130 (DealII
problem), as it has the 2^32-1 values
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-01-26 10:03
---
With my "user of the compiler" hat, I must say that I was also put off by the 3
new switches... fwiw
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42694
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 09:57 ---
Ugh, I don't like more switches. Instead I would say that using two sqrt
calls instead of one pow call is always profitable if not optimizing for size
and the target has an optab for sqrt.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 09:56 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 09:51 ---
Subject: Bug 42866
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jan 26 09:51:23 2010
New Revision: 156236
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156236
Log:
PR fortran/42866
* omp-low.c (expand_omp_sections
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 09:48 ---
Subject: Bug 42866
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jan 26 09:47:45 2010
New Revision: 156235
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156235
Log:
PR fortran/42866
* omp-low.c (expand_omp_sections
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 09:19 ---
Another link http://openmp.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=7&start=10#p292
(I knew I've raised this issue already before 3.0 standard was released).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42865
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 09:14 ---
Created an attachment (id=19708)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19708&action=view)
gcc45-pr42866.patch
Patch I'm testing.
BTW, the provided testcase is wrong, if more than one section is schedule
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-26 08:15 ---
This is invalid, you violate the restrictions of the copyin clause.
Page 101 talks about POINTER copyin arguments, not ALLOCATABLEs.
See http://openmp.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=639 for more details.
--
jakub at
92 matches
Mail list logo
