--- Comment #1 from carrot at google dot com 2010-03-16 06:23 ---
This optimization uses one less register (the register hold the GOT base), to
get this beneficial the ideal place for it should be before register
allocation.
Usually expand pass generates instructions to load global vari
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-16 06:03 ---
template
X& first_of(X & x1, X & x2) { return x1; }
That is not a specialization which could be deduced. The correct way of
writing the specialization is:
template
X& first_of(X & x1, X & x2) { return x1; }
As the
In the following test program, the specialization of the function-template
"first_of" declares an unused template parameter Y which causes a link error.
This "soft" failure is very hard to debug in functions with more than one
argument and with (levels of) nested templates. It would be helpful to h
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-03-15 23:56
---
If you could reduce it somewhat, it would be appreciated.
Let's add Jason in CC.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from bernds at codesourcery dot com 2010-03-15 23:44 ---
I'm testing a fwprop patch that fixes the problem except for two unnecessary
movs at the end.
--
bernds at codesourcery dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
posix/bug-regex11 and posix/bug-regex20 in the glibc testsuite
fail with gcc-4.5.0 on the trunk. gcc-4.4.x and gcc-4.3.x do
not have this failure.
I'll try to put together a small minimal test case and also see
if i386 has the same problem to help diagnose this.
--
Summary: glibc re
--- Comment #4 from segher at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 22:23 ---
> Works on x86_64-linux.
Works on *-linux except mips.
> mips-linux is neither primary nor secondary, thus a
> candidate for downgrading to P4. Still looks serious so leaving at P3 for
> now.
I tested it on mipsi
--- Comment #6 from gmcgrath at yahoo dot com 2010-03-15 22:11 ---
It seems to work in 4.4.0. The code:
register int16x8_t a asm ("q7");
asm (
"vadd.i32 %q0, %q1, %q2 \n\t"
: "=w" (a)
: "w" (b), "w" (c)
);
yields an expected:
vadd.i32 q7, q8, q7
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 21:53 ---
Yeah, invalid.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 21:27 ---
Subject: Bug 43363
Author: janis
Date: Mon Mar 15 21:27:23 2010
New Revision: 157467
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=157467
Log:
PR testsuite/43363
* g++.dg/ext/altivec-17.C: Han
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2010-03-15 21:16 ---
Subject: Re: __extendxftf2 not exported from 32-bit shared
libgcc
Exporting at GCC_4.5.0 is the obvious thing to do.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43383
--- Comment #1 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-03-15 21:09 ---
Created an attachment (id=20113)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20113&action=view)
different problem
This is probably related problem.
It fails in trunk with:
$ /mnt/svn/gcc-trunk/binary-157460-lto/bi
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-03-15 21:01 ---
It is an oversight. How should we deal with it?
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
Command line:
gcc testcase.c
- testcase.c -
void c_direct(p)
void *p = &&lab;
{}
--
3.3.6 gives:
$ gcc-3.3.6 testcase.c
testcase.c: In function `c_direct':
testcase.c:2: error: parameter `p' is initialized
testcase.c:2: error: label `lab' used but not defined
3.4.6 an
config/i386/libgcc-glibc.ver only exports __extendxftf2 from shared libgcc
for 64-bit, not 32-bit. I see no obvious reason for this omission, and
__extendxftf2 is in static libgcc.
--
Summary: __extendxftf2 not exported from 32-bit shared libgcc
Product: gcc
Ver
The following code causes an assert on a recent svn g++, with -std=c++0x. On
g++ 4.4 it produces an error. I believe the code to be valid, but am not 100%
positive.
#include
struct Range
{
int lb;
int ub;
Range(int i, int j) : lb(i), ub(j) {}
Range(const Range& r)
--- Comment #10 from ilatypov at infradead dot org 2010-03-15 19:47 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> constness of a multiply
> referenced value cannot be promised, and, therefore, C propagates the compile
> -time constness requirement up the assignment chain in cases where the level
> of
--- Comment #1 from aldyh at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 19:44 ---
Created an attachment (id=20112)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20112&action=view)
gcc.dg/parm-impl-decl-1.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43381
When compiling gcc.dg/parm-impl-decl-1.c with -g, there seems to be an infinite
loop in gen_decl_die. This is present in 4.4.2 on my workstation, as well as
on trunk.
--
Summary: infinite loop in gcc.dg/parm-impl-decl-1.c with -g
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
--
rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-03-15 18:49 ---
It is caused by revision 157458:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-03/msg00295.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43379
--- Comment #2 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 18:47 ---
This is a violation of the one definition rule, the program is invalid, no
diagnostic is required.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43380
--- Comment #14 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 18:39 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> The case that I keep running into all the time is that I convert a bunch of
> code from "char *" from "const char*", then go update the header to match up
> with the code, but happen to miss
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-03-15 18:28 ---
It is introduced between revision 157457 and revision 157460.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from gael dot guennebaud at gmail dot com 2010-03-15 18:25
---
Created an attachment (id=20111)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20111&action=view)
the test case preprocessed with 4.3.3
Oops, indeed it seems I messed up the first time. This one is gcc
--- Comment #1 from danielfriederich at gmx dot net 2010-03-15 18:16
---
Created an attachment (id=20110)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20110&action=view)
reproducible case.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43380
I'm aware that code compiled with -fPIC is inefficient, but I did not read
anywhere that it is illegal to link -fPIC code into an executable.
We are compiling code with -fPIC and place the same code into the real
"product" so's as well as into unit test executables. With this setup
one problem I n
--- Comment #1 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-03-15 17:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=20109)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20109&action=view)
reduced testcase
Command line:
gcc -O2 -ftracer -c pr43379.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43379
Command line:
gcc -O2 -ftracer testcase.c
or
gcc -O1 -freorder-blocks -ftracer -c testcase.c
Tested revisions:
r157460 - crash
r157386 - OK
r157326 - OK
r153685 - OK
4.4 r157395 - OK (with checking)
Compiler output:
$ /mnt/svn/gcc-trunk/binary-157460-lto/bin/gcc -O2 -ftracer -c testcase.c
testcas
--- Comment #6 from laurent at guerby dot net 2010-03-15 17:36 ---
As Matthias said this is a --with-mode=thumb issue, people not using this
option have no issue bootstraping natively on arm:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-03/msg01254.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresul
--- Comment #13 from erh+gcc at nimenees dot com 2010-03-15 17:30 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #11)
> > hmm... is there a way to have g++ put everything into some default
> > namespace so
> > I always get errors like this? If so, that would satisfy my needs.
>
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 17:23 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Will check this out as soon as I am back at base.
HJ,
4.4 does not deal with the original problem and so still produces the
unnecessary temporaries.
from the end of internal_pack12.f90..
--- Comment #7 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-03-15 17:23
---
An additional remark: irrespective of the C++1x PODness, the *TR1* is_pod
cannot be broken, because essentially N1836, not requiring compiler support,
allows for any behavior outside scalar types (see 4.9/8).
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 16:38 ---
The first example is done on purpose as the class is std:: deque which is
a template class which is on a fundamental type which is always going to be
visible. (See PR 19664 for the reasons why).
--
http://gcc.g
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major |normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43376
--- Comment #1 from zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-03-15 16:33 ---
fails at x86_84 for me, too
--
zsojka at seznam dot cz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #6 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 16:15 ---
Fixed. I put in a testcase that doesn't need graphite.
--
matz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #5 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 16:13 ---
Subject: Bug 43300
Author: matz
Date: Mon Mar 15 16:13:28 2010
New Revision: 157461
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=157461
Log:
PR middle-end/43300
* tree-outof-ssa.c (emit_partit
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 15:23 ---
Invalid then.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NE
--- Comment #20 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 15:20
---
*** Bug 42911 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41371
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 15:20 ---
Fixed. Or rather, duplicate of 41371.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 41371 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2010-03-15 15:17 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression] Optimization error on vectors
of uint64_t
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> Joseph, is this a valid testcase?
>
> typedef unsigned long obj[1];
> exte
--- Comment #19 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 15:12 ---
A variant of the #c9 patch is checked in for many days, do you still have
something where VTA is really so big compile time or memory hog (besides
PR43058)?
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
Wha
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43247
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 15:01 ---
The preprocessed testcase does not build for me with GCC 4.3.x. Please attach
preprocessed source when building with GCC 4.3.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 14:56 ---
Joseph, is this a valid testcase?
typedef unsigned long obj[1];
extern void abort (void);
int main()
{
obj X[2];
X[1][0] = 67890;
if (X[0][1] != 67890)
abort ();
return 0;
}
--
rguenth at g
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 14:53 ---
Not a regression. Fixed for 4.4.0.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 14:52 ---
Not a regression. Fixed for 4.4.0.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-03-15 14:52 ---
It is caused by revision 157203:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-03/msg00075.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #6 from aldyh at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 14:35 ---
With the last set of patches to var-tracking, this has been fixed. Closing.
--
aldyh at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 14:29 ---
I don't intend backporting this to the 4.3 branch and hence marking this
closed.
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 14:27 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> >
> > The trivial fix would be to compute post-dominator info and check if the
> > edge with the uninitialized use is executed on all paths from function
> > ent
--- Comment #7 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-03-15 14:21 ---
See also pr43359.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40979
--- Comment #4 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-03-15 14:20 ---
The patch used for comment #3 was
--- /opt/gcc/_clean/gcc/passes.c2010-02-22 15:28:45.0 +0100
+++ /opt/gcc/p_work/gcc/passes.c2010-03-14 14:05:55.0 +0100
@@ -901,6 +901,8 @@ init_optim
--- Comment #3 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 13:42 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
>
> The trivial fix would be to compute post-dominator info and check if the
> edge with the uninitialized use is executed on all paths from function
> entry to exit (its source and destination
--- Comment #18 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 13:40 ---
Pawel, I thank you for the report, but I really do not see how we can use this
bug report. The testcase is huge, so we cannot add it to the testsuite to avoid
regressing. If you can find a reduced testcase
http://gcc.g
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 13:26
---
It sounds to me that this is a verifier issue, not a possible wrong-code issue.
Downgrading to P2 also because the predicate is the same since 4.3.0.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #16 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 13:24
---
Re-assigning to Martin then.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 13:23 ---
Ping.
Is native bootstrap not important for arm? If so please downgrade to P2.
Thanks.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 13:20 ---
Not a regression. Diagnostic enhancement possible.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 13:19 ---
Subject: Bug 43367
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Mar 15 13:18:45 2010
New Revision: 157458
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=157458
Log:
2010-03-15 Richard Guenther
PR tree-optimization/
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 13:18 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 13:17 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 13:13 ---
Or is a latent bug in ehopt.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Prio
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43360
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 13:09 ---
Works on x86_64-linux. mips-linux is neither primary nor secondary, thus a
candidate for downgrading to P4. Still looks serious so leaving at P3 for now.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
W
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 13:05 ---
Subject: Bug 43317
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Mar 15 13:05:05 2010
New Revision: 157457
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=157457
Log:
2010-03-15 Richard Guenther
PR tree-optimization/
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 13:01 ---
I have a patch.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 12:55 ---
According to comment #3 needs to be re-verified by submitter.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 12:51 ---
Because we drop DECL_CONTEXT.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 12:49 ---
Fixed by:
r157456 | jamborm | 2010-03-15 12:43:04 +0100 (Mon, 15 Mar 2010) | 7 lines
2010-03-15 Martin Jambor
PR tree/optimization/43141
* tree-sra.c (create_abstract_origin): New function.
void bar(int, int, int);
void foo(int left, int rite, int element)
{
while (left <= rite)
{
rite -= element;
bar(left, rite, element);
left += element;
}
}
produces:
foo (int left, int rite, int element)
{
unsigned int D.2741;
unsigned int D.2742;
unsigned int D.
--- Comment #4 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 12:22 ---
14.7.3 [temp.expl.spec] p6 says:
If a template, a member template or the member of a class template is
explicitly specialized then that specialization
shall be declared before the first use of that specialization that
--- Comment #2 from piotr dot wyderski at gmail dot com 2010-03-15 12:20
---
(In reply to comment #1)
It's a fairly recent regression: the snapshot 20100218 compiled it without
problems.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43375
--- Comment #1 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 11:58 ---
though trunk of a recent vintage generates the following bit of code which is
slightly better. There's no reason why we can't expand in a better manner and
generate the vld1.f32. Marking as an enhancement.
--- Comment #1 from pluto at agmk dot net 2010-03-15 11:50 ---
Created an attachment (id=20108)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20108&action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43377
$ make clean all
rm -f *.o *.s *.ii m
g++45 -Wall -g2 -O1 a.cpp -c
g++45 -Wall -g2 -O1 m.cpp -c
g++45 -Wall -g2 -O1 a.o m.o -o m --save-temps -fverbose-asm
$ readelf --debug-dump=pubnames ./m
(...)
Offset Name
8e7 Y::foo <==
913 X::foo
--- Comment #1 from fjoe at samodelkin dot net 2010-03-15 11:32 ---
In the last example above I mean that there is shared library foo with
interface declared in foo.h and it is used in another shared library bar. And
bar will have unnecessary template instantiations visible even if compi
--
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=43358
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 11:30 ---
I'd say its P2 only because it does affect released compilers and is not a
regression on their branches.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Stock RHEL5 g++ 4.4 version:
[Mon Mar 15 17:04:26] kenny:~/work$g++44 -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i386-redhat-linux6E
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man
--infodir=/usr/share/info --with-bugurl=http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla
--enable-bootstrap --enable-sha
--- Comment #5 from pluto at agmk dot net 2010-03-15 11:28 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I'm not sure you are supposed to mix -flto and -fwhopr (though it probably
> just works). This is btw the most prominent ICE I see when building SPEC
> with -fwhopr and checking enabled.
mixing -f
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 11:27 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> In GCC 4.3.x you need optimization enabled for Wuninitialized.
>
> In GCC 4.4.1 and GCC 4.5 (trunk) I get warnings in line 6 with -O1 -O2 and
> -O3.
>
> We do not get a warning with -O0
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.5
http://gcc.g
--
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=43363
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 11:20 ---
EDG agrees. But accepts the code without the explicit specialization.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 11:19 ---
As for the arbitrary expressions, can't you just add an artificial, nameless,
DW_TAG_variable (not sure if DW_TAG_dwarf_procedure would be tollerable
instead), probably as child of the DW_TAG_subprogram whose
DW_TAG_fo
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2010-03-15 11:18 ---
Subject: Re: ICE with __builtin_isinf() and _Decimal argument
The most recent draft of TR 24732 I have (I don't have the final published
TR) says that all the type-generic classification and comparison macros
hav
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.4
http://gcc
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 11:14 ---
Confirmed. -fwhopr seems to be broken with respect to ar archive support.
I don't see any reason to strip extensions at all. Which then get's us to
lto1: internal compiler error: compressed stream: data error
Plea
--- Comment #2 from astrange at ithinksw dot com 2010-03-15 11:10 ---
The last two commands were the source and testcase. Should have spaced it out
more.
i don't have enough memory allocated to this VM to build ffmpeg without whopr,
so I thought i'd try the more experimental path first.
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 11:08 ---
Testcase? Note that -fwhopr is highly experimental (likewise linker-plugin
support has seen way less testing than the collect2 path).
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 11:06 ---
Somewhere I added generic C frontend argument checking for builtins...
c-common.c:check_builtin_function_arguments. Which checks for REAL_TYPE
arguments to isinf. Janis, is isinf not supposed to be used for
decima
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 11:00 ---
Confirmed.
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x006b2ae8 in make_alias_for (target=0x7599ddc0,
newid=0x758d3a50) at /space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/gcc/cp/method.c:224
224
--- Comment #6 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-03-15 10:45 ---
Fixed at revision 130279, closing.
--
dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-15 10:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=20107)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20107&action=view)
Draf patch
Thanks Jakub for the review. This updated patch should address your comments.
--
dodji at gcc dot
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
ht
--- Comment #4 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-03-15 10:39 ---
No answer to comment #3 (likely fixed at revision 134936); closing as fixed.
--
dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #17 from pluto at agmk dot net 2010-03-15 10:32 ---
recent 4.4/4.5 compiles '32395.ii -Wall -c -O1 -m32' cleanly, 4.3 still warns.
--
pluto at agmk dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
