[Bug middle-end/44989] New: [4.6 regression] g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C

[Bug middle-end/44989] New: [4.6 regression] g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C

[hjl dot tools at gmail dot com]

On Linux/x86, revision 162274 gave:

FAIL: g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C  -O2 -flto  line 16 i == 24
FAIL: g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C  -O2 -fwhopr  line 16 i == 24

Revision 162258 is OK.


-- 
           Summary: [4.6 regression] g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.6.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: middle-end
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44989

[Bug middle-end/44989] [4.6 regression] g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C

[hjl dot tools at gmail dot com]

------- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com  2010-07-19 13:42 -------
Revision 162269 is bad and revision 162264 is good.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44989

[Bug middle-end/44989] [4.6 regression] g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.6.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44989

[Bug middle-end/44989] [4.6 regression] g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-07-19 16:32 -------
The test is new, how could this be a regression?
Yes, -flto/-fwhopr has lots of issues with debug info.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44989

[Bug middle-end/44989] [4.6 regression] g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-07-23 12:56 -------
Confirmed.


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2010-07-23 12:56:35
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44989

[Bug testsuite/44989] [4.6 regression] g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-02 11:08 -------
I can't get anything but { dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } { "-fwhopr" "-flto" } { "" }
} to work.  But then -O0 still fails for me.

13          int i = 42;^M
$1 = 0^M
$2 = 42^M
0 != 42

with gdb 7.1.


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Component|middle-end                  |testsuite
           Priority|P3                          |P1


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44989

[Bug testsuite/44989] [4.6 regression] g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-02 11:51 -------
This isn't a testsuite bug, but lto/whopr bug, and IMHO quite severe, it
affects debugging even at -O0.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44989

[Bug lto/44989] [4.6 regression] g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-02 12:37 -------
Seems to be a bug in free_lang_data_in_block, which throws away the
DECL_EXTERNAL decl from BLOCK_VARS, eventhough it is obviously very much
needed. In fact, is there ever a case where what free_lang_data_in_block does
is desirable?


-- 

jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Component|testsuite                   |lto


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44989

[Bug lto/44989] [4.6 regression] g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44989

--- Comment #9 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-15 15:52:48 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Nov 15 15:52:42 2010
New Revision: 166757

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166757
Log:
2010-11-15  Richard Guenther  <rguenther@suse.de>

    PR lto/44989
    * g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C: Do not execute for LTO.

Modified:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C

[Bug lto/44989] [4.6 regression] g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44989

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Priority|P1                          |P2
                 CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-10 16:16:10 UTC ---
I don't think this is a P1 though, lto is known to have lots of issues with
debug info, that isn't going to be fully fixed for 4.6, and this is just one of
them.

[Bug lto/44989] [4.6 regression] g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44989

--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-03 16:01:41 UTC ---
No.  It's gone now ;)

But the FAILs remain.