[Bug bootstrap/33781] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] "Arg list too long" building libgcc.a

2009-04-07 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
--- Comment #25 from PHHargrove at lbl dot gov 2009-04-07 20:39 --- Has any progress been made on this bug? I have hit this problem with gcc-4.3.2 on IRIX with both --disable-fixed-point and --disable-decimal-float. Since this bug is open with a milestone of 4.3.4 I figured a switch to

[Bug bootstrap/33781] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] "Arg list too long" building libgcc.a

2009-04-07 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
--- Comment #27 from PHHargrove at lbl dot gov 2009-04-07 23:39 --- (In reply to comment #26) Ralph, Thanks for the quick reply. Unfortunately, I am not in control of the machine in question and thus cannot raise the ARG_MAX limit on my own. I will send email to the admins to see if

[Bug target/54142] ppc64 build failure - Unrecognized opcode: `sldi' (and `srdi`)

2012-08-13 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54142 --- Comment #8 from Paul H. Hargrove 2012-08-13 22:04:40 UTC --- The following is a transcript of a test I just tried one of my systems where Gary and I have observed this bug. The test appears to show that the gcc provided by Fedora Core 6 does

[Bug target/54142] ppc64 build failure - Unrecognized opcode: `sldi' (and `srdi`)

2012-08-13 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54142 --- Comment #9 from Paul H. Hargrove 2012-08-13 22:42:16 UTC --- Following up on my previous experiment, I tried the same input with the xgcc which is failing to build libdecnumber. If also fails with the 1-line test case: {phargrov@fc6 ~}$ cat

[Bug target/54142] ppc64 build failure - Unrecognized opcode: `sldi' (and `srdi`)

2012-08-13 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54142 --- Comment #10 from Paul H. Hargrove 2012-08-13 22:54:12 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) > Following up on my previous experiment, I tried the same input with the xgcc > which is failing to build libdecnumber. If also fails with the 1-line tes

[Bug target/31557] return 0x80000000UL code gen can be improved

2012-08-13 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31557 Paul H. Hargrove changed: What|Removed |Added CC||PHHargrove at lbl dot gov --- Comment

[Bug target/17108] Store with update not generated for a simple loop

2012-08-13 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17108 Paul H. Hargrove changed: What|Removed |Added CC||PHHargrove at lbl dot gov --- Comment

[Bug target/54142] [4.8 regression] ppc64 build failure - Unrecognized opcode: `sldi' (and `srdi`)

2012-08-13 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54142 --- Comment #13 from Paul H. Hargrove 2012-08-14 00:01:08 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) > Of course, if 'sldi' and 'slri' ARE supposed to be supported in "common" mode, > then this is a binutils bug. I've confirmed that these instruction are

[Bug target/31557] return 0x80000000UL code gen can be improved

2012-08-13 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31557 --- Comment #4 from Paul H. Hargrove 2012-08-14 00:31:14 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > FWIW, 4.8.0 20120809 w/ -O1 or higher is now using just 4 instructions instead > of 5. So, "half way there". > > > .L.f: > lis 3,0x8000 >

[Bug other/54308] New: build regression in 190498 on ppc64/linux: legitimate_indirect_address_p undefined

2012-08-17 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54308 Bug #: 54308 Summary: build regression in 190498 on ppc64/linux: legitimate_indirect_address_p undefined Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Stat

[Bug other/54308] build regression in 190498 on ppc64/linux: legitimate_indirect_address_p undefined

2012-08-17 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54308 --- Comment #2 from Paul H. Hargrove 2012-08-18 02:38:21 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > (Note, apparent s/4.2.1/4.1.2/g in initial description.) Correct, I am sorry about that. > I'd suggest updating to just a later gcc build, if you can fi

[Bug other/54308] build regression in 190498 on ppc64/linux: legitimate_indirect_address_p undefined

2012-08-17 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54308 --- Comment #3 from Paul H. Hargrove 2012-08-18 03:02:36 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > I'd suggest updating to just a later gcc build, if you can find *only slightly > newer* rpm:s; as for a x86_64-linux F 8 with gcc-4.1.2-33 ("gcc (GCC) 4.1

[Bug target/54308] [4.8 regression] build regression in 190498 on ppc64/linux: legitimate_indirect_address_p undefined

2012-08-18 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54308 --- Comment #6 from Paul H. Hargrove 2012-08-18 19:05:19 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5 by Gary Funck) [...] > FYI, the failing system has Redhat Release 8 (circa 2002). Fedocra Core 8 > didn't come out until circa 2007. Thus, it would be surp

[Bug bootstrap/54326] GCC does not build with G++ version 3.4.0

2012-08-20 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54326 --- Comment #4 from Paul H. Hargrove 2012-08-20 08:22:18 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > Fixed(?). YES. I was the one to originally observe the failure. Just svn-uped to revision 190524 and was able to build stage1 with g++-3.4.0.

[Bug target/54308] [4.8 regression] build regression in 190498 on ppc64/linux: legitimate_indirect_address_p undefined

2012-08-20 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54308 --- Comment #8 from Paul H. Hargrove 2012-08-20 08:57:29 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) [...] > Ok, but see comment 4; try just removing the "inline" there. If necessary, > the > inline can be wrapped in some #ifdef construct. It depends on

[Bug sanitizer/57316] New: [4.8 regresion] build failure in libsanitizer

2013-05-17 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
: sanitizer Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: PHHargrove at lbl dot gov CC: dodji at gcc dot gnu.org, dvyukov at gcc dot gnu.org, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, kcc at gcc dot gnu.org On the same system where I reported bug 55989, I am

[Bug sanitizer/57316] [4.8 regression] build failure in libsanitizer

2013-05-20 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57316 --- Comment #3 from Paul H. Hargrove --- (In reply to Kostya Serebryany from comment #1) > Sorry for the breakages, but we are unable to monitor build failures on old > kernels unless someone sets up a regular testing (build bot) with such kernels

[Bug target/54142] ppc64 build failure - Unrecognized opcode: `sldi' (and `srdi`)

2012-07-31 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54142 --- Comment #6 from Paul H. Hargrove 2012-07-31 17:59:31 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > sldi and srdi are both standard PowerPC64 instructions. IBM's "Programming Environments Manual for 64-Bit Microprocessors" lists sldi and srdi as "Simpl

[Bug other/58996] New: [4.9 regression] build failure in libcilkrts

2013-11-04 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
: other Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: PHHargrove at lbl dot gov I have an ancient x86 system running Red Hat 8. This system's version of Linux and/or glibc lacks definitions of cpu_set_t and CPU_SETSIZE: $ grep -rl -e CPU_SETSIZE -e cpu_set_t /usr/includ

[Bug c/43027] #pragma rejected inside enum defn

2013-11-04 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43027 --- Comment #4 from Paul H. Hargrove --- For what it's worth, the sample input is fine with gcc-3.2.2 gcc-3.3.3 gcc-3.4.0 gcc-4.0.0 gcc-4.1.0 gcc-4.2.1 gcc-4.3.2 and broken with gcc-4.4.2 (the original report) gcc-4.5.1

[Bug other/48922] invalid dwarf2 on ia64 with very old gas

2011-12-15 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48922 --- Comment #3 from Paul H. Hargrove 2011-12-16 01:42:30 UTC --- Created attachment 26105 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26105 BUILDDIR/gcc/config.log from the problematic build

[Bug target/55433] New: [4.8 Regression] ICE on excessive reloads

2012-11-21 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55433 Bug #: 55433 Summary: [4.8 Regression] ICE on excessive reloads Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/55433] [4.8 Regression] ICE on excessive reloads

2012-11-21 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55433 --- Comment #1 from Paul H. Hargrove 2012-11-21 22:48:05 UTC --- Minor correction: The line or error output in the Description that reads testcase.c:10:1: internal compiler error: [...] should instead read testcase.c:9:1: interna

[Bug sanitizer/55989] New: [4.8 regresion] build failure in libsanitizer

2013-01-15 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55989 Bug #: 55989 Summary: [4.8 regresion] build failure in libsanitizer Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: blocker

[Bug sanitizer/55989] [4.8 regresion] build failure in libsanitizer

2013-01-15 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55989 --- Comment #2 from Paul H. Hargrove 2013-01-15 08:59:42 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > Will the following patch work? [...] Yes, it allows the compilation to complete. SInce I don't know anything to the contrary, I'll assume tha

[Bug target/55433] [4.8 Regression][LRA] ICE on excessive reloads

2013-01-15 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55433 --- Comment #3 from Paul H. Hargrove 2013-01-15 09:15:44 UTC --- This bug is still present and "biting me" as of r195176. Is there anything I can do to help make some progress on this? -Paul

[Bug preprocessor/43027] New: #pragma rejected inside enum defn

2010-02-10 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: preprocessor AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: PHHargrove at lbl dot gov http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43027

[Bug preprocessor/43027] #pragma rejected inside enum defn

2010-02-10 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
--- Comment #2 from PHHargrove at lbl dot gov 2010-02-11 02:09 --- (In reply to comment #1) > Looks related to PR 37267 but that talks about #pragma inside struct. Hmm. Indeed this shares w/ PR 37267 the fact that the original code looks roughly like: enum { #incl

[Bug other/58996] [4.9 regression] build failure in libcilkrts

2014-01-09 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58996 --- Comment #5 from Paul H. Hargrove --- The patch in comment #2 allows the build to complete without the need to --disable-libcilkrts. However, I agree with Jakub (comment #3) that use of a glibc internal macros is a poor idea and a configure-ti

[Bug other/58996] [4.9 regression] build failure in libcilkrts

2014-01-10 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58996 --- Comment #8 from Paul H. Hargrove --- (In reply to Barry Tannenbaum from comment #6) > I don't understand the reluctance to check the defintion of > __cpu_set_t_defined, since it's defined right there in > /usr/include/bits/sched.h on my Ubuntu

[Bug other/58996] [4.9 regression] build failure in libcilkrts

2014-01-15 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58996 --- Comment #12 from Paul H. Hargrove --- Balaji, Reading the patch it looks sufficient. I will test when I have a chance, but cannot guess how soon that may be, -Paul

[Bug sanitizer/57316] [4.8 regression] build failure in libsanitizer

2014-01-23 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57316 --- Comment #20 from Paul H. Hargrove --- (In reply to Yury Gribov from comment #19) > Paul, could you check if libsanitizer is now auto-disabled on your system > and close the bug in that case? Probably can't get to this until next week. However

[Bug sanitizer/57316] [4.8 regression] build failure in libsanitizer

2014-01-24 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57316 --- Comment #21 from Paul H. Hargrove --- A build from svn trunk (r207062) completed w/o problems. I see: Configuring in i686-pc-linux-gnu/libsanitizer followed later by checking for necessary platform features... no So the added configure

[Bug sanitizer/57316] [4.8 regression] build failure in libsanitizer

2014-10-21 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57316 --- Comment #26 from Paul H. Hargrove --- (In reply to Yury Gribov from comment #25) > Can we close this? Just tried to build the released 4.8.3 and still see the original problem (see error messages below). Same is true at the tip of the gcc-4

[Bug c/62198] spurious warning - initialization discards qualifier from pointer target type for pointer to array

2014-08-20 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62198 --- Comment #2 from Paul H. Hargrove --- Both icc (v13.0.1) and pgcc (v12.9-0) agree with gcc (and thus disagree with clang) on this: $ cat -n q.c 1 2 typedef unsigned long size_t; 3 extern const void *alloc (size_t); 4

[Bug other/48924] New: bugzilla: password dialog still claims 6-char minimum length

2011-05-06 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48924 Summary: bugzilla: password dialog still claims 6-char minimum length Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: trivial Priority: P3 Com

[Bug other/48922] New: invalid dwarf2 on ia64 with very old gas

2011-05-06 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48922 Summary: invalid dwarf2 on ia64 with very old gas Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: other AssignedTo: unassig..

[Bug other/49303] New: ICE: vinsn_detach, at sel-sched-ir.c:1277 w/ -O3 on ia64 in r174558

2011-06-06 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49303 Summary: ICE: vinsn_detach, at sel-sched-ir.c:1277 w/ -O3 on ia64 in r174558 Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug other/49303] ICE: vinsn_detach, at sel-sched-ir.c:1277 w/ -O3 on ia64 in r174558

2011-06-06 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49303 --- Comment #1 from Paul H. Hargrove 2011-06-06 20:07:44 UTC --- Due to a "rogue $PATH" the failing gcc-4.7.0 in the report was built with a non-standard gcc. To rule out that as a possible contributing factor, I have confirmed (below) that when

[Bug c/49304] New: ICE: code_motion_path_driver, at sel-sched.c:6573 w/ -O3 on ia64 in r174558

2011-06-06 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49304 Summary: ICE: code_motion_path_driver, at sel-sched.c:6573 w/ -O3 on ia64 in r174558 Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c/49379] warning from Mac OS X linker alignment lost for -ftree-vectorize optimization

2011-06-28 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49379 --- Comment #5 from Paul H. Hargrove 2011-06-29 04:20:13 UTC --- Created attachment 24629 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24629 Second (non Apple) reproducer for bug 49379 This attachment is a simple 3-file reproducer for thi

[Bug c/49379] warning from Mac OS X linker alignment lost for -ftree-vectorize optimization

2011-06-28 Thread PHHargrove at lbl dot gov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49379 Paul H. Hargrove changed: What|Removed |Added CC||PHHargrove at lbl dot gov --- Comment