public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug target/51134] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90
@ 2011-11-14 23:51 hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-15 4:15 ` [Bug target/51134] " hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (14 more replies)
0 siblings, 15 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hjl.tools at gmail dot com @ 2011-11-14 23:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
Bug #: 51134
Summary: [4.7 Regression] FAIL:
gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: hjl.tools@gmail.com
CC: hubicka@gcc.gnu.org
On Linux/x86-64, revision 181359 gave
FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 execution, -O2
-fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions -funroll-loops
Revision 181355 is OK. It may be caused by revision 181357:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2011-11/msg00649.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90
2011-11-14 23:51 [Bug target/51134] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 hjl.tools at gmail dot com
@ 2011-11-15 4:15 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-15 5:21 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (13 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hjl.tools at gmail dot com @ 2011-11-15 4:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-11-15 04:03:41 UTC ---
It is caused by revision 181357.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90
2011-11-14 23:51 [Bug target/51134] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-15 4:15 ` [Bug target/51134] " hjl.tools at gmail dot com
@ 2011-11-15 5:21 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-15 12:40 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
` (12 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hjl.tools at gmail dot com @ 2011-11-15 5:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-11-15 04:05:06 UTC ---
gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 is miscompiled.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90
2011-11-14 23:51 [Bug target/51134] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-15 4:15 ` [Bug target/51134] " hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-15 5:21 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
@ 2011-11-15 12:40 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
2011-11-15 14:01 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
` (11 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hubicka at ucw dot cz @ 2011-11-15 12:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> 2011-11-15 12:37:07 UTC ---
> gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 is miscompiled.
There are 4 expanded memset calls in the testcase, all ends up being unrolled
loop.
Looks like we misoptmize one of them. I am looking into that.
Honza
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90
2011-11-14 23:51 [Bug target/51134] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2011-11-15 12:40 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
@ 2011-11-15 14:01 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
2011-11-15 16:44 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (10 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hubicka at ucw dot cz @ 2011-11-15 14:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> 2011-11-15 13:28:42 UTC ---
Hi,
the bug is loopy epilogue not being used because promoted value is not
availbale. The non-loopy epilogue does not expect alignments
greater than 16.
I am testing the following patch.
I think we might still have bugs for blocks >8 && <16. Will try to produce
testcase.
Honza
Index: config/i386/i386.c
===================================================================
--- config/i386/i386.c (revision 181357)
+++ config/i386/i386.c (working copy)
@@ -23073,13 +23073,13 @@ ix86_expand_setmem (rtx dst, rtx count_e
rtx tmp;
if (align_unknown && unroll_factor > 1
&& epilogue_size_needed >= GET_MODE_SIZE (move_mode)
- && vec_promoted_val)
+ && (vec_promoted_val || gpr_promoted_val))
{
/* Reduce epilogue's size by creating not-unrolled loop. If we won't
do this, we can have very big epilogue - when alignment is statically
unknown we'll have the epilogue byte by byte which may be very slow.
*/
loop_iter = expand_set_or_movmem_via_loop_with_iter (dst, NULL, destreg,
- NULL, vec_promoted_val, count_exp,
+ NULL, vec_promoted_val ? vec_promoted_val : gpr_promoted_val,
count_exp,
loop_iter, move_mode, 1,
expected_size, false);
dst = change_address (dst, BLKmode, destreg);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90
2011-11-14 23:51 [Bug target/51134] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2011-11-15 14:01 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
@ 2011-11-15 16:44 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-15 19:57 ` [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] x86 memset/memcpy expansion is broken hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (9 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hjl.tools at gmail dot com @ 2011-11-15 16:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-11-15 16:34:22 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Hi,
> the bug is loopy epilogue not being used because promoted value is not
> availbale. The non-loopy epilogue does not expect alignments
> greater than 16.
>
> I am testing the following patch.
> I think we might still have bugs for blocks >8 && <16. Will try to produce
> testcase.
I believe so. If you configure GCC for Linux/x86-64 with
--with-arch=core2 --with-cpu=atom
you will get
gengtype: malloc.c:3840: _int_malloc: Assertion `(unsigned long)(size) >=
(unsigned long)(nb)' failed.
make[6]: *** [s-gtype] Aborted
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] x86 memset/memcpy expansion is broken
2011-11-14 23:51 [Bug target/51134] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2011-11-15 16:44 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
@ 2011-11-15 19:57 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-16 5:15 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (8 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hjl.tools at gmail dot com @ 2011-11-15 19:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
Summary|[4.7 Regression] FAIL: |[4.7 Regression] x86
|gfortran.fortran-torture/ex |memset/memcpy expansion is
|ecute/arrayarg.f90 |broken
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] x86 memset/memcpy expansion is broken
2011-11-14 23:51 [Bug target/51134] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2011-11-15 19:57 ` [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] x86 memset/memcpy expansion is broken hjl.tools at gmail dot com
@ 2011-11-16 5:15 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-18 1:17 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hjl.tools at gmail dot com @ 2011-11-16 5:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-11-16 01:56:08 UTC ---
On Linux/ia32, If you configure GCC with
--with-arch=core2 --with-cpu=atom
you will get
bin/sh ../../src-trunk/gcc/../move-if-change tmp-check.h tree-check.h
*** glibc detected *** build/gengtype: malloc(): memory corruption: 0x09561138
***
and it hangs forever.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] x86 memset/memcpy expansion is broken
2011-11-14 23:51 [Bug target/51134] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2011-11-16 5:15 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
@ 2011-11-18 1:17 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-18 2:23 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-11-18 1:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed| |2011-11-18
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-11-18 01:03:17 UTC ---
I am testing patch fixing the Atom issues and other problems.
The gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 testcase is however
different: the new inline code enables loop unrolling that in turn makes sched2
to produce wrong code. The testcase passes with -fno-unroll-loop (or a hack
disabling only RTL unroller) as well as with -fno-schedule-insns2 added.
After hours looking into the code produced I am quite convinced that the memset
expansion involved is correct. Can someone with better Fortran-fu than me
verify that the testcase is well defined WRT aliasing?
Honza
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] x86 memset/memcpy expansion is broken
2011-11-14 23:51 [Bug target/51134] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2011-11-18 1:17 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-11-18 2:23 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-22 5:31 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (5 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-11-18 2:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-11-18 02:18:32 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Fri Nov 18 02:18:28 2011
New Revision: 181466
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181466
Log:
PR bootstrap/51134
* i386.c (atom_cost): Fix 32bit memset description.
(expand_set_or_movmem_via_loop_with_iter): Output proper bounds check for
epilogue loops.
(expand_movmem_epilogue): Handle epilogues up to size 15 w/o producing byte
loop.
(decide_alg): sse_loop is not useable wthen SSE2 is disabled; when not
optimizing always
use rep movsb or lincall; do not produce word sized loops when optimizing
memset for
size (to avoid need for large constants).
(ix86_expand_movmem): Get into sync with ix86_expand_setmem; choose unroll
factors
better; always do 128bit moves when producing SSE loops; do not produce
loopy epilogue
when size is too small.
(promote_duplicated_reg_to_size): Do not look into desired alignments when
doing vector expansion.
(ix86_expand_setmem): Track better when promoted value is available; choose
unroll factors
more sanely.; output loopy epilogue only when needed.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] x86 memset/memcpy expansion is broken
2011-11-14 23:51 [Bug target/51134] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2011-11-18 2:23 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-11-22 5:31 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-22 14:19 ` michael.v.zolotukhin at gmail dot com
` (4 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hjl.tools at gmail dot com @ 2011-11-22 5:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-11-22 03:30:54 UTC ---
On Linux/x86-64, configured with
--enable-clocale=gnu --with-system-zlib --with-demangler-in-ld --enable-shared
--prefix=/usr/gcc-4.7.0 --with-local-prefix=/usr/local -with-arch=core2
--with-cpu=atom --with-fpmath=sse
revision 181584 result is at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-11/msg02226.html
revision 181584 + the old memset/memcpy expansion result us at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-11/msg02225.html
Regressions caused by the new memset/memcpy expansion are
FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/wchar_t/1.cc execution test
FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekpos/wchar_t/9874.cc execution test
FAIL: 27_io/manipulators/basefield/char/1.cc execution test
FAIL: 27_io/manipulators/basefield/wchar_t/1.cc execution test
FAIL: 27_io/objects/wchar_t/12.cc execution test
FAIL: 27_io/objects/wchar_t/13.cc execution test
FAIL: events run
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/cleanup-1.c execution test
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/cleanup-2.c execution test
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 execution, -O2
-fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions -funroll-loops
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] x86 memset/memcpy expansion is broken
2011-11-14 23:51 [Bug target/51134] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2011-11-22 5:31 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
@ 2011-11-22 14:19 ` michael.v.zolotukhin at gmail dot com
2011-11-22 16:43 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (3 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: michael.v.zolotukhin at gmail dot com @ 2011-11-22 14:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #10 from Michael Zolotukhin <michael.v.zolotukhin at gmail dot com> 2011-11-22 13:17:38 UTC ---
Created attachment 25882
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25882
Patch for new memset/memcpy implementation
(In reply to comment #9)
> Regressions caused by the new memset/memcpy expansion are
>
> FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/wchar_t/1.cc execution test
> FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekpos/wchar_t/9874.cc execution test
> FAIL: 27_io/manipulators/basefield/char/1.cc execution test
> FAIL: 27_io/manipulators/basefield/wchar_t/1.cc execution test
> FAIL: 27_io/objects/wchar_t/12.cc execution test
> FAIL: 27_io/objects/wchar_t/13.cc execution test
> FAIL: events run
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/cleanup-1.c execution test
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/cleanup-2.c execution test
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (internal compiler error)
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (internal compiler error)
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 execution, -O2
> -fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions -funroll-loops
With the attached patch fails on PR34077 and arrayarg.f90 are fixed, fails on
cleanup-tests are probably caused by incorrect testcase (see
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49503).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] x86 memset/memcpy expansion is broken
2011-11-14 23:51 [Bug target/51134] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2011-11-22 14:19 ` michael.v.zolotukhin at gmail dot com
@ 2011-11-22 16:43 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-22 17:23 ` michael.v.zolotukhin at gmail dot com
` (2 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hjl.tools at gmail dot com @ 2011-11-22 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-11-22 16:34:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Created attachment 25882 [details]
> Patch for new memset/memcpy implementation
>
> (In reply to comment #9)
> > Regressions caused by the new memset/memcpy expansion are
> >
> > FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/wchar_t/1.cc execution test
> > FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekpos/wchar_t/9874.cc execution test
> > FAIL: 27_io/manipulators/basefield/char/1.cc execution test
> > FAIL: 27_io/manipulators/basefield/wchar_t/1.cc execution test
> > FAIL: 27_io/objects/wchar_t/12.cc execution test
> > FAIL: 27_io/objects/wchar_t/13.cc execution test
> > FAIL: events run
> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/cleanup-1.c execution test
> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/cleanup-2.c execution test
> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (internal compiler error)
> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (internal compiler error)
> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 execution, -O2
> > -fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions -funroll-loops
>
> With the attached patch fails on PR34077 and arrayarg.f90 are fixed, fails on
> cleanup-tests are probably caused by incorrect testcase (see
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49503).
Do you have a patch for those C++ and Java regressions?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] x86 memset/memcpy expansion is broken
2011-11-14 23:51 [Bug target/51134] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2011-11-22 16:43 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
@ 2011-11-22 17:23 ` michael.v.zolotukhin at gmail dot com
2011-11-24 22:21 ` hjl at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-25 2:03 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: michael.v.zolotukhin at gmail dot com @ 2011-11-22 17:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #12 from Michael Zolotukhin <michael.v.zolotukhin at gmail dot com> 2011-11-22 16:54:35 UTC ---
> Do you have a patch for those C++ and Java regressions?
What regressions do you mean exactly? I managed to fix the bootstraps
(with sse_loop enabled again), but there are still some fails, so I
don't send the patch.
Currently I don't have a fix that solves all the problems - the
attached to previous letter patch fixes some of them, but there are
other fails (in 27_io and in some specs2k). I'm continuing debugging
and hope to finish fixes soon.
On 22 November 2011 20:34, hjl.tools at gmail dot com
<gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
>
> --- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-11-22 16:34:54 UTC ---
> (In reply to comment #10)
>> Created attachment 25882 [details]
>> Patch for new memset/memcpy implementation
>>
>> (In reply to comment #9)
>> > Regressions caused by the new memset/memcpy expansion are
>> >
>> > FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekoff/wchar_t/1.cc execution test
>> > FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/seekpos/wchar_t/9874.cc execution test
>> > FAIL: 27_io/manipulators/basefield/char/1.cc execution test
>> > FAIL: 27_io/manipulators/basefield/wchar_t/1.cc execution test
>> > FAIL: 27_io/objects/wchar_t/12.cc execution test
>> > FAIL: 27_io/objects/wchar_t/13.cc execution test
>> > FAIL: events run
>> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/cleanup-1.c execution test
>> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/cleanup-2.c execution test
>> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (internal compiler error)
>> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (internal compiler error)
>> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (test for excess errors)
>> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr34077.c (test for excess errors)
>> > FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 execution, -O2
>> > -fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions -funroll-loops
>>
>> With the attached patch fails on PR34077 and arrayarg.f90 are fixed, fails on
>> cleanup-tests are probably caused by incorrect testcase (see
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49503).
>
> Do you have a patch for those C++ and Java regressions?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] x86 memset/memcpy expansion is broken
2011-11-14 23:51 [Bug target/51134] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2011-11-22 17:23 ` michael.v.zolotukhin at gmail dot com
@ 2011-11-24 22:21 ` hjl at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-25 2:03 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hjl at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-11-24 22:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #13 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org <hjl at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-11-24 22:11:16 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Nov 24 22:11:12 2011
New Revision: 181701
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181701
Log:
Revert revision 181357.
gcc/
2011-11-24 H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
PR target/51134
* config/i386/i386.h (processor_costs): Revert revision 181357.
* config/i386/i386.c (cost models): Likewise.
(core_cost): Likewise.
(promote_duplicated_reg): Likewise.
(promote_duplicated_reg_to_size): Likewise.
(processor_target): Likewise.
(expand_set_or_movmem_via_loop_with_iter): Likewise.
(expand_set_or_movmem_via_loop): Likewise.
(emit_strset): Likewise.
(expand_movmem_epilogue): Likewise.
(expand_setmem_epilogue): Likewise.
(expand_movmem_prologue): Likewise.
(expand_setmem_prologue): Likewise.
(expand_constant_movmem_prologue): Likewise.
(expand_constant_setmem_prologue): Likewise.
(decide_alg): Likewise.
(decide_alignment): Likewise.
(ix86_expand_movmem): Likewise.
(ix86_expand_setmem): Likewise.
(ix86_slow_unaligned_access): Likewise.
* config/i386/i386.md (strset): Likewise.
* config/i386/sse.md (vec_dupv4si): Likewise.
(vec_dupv2di): Likewise.
gcc/testsuite/
2011-11-24 H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
PR target/51134
* gcc.target/i386/sw-1.c: Revert revision 181357.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/config/i386/i386-opts.h
trunk/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
trunk/gcc/config/i386/i386.h
trunk/gcc/config/i386/i386.opt
trunk/gcc/config/i386/sse.md
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/sw-1.c
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] x86 memset/memcpy expansion is broken
2011-11-14 23:51 [Bug target/51134] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2011-11-24 22:21 ` hjl at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-11-25 2:03 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hjl.tools at gmail dot com @ 2011-11-25 2:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #14 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-11-25 01:04:37 UTC ---
Fixed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-11-25 1:05 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-11-14 23:51 [Bug target/51134] New: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/arrayarg.f90 hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-15 4:15 ` [Bug target/51134] " hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-15 5:21 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-15 12:40 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
2011-11-15 14:01 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
2011-11-15 16:44 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-15 19:57 ` [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] x86 memset/memcpy expansion is broken hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-16 5:15 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-18 1:17 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-18 2:23 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-22 5:31 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-22 14:19 ` michael.v.zolotukhin at gmail dot com
2011-11-22 16:43 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-11-22 17:23 ` michael.v.zolotukhin at gmail dot com
2011-11-24 22:21 ` hjl at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-25 2:03 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).