http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47420
Summary: ICE: in calc_dfs_tree, at dominance.c:395 with c++
code
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #28 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-01-23 08:44:45 UTC ---
According to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/2011-01/msg00375.html
revision 169136 caused a bootstrap failure on powerpc-apple-darwin9.8.0:
/Users/regress/tbox/nativ
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47419
--- Comment #1 from Pawel Sikora 2011-01-23 09:36:57
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> following code...
>
> unsigned __attribute__((regparm(2)))
> asm_read_mapped_register( unsigned* address, unsigned long index )
> {
> unsigned value;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41951
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47419
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47421
Summary: Wrong-code: Value of scalar ALLOCATABLE
CHARACTER(len=n) dummy is mangled
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: n
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41951
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-01-23
10:57:05 UTC ---
> Another test case, from ...
It is pr47399.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #29 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-01-23 11:17:32 UTC ---
>From http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-01/msg01607.html the bootstrap
failure seems rather due to revision 169131. Note that revision 169142
bootstrapped on x86_64-apple
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #30 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-01-23 11:43:09 UTC ---
Concerning the timings in comment #27 they may reflect the fact the the inliner
is not aggressive enough for fortran codes and that it is worsen when using
-flto:
For rnflow.f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #31 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-01-23 12:06:00 UTC ---
The relevant pr for comment #30 is pr45810 comment #9. The threshold for
fatigue.f90 was322 before revision 169136 and is now 1520 (~x5).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47419
--- Comment #3 from Pawel Sikora 2011-01-23 13:02:02
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Well there is no constraint for reg+reg*N really. You should do:
> asm /* reading has side-effects in hardware */ volatile (
> "movl %1, %0"
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #33 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-23 13:15:27
UTC ---
Please use -fdump-ipa-inline-details to generate the dump. Perhaps we just
miscompute function body size somehow.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #32 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-23 13:14:56
UTC ---
> The relevant pr for comment #30 is pr45810 comment #9. The threshold for
> fatigue.f90 was322 before revision 169136 and is now 1520 (~x5).
Interesting. Do you know what function we f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #34 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-23 13:16:34
UTC ---
Pretty obvoius fix to the compare-elim issue is adding ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED to b
parameter.
It is used by SELECT_CC_MODE macro that is defined to not use it by default.
Honza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47049
--- Comment #7 from Eamon Nerbonne 2011-01-23
13:31:38 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> it might get analysed sooner if you try to reduce the code to something
> smaller
> than 7 lines
Yeah, I realize: I've been putting that off, because,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47422
Summary: [4.6 regression] bootstrap failure due to warnings in
compare-elim.c
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47422
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47421
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #35 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-01-23 15:02:43 UTC ---
> Do you know what function we fail to inline?
It is generalized_hookes_law.
I have looked to fatigue.f90 in more details. With revision 168741, I see the
transitions:
9.25
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47420
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #36 from Jack Howarth 2011-01-23
15:45:19 UTC ---
Created attachment 23086
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23086
bzip2 compressed ipa-inline-details dump without -finline-limit
generated at r169137 on x86_64-apple
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #37 from Jack Howarth 2011-01-23
15:47:54 UTC ---
Created attachment 23087
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23087
bzip2 compressed ipa-inline-details dump with -finline-limit=600
bzip2 compressed ipa-inline-details
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #38 from Jack Howarth 2011-01-23
15:49:19 UTC ---
Created attachment 23088
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23088
bzip2 compressed ipa-inline-details dump with -finline-limit=2000
generated at r169137 on x86_64-app
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45810
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47049
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #39 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-01-23 16:32:38 UTC ---
Created attachment 23089
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23089
-finline-limit=321 revision 168741
bzip2 fatigue.f90.048i.inline generated at revision168741
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #40 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-01-23 16:33:39 UTC ---
Created attachment 23090
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23090
-finline-limit=322 revision168741
bzip2 fatigue.f90.048i.inline generated at revision168741
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #41 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-01-23 16:35:02 UTC ---
Created attachment 23091
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23091
-finline-limit=321 revision 169142
bzip2 fatigue.f90.048i.inline generated at revision 16914
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #42 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-01-23 16:36:00 UTC ---
Created attachment 23092
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23092
-finline-limit=322 revision 169142
bzip2 fatigue.f90.048i.inline generated at revision 16914
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47049
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at redhat dot com
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45810
--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-23
16:45:23 UTC ---
OK, the slowdown comes away when both hookers_law and perida is inlined.
First needs -finline-limit=380 the second needs large-function-growth=1000
(or large increase of inline limi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45810
--- Comment #14 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-01-23 17:04:07 UTC ---
After removing the comments, generalized_hookes_law reads
function generalized_hookes_law (strain_tensor, lambda, mu) result
(stress_tensor)
!
real (kind = LONGrea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45810
--- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-23
17:56:31 UTC ---
Enabling early FRE
Index: passes.c
===
--- passes.c(revision 169136)
+++ passes.c(working copy)
@@ -760,6 +760,7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45810
--- Comment #16 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-23
17:57:58 UTC ---
Also w/o inlining hookes_law but with inlining perida (by using
large-function-growth parameter only and the patch abov), I get 30% speedup,
not 50% as with inlining both, but it seems
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44334
--- Comment #43 from Jack Howarth 2011-01-23
18:07:36 UTC ---
On x86_64-apple-darwin10 at r169137, the pb05 benchmarks compiled with
benchmark -O3 -ffast-math -funroll-loops -O3 -ffast-math -funroll-loops
%change
-flto -fwhole-prog
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45810
--- Comment #17 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-01-23 19:38:30 UTC ---
With the patch in comment #15 and -finline-limit=300, I get
Date & Time : 23 Jan 2011 20:1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45810
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2011-01-23 15:59:30 |
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47423
Summary: Many testsuite failures caused by missing
gxx_visibility_sj0
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45810
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2011-01-23 15:59:30
--- Comment #19 from Ja
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47166
--- Comment #20 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-01-23
21:11:27 UTC ---
Author: bernds
Date: Sun Jan 23 21:11:24 2011
New Revision: 169144
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169144
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/47166
* reload1.c (em
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47424
Summary: [4.6 Regression] Glibc miscompiled
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47421
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2011-01-23
22:26:35 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Sun Jan 23 22:26:27 2011
New Revision: 169145
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169145
Log:
2011-01-23 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/47
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47425
Summary: Array constructor with type-spec: Fails with more
complicated length type expr
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Sev
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47333
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47421
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45810
--- Comment #20 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-01-23 23:20:34 UTC ---
> This makes hookes_law estimate to be 91 instructions, so -finline-limit=183
> should be enough.
With the patch in comment #19, I rather find a threshold of -finline-limit=25
model: win32
gcc version 4.6.0 20110123 (experimental)
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-c' '-O2' '-v' '-mtune=generic' '-march=pentiumpro'
c:/snowfishroot/mingw/bin/../libexec/gcc/mingw32/4.6.0/cc1plus.exe -quiet -v
-iprefix c:\snowfishroot\mingw\bin\../lib/g
=release --enable-sjlj-exceptions --enable-cloog-backend=isl
> --disable-cloog-version-check
> Thread model: win32
> gcc version 4.6.0 20110123 (experimental)
> COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-c' '-O2' '-v' '-mtune=generic' '-march=pentiumpro'
> c:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47420
Yu Simin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||mingw32
--- Comment #4 from Yu Simin 2011-01-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47426
Summary: [4.6 Regression] wrong code with -O2 -fipa-pta
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Ass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47426
--- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka 2011-01-24 02:05:12
UTC ---
Created attachment 23094
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23094
main.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45785
Zdenek Sojka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47420
--- Comment #5 from Yu Simin 2011-01-24 02:42:34
UTC ---
If I added the '-fno-exceptions' flag, the ICE disappearsed. My g++ is built
with SJLJ exception support. I think both Linux/x86 and arm-none-eabi are using
DW exception.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47420
--- Comment #6 from Yu Simin 2011-01-24 03:11:24
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> If I added the '-fno-exceptions' flag, the ICE disappearsed. My g++ is built
> with SJLJ exception support. I think both Linux/x86 and arm-none-eabi are
> using
ead model: posix
gcc version 4.6.0 20110123 (experimental) (GCC)
[regehr@gamow tmp443]$ cat small.c
long g_128;
int *g;
int func_73 (unsigned char p_74, const int p_75)
{
lbl_159:for (; g_128; g = (int *)g_128)
for (g = 0; g_128; g_128++)
{
int l_144 = 1;
if (g_128)
{
: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../configure --with-libelf=/usr/local --enable-lto
--prefix=/home/regehr/z/compiler-install/gcc-r169143-install
--program-prefix=r169143- --enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.6.0 20110123 (experimental) (GCC)
[regehr@gamow tmp4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47429
Summary: -Wfatal-errors hiding line number of offending caller
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47429
--- Comment #1 from Navin Kumar 2011-01-24
04:50:18 UTC ---
(re-pasted error output):
When compiling with g++ -c -Wall -Werror, the output is:
test.cc: In member function ‘int Evil::test()’:
test.cc:2:6: error: ‘int Blah::test’ is private
test.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47426
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47427
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47428
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
61 matches
Mail list logo
