[Bug rtl-optimization/49007] ICE in extract_true_false_edges_from_block at tree-cfg.c:7379

2011-05-23 Thread dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49007 --- Comment #20 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-05-23 18:52:27 UTC --- On Mon, 23 May 2011, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > This code fails to handle the case where there already is a use. > > This should have been fixed in 4.5 a

[Bug target/47110] mips-openbsd mips.o build fails for lack of ASM_OUTPUT_DEF definition

2011-05-23 Thread rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47110 rsand...@gcc.gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug libfortran/48906] Wrong rounding results with -m32

2011-05-23 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48906 --- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-05-23 19:00:54 UTC --- Status: I am down to about 5 testsuite failures on the patch for this. There is a lot if interplay going on, so i will be factoring the code some as part of the cleanup. Stay tuned.

[Bug c++/48884] decltype's operand doesn't consider friend declaration

2011-05-23 Thread jason at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48884 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug rtl-optimization/49007] ICE in extract_true_false_edges_from_block at tree-cfg.c:7379

2011-05-23 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49007 --- Comment #21 from Eric Botcazou 2011-05-23 19:33:36 UTC --- > Ok to backport this fix after testing to 4.3 and 4.4? I would also > like to backport this fix > > PR rtl-optimization/42775 > * cfgrtl.c (rest_of_pass_free_cfg): Recomput

[Bug fortran/48955] [4.6/4.7 Regression] Wrong result for array assignment due to missing temporary

2011-05-23 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48955 --- Comment #10 from Thomas Koenig 2011-05-23 20:01:10 UTC --- Hi Paul, just two questions, for my understanding: With your patch, what is the difference between GFC_CAN_REVERSE and GFC_REVERSE_NOT_SET? And why do you initialize loop.reverse c

[Bug libfortran/49024] REAL*16 ERFC_SCALED inaccuracy

2011-05-23 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49024 --- Comment #2 from Francois-Xavier Coudert 2011-05-23 19:53:31 UTC --- The 128-bit code for scaled erfc in Cephes is terrible. For ERFC_SCALED(1), it gives: 0.427592... instead of: 0.427583... I don't see any easy way about this, someone wi

[Bug lto/49123] [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr48973-[12].c

2011-05-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49123 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-05-23 20:38:19 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Mon May 23 20:38:17 2011 New Revision: 174088 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174088 Log: PR lto/49123 * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr491

[Bug lto/49123] [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr48973-[12].c

2011-05-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49123 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-05-23 20:37:22 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Mon May 23 20:37:18 2011 New Revision: 174087 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174087 Log: PR lto/49123 * fold-const.c (constant_boole

[Bug lto/49123] [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr48973-[12].c

2011-05-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49123 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c/49128] -mtune=native generates unsupported instructions

2011-05-23 Thread nathanael.schaeffer+ml at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49128 --- Comment #3 from natchouf 2011-05-23 20:32:14 UTC --- Oups, I'm sorry. -mtune should be replaced by -march everywhere in my report... Thanks for the patch.

[Bug c/49128] -mtune=native generates unsupported instructions

2011-05-23 Thread nathanael.schaeffer+ml at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49128 --- Comment #4 from natchouf 2011-05-23 20:36:15 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > A patch is posted at > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg01664.html in the patch you linked to, I think there is a mistake in these lines : +

[Bug debug/49130] New: discrepancies between DW_AT_name and demangler

2011-05-23 Thread tromey at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49130 Summary: discrepancies between DW_AT_name and demangler Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: debug AssignedTo: u

[Bug libfortran/49024] REAL*16 ERFC_SCALED inaccuracy

2011-05-23 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49024 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3

[Bug c++/49132] New: [C++0x] Aggregate-initialization rejected for class with const data member

2011-05-23 Thread daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49132 Summary: [C++0x] Aggregate-initialization rejected for class with const data member Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug debug/49131] New: destructors missing DW_AT_vtable_elem_location

2011-05-23 Thread tromey at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49131 Summary: destructors missing DW_AT_vtable_elem_location Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: debug AssignedTo: u

[Bug libfortran/49024] REAL*16 ERFC_SCALED inaccuracy

2011-05-23 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49024 Francois-Xavier Coudert changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|fxcoudert at gcc dot|unassigned at gcc dot

[Bug target/44618] [4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7 regression] wrong code with -frename-registers

2011-05-23 Thread edmar at freescale dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44618 --- Comment #22 from Edmar Wienskoski 2011-05-23 21:57:08 UTC --- I completed re-testing everything. It turns out I cannot reproduce the original error on gcc-4.4 (rev 173968) So, I am submitting only the patch that I tested for gcc-4.5/4.6/4.7

[Bug target/49133] New: [4.6 Regression] modification of aliased __m128d miscompiles

2011-05-23 Thread kretz at kde dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49133 Summary: [4.6 Regression] modification of aliased __m128d miscompiles Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compon

[Bug target/44618] [4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7 regression] wrong code with -frename-registers

2011-05-23 Thread edmar at freescale dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44618 --- Comment #23 from Edmar Wienskoski 2011-05-23 21:58:28 UTC --- Created attachment 24337 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24337 This patch was tested against 4.5/4.6/4.7

[Bug c++/49132] [C++0x] Aggregate-initialization rejected for class with const data member

2011-05-23 Thread jason at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49132 --- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-23 22:08:46 UTC --- It's annoying how GCC bugzilla tends not to send mail to people when I add them to CC even if I also add a comment. Anyway, Fabien, please take a look at this bug.

[Bug c++/49132] [DR 178] Aggregate-initialization rejected for class with const data member

2011-05-23 Thread jason at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49132 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Aggregate-initialization|[DR 178] |rejected for

[Bug c++/49132] [4.6/4.7 regression] Aggregate-initialization rejected for class with const data member

2011-05-23 Thread jason at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49132 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.5.1 Summary|[C++0x]

[Bug c++/49132] [C++0x] Aggregate-initialization rejected for class with const data member

2011-05-23 Thread jason at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49132 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/49132] Aggregate-initialization rejected for class with const data member

2011-05-23 Thread jason at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49132 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Known to work|4.5.1

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

2011-05-23 Thread danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40086 --- Comment #20 from John David Anglin 2011-05-23 22:31:59 UTC --- Author: danglin Date: Mon May 23 22:31:55 2011 New Revision: 174090 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174090 Log: PR rtl-optimization/49007 Backport f

[Bug rtl-optimization/49007] ICE in extract_true_false_edges_from_block at tree-cfg.c:7379

2011-05-23 Thread danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49007 --- Comment #22 from John David Anglin 2011-05-23 22:31:59 UTC --- Author: danglin Date: Mon May 23 22:31:55 2011 New Revision: 174090 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174090 Log: PR rtl-optimization/49007 Backport f

[Bug c++/49105] [C++0x][SFINAE] ICE during list-initialization of rvalue-references to const

2011-05-23 Thread jason at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49105 --- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-23 22:56:08 UTC --- Author: jason Date: Mon May 23 22:56:04 2011 New Revision: 174093 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174093 Log: PR c++/49105 * typeck.c (cp_build_c_cast):

[Bug c++/49105] [C++0x][SFINAE] ICE during list-initialization of rvalue-references to const

2011-05-23 Thread jason at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49105 --- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-23 22:56:00 UTC --- Author: jason Date: Mon May 23 22:55:56 2011 New Revision: 174092 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174092 Log: PR c++/49105 * typeck.c (build_const_cast_1

[Bug c++/48106] [C++0x] ICE with scoped enum with fixed underlying type

2011-05-23 Thread jason at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48106 --- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-23 22:55:51 UTC --- Author: jason Date: Mon May 23 22:55:46 2011 New Revision: 174091 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174091 Log: PR c++/48106 * c-common.c (c_common_get_nar

[Bug c++/49132] [DR 178] Aggregate-initialization rejected for class with const data member

2011-05-23 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49132 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-05-23 23:16:02 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > It's annoying how GCC bugzilla tends not to send mail to people when I add > them > to CC even if I also add a comment. Anyway, Fabien, please take a loo

[Bug c++/49134] New: ICE in g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr tests for arm

2011-05-23 Thread janis at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49134 Summary: ICE in g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr tests for arm Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassig.

[Bug tree-optimization/49135] New: ICE in gcc.c-torture/execute/920302-1.c on arm

2011-05-23 Thread janis at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49135 Summary: ICE in gcc.c-torture/execute/920302-1.c on arm Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization Ass

[Bug c++/49102] [C++0x] Use of deleted copy constructor not diagnosed

2011-05-23 Thread jason at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49102 --- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill 2011-05-24 03:49:07 UTC --- Author: jason Date: Tue May 24 03:49:03 2011 New Revision: 174101 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174101 Log: PR c++/49102 * call.c (convert_arg_to_ellip

[Bug target/49114] [x32] 454.calculix in SPEC CPU 2006 failed

2011-05-23 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49114 --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu 2011-05-24 04:40:08 UTC --- gen_reload generates wrong code for (gdb) call debug_rtx (out) (reg:SI 1 dx) (gdb) call debug_rtx (in) (plus:SI (subreg:SI (reg/v/f:DI 182 [ b ]) 0) (const_int 8 [0x8])) (gdb) when dx

[Bug target/49114] [x32] 454.calculix in SPEC CPU 2006 failed

2011-05-23 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49114 --- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu 2011-05-24 05:12:46 UTC --- For (insn 588 587 589 28 (set (mem:DF (zero_extend:DI (plus:SI (subreg:SI (reg/v/f:DI 182 [ b ]) 0) (const_int 8 [0x8]))) [4 MEM[base: b_96(D), index: D.15020_278, step

<    1   2