[Bug middle-end/61913] New: ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr

[Bug middle-end/61913] New: ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr

[burnus at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61913

            Bug ID: 61913
           Summary: ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.10.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: middle-end
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
                CC: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org

The following gives an ICE:

$ touch foo.cc
$ g++ -Wodr foo.cc


cc1plus: internal compiler error: in common_handle_option, at opts.c:1926
0x119e5f3 common_handle_option(gcc_options*, gcc_options*, cl_decoded_option
const*, unsigned int, int, unsigned int, cl_option_handlers const*,
diagnostic_context*)
        ../../gcc/opts.c:1926
0x11a0e07 handle_option
        ../../gcc/opts-common.c:925
0x11a10b3 read_cmdline_option(gcc_options*, gcc_options*, cl_decoded_option*,
unsigned int, unsigned int, cl_option_handlers const*, diagnostic_context*)
        ../../gcc/opts-common.c:1101
0xb2f357 read_cmdline_options
        ../../gcc/opts-global.c:235
0xb2f357 decode_options(gcc_options*, gcc_options*, cl_decoded_option*,
unsigned int, unsigned int, diagnostic_context*)
        ../../gcc/opts-global.c:309

[Bug middle-end/61913] ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr

[mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61913

Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2014-07-26
                 CC|                            |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
           Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.10.0
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I'll fix it.

[Bug middle-end/61913] ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr

[mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61913

--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Mon Jul 28 08:33:33 2014
New Revision: 213115

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=213115&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
    PR middle-end/61913
    * common.opt (Wodr): Add Var.

Modified:
    trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/common.opt

[Bug middle-end/61913] ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr

[mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61913

Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed.

[Bug middle-end/61913] ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr

[manu at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61913

Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |manu at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
It is pretty strange that you need a Var() if it is not used anywhere.

Also, most of my comments in this review have been ignored:

https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg00233.html

The one about not having any testcase at all seems quite prescient.
>From gcc-bugs-return-457247-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Jul 28 14:24:18 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-457247-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 6769 invoked by alias); 28 Jul 2014 14:24:17 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 6745 invoked by uid 48); 28 Jul 2014 14:24:14 -0000
From: "modysk at hotmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/61936] New: gcc:g++ template template friends fail to compile.
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 14:24:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.8.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: modysk at hotmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter
Message-ID: <bug-61936-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-07/txt/msg01838.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1668

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61936

            Bug ID: 61936
           Summary: gcc:g++ template template friends fail to compile.
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.8.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: modysk at hotmail dot com

In header view.h

    template<class S, template<typename> class V>
    void Operate(S c, const V<S>& vx);

    template<class T, template<typename> class U>
    class ViewBase
    {
        template<class S, template<typename> class V>
        friend void Operate(S c, const V<S>& vx);
    };

    template<class T>
    class ViewTypeA : public ViewBase<T, ViewTypeA>
    {
    };

    template<class T>
    class ViewTypeB : public ViewBase<T, ViewTypeB>
    {
    };

    template<class S, template<typename> class V>
    void Operate(S c, const V<S>& vx)
    {
    }

In main.cpp

    #include "view.h"

    int main(int argc, char **argv)
    {
        Operate(5, ViewTypeA<int>());
    }

gcc (compiling with -std=gnu++11) gives errors

main.cpp||In function ‘int main(int, char**)’:

main.cpp|7|error: call of overloaded ‘Operate(int, ViewTypeA<int>&)’ is
ambiguous

main.cpp|7|note: candidates are:

view.h|25|note: void Operate(S, const V<S>&) [with S = int; V = ViewTypeA]

view.h|9|note: void Operate(S, const V<S>&) [with S = int; V = ViewTypeA; T =
int; U = ViewTypeA]

The ambiguity seems to be based on the _class_ template parameters which should
not come into the picture at all for the user.
>From gcc-bugs-return-457248-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Jul 28 14:24:55 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-457248-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 7623 invoked by alias); 28 Jul 2014 14:24:55 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 7575 invoked by uid 48); 28 Jul 2014 14:24:51 -0000
From: "mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug other/61480] GCC options processing: Init() requires Var() for 'no-' to work as expected
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 14:24:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: other
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on cc everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-61480-4-EugW4YAUCI@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-61480-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-61480-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-07/txt/msg01839.txt.bz2
Content-length: 560

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ida480

Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2014-07-28
                 CC|                            |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed.

[Bug middle-end/61913] ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr

[mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61913

--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #4)
> It is pretty strange that you need a Var() if it is not used anywhere.

It is, we have a bug for it: PR61480.

> Also, most of my comments in this review have been ignored:
> 
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg00233.html
> 
> The one about not having any testcase at all seems quite prescient.

The issue is that lto.exp does not allow to scan for 'warning:'.
>From gcc-bugs-return-457251-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Jul 28 14:29:39 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-457251-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 16200 invoked by alias); 28 Jul 2014 14:29:39 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 15192 invoked by uid 55); 28 Jul 2014 14:29:30 -0000
From: "ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug bootstrap/61320] [4.10 regression] ICE in jcf-parse.c:1622 (parse_class_file
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 14:29:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: bootstrap
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-61320-4-oVpwKRzyFq@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-61320-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-61320-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-07/txt/msg01842.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1263

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ida320

--- Comment #62 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #60 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
[...]
> Fix:
>
> Index: gcc/tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c
> ==================================================================> --- gcc/tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c  (revision 213050)
> +++ gcc/tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c  (working copy)
> @@ -1704,6 +1704,8 @@ may_be_unaligned_p (tree ref, tree step)
>      return false;
>
>    unsigned int align = TYPE_ALIGN (TREE_TYPE (ref));
> +  if (GET_MODE_ALIGNMENT (TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (ref))) > align)
> +    align = GET_MODE_ALIGNMENT (TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (ref)));
>
>    unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT bitpos;
>    unsigned int ref_align;
>
> can you test and apply that patch?

With the patch, SPARC bootstrap concluded on mainline.  I'm seeing two
different regressions with this patch in tree:

* on i386-pc-solaris2.10, gcc.dg/pch/import-[12].c FAILs (SEGV in cc1
  due to unaligned movaps destination)

* on sparc-sun-solaris2.*, many 64-bit gfortran.dg tests (starting with
  gfortran.dg/allocate_class_3.f90) FAIL at -O1 and above

I'd like to make sure those are not related to your patch first.

    Rainer

[Bug middle-end/61913] ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr

[manu at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61913

--- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #5)
> (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #4)
> > It is pretty strange that you need a Var() if it is not used anywhere.
> 
> It is, we have a bug for it: PR61480.

But there is no Init(1) there. In fact, I doubt Wodr is enabled by default as
the documentation says without Init(1).

> The issue is that lto.exp does not allow to scan for 'warning:'.

Isn't that a bug/missing feature? It seems crucial if one wants to add
warnings/errors generated by LTO.
>From gcc-bugs-return-457258-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Jul 28 14:41:07 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-457258-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 32064 invoked by alias); 28 Jul 2014 14:41:06 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 32002 invoked by uid 48); 28 Jul 2014 14:41:02 -0000
From: "manu at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/61913] ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 14:41:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: manu at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-61913-4-1mRVoMLY5z@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-61913-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-61913-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-07/txt/msg01849.txt.bz2
Content-length: 436

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61913

--- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #5)
> > Also, most of my comments in this review have been ignored:
> > 
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg00233.html

In particular, the manual does not show Wodr:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Warning-Options.html#Warning-Options
>From gcc-bugs-return-457259-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Jul 28 14:47:06 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-457259-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 2912 invoked by alias); 28 Jul 2014 14:47:05 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 2839 invoked by uid 48); 28 Jul 2014 14:47:00 -0000
From: "mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/61913] ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 14:47:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-61913-4-7copHNQouR@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-61913-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-61913-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-07/txt/msg01850.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1081

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61913

--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #6)
> (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #4)
> > > It is pretty strange that you need a Var() if it is not used anywhere.
> > 
> > It is, we have a bug for it: PR61480.
> 
> But there is no Init(1) there. In fact, I doubt Wodr is enabled by default
> as the documentation says without Init(1).

I guess it doesn't matter whether there's Init() or not then.

> > The issue is that lto.exp does not allow to scan for 'warning:'.
> 
> Isn't that a bug/missing feature? It seems crucial if one wants to add
> warnings/errors generated by LTO.

It certainly is a deficiency.

> In particular, the manual does not show Wodr:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Warning-Options.html#Warning-Options

The description is there (after -Wno-overflow), but @item is missing, so the
warning name isn't listed there.  I'll add it.
>From gcc-bugs-return-457260-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Jul 28 14:53:51 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-457260-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 10344 invoked by alias); 28 Jul 2014 14:53:51 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 10279 invoked by uid 48); 28 Jul 2014 14:53:45 -0000
From: "manu at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/61913] ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 14:53:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: manu at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-61913-4-uVQ3NCta7t@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-61913-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-61913-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-07/txt/msg01851.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1726

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61913

--- Comment #9 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #8)
> (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #6)
> > (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #5)
> > > (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #4)
> > > > It is pretty strange that you need a Var() if it is not used anywhere.
> > > 
> > > It is, we have a bug for it: PR61480.
> > 
> > But there is no Init(1) there. In fact, I doubt Wodr is enabled by default
> > as the documentation says without Init(1).
> 
> I guess it doesn't matter whether there's Init() or not then.

It doesn't seem to be the same bug at all. The other one does not ICE, just
ignores -Wno-. I understand why -Wno- is ignored, but I don't understand why it
-Wodr ICEs without Var().

> > > The issue is that lto.exp does not allow to scan for 'warning:'.
> > 
> > Isn't that a bug/missing feature? It seems crucial if one wants to add
> > warnings/errors generated by LTO.
> 
> It certainly is a deficiency.

It seems quite a major deficiency if we are going to keep adding warnings to
LTO, which are never tested and there is a high chance they are not working at
all. Is there a PR about it? Is Jan or someone else working on it?

> > In particular, the manual does not show Wodr:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Warning-Options.html#Warning-Options
> 
> The description is there (after -Wno-overflow), but @item is missing, so the
> warning name isn't listed there.  I'll add it.

I added the correct entry in my review. You could use that. It fixes several
deficiencies with the current entry.
>From gcc-bugs-return-457261-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Jul 28 15:02:04 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-457261-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 19349 invoked by alias); 28 Jul 2014 15:02:02 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 18894 invoked by uid 48); 28 Jul 2014 15:01:56 -0000
From: "galdralag at bk dot ru" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/61935] Missing "unused variable" warning in 4.9 but it was in g++ 4.8
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 15:02:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: galdralag at bk dot ru
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-61935-4-nqjAEA37An@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-61935-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-61935-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-07/txt/msg01852.txt.bz2
Content-length: 560

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ida935

Vyacheslav <galdralag at bk dot ru> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |UNCONFIRMED
         Resolution|DUPLICATE                   |---

--- Comment #2 from Vyacheslav <galdralag at bk dot ru> ---
Variable rrr is reference.
If change it to pointer warning occurs.
Is it intentional ?

And one more time: In g++ 4.8 warning always printed as expected.

[Bug middle-end/61913] ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr

[mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61913

--- Comment #10 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #9)
> It doesn't seem to be the same bug at all. The other one does not ICE, just
> ignores -Wno-. I understand why -Wno- is ignored, but I don't understand why
> it -Wodr ICEs without Var().

Right, but that might be due to common.opt vs c-family/c.opt.  I haven't
inspected this to be sure.

> It seems quite a major deficiency if we are going to keep adding warnings to
> LTO, which are never tested and there is a high chance they are not working
> at all. Is there a PR about it? Is Jan or someone else working on it?

I don't know about such PR.  Neither do I know whether Jan's planning to fix
this soon.

> I added the correct entry in my review. You could use that. It fixes several
> deficiencies with the current entry.

https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg01905.html
>From gcc-bugs-return-457263-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Jul 28 16:17:05 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-457263-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 13659 invoked by alias); 28 Jul 2014 16:17:04 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 13596 invoked by uid 48); 28 Jul 2014 16:16:58 -0000
From: "daniel.gutson at tallertechnologies dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/60850] pedantic warning behavior when casting void* to ptr-to-func
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 16:17:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.8.3
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: patch
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: daniel.gutson at tallertechnologies dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-60850-4-xvOUflkAHS@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-60850-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-60850-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-07/txt/msg01854.txt.bz2
Content-length: 267

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id`850

--- Comment #8 from Daniel Gutson <daniel.gutson at tallertechnologies dot com> ---
Could you please detail *exactly* what the problem is, what the output error is
and what does autotools do in its probe?

Thanks.

Re: [Bug middle-end/61913] ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr

[Jan Hubicka]

> > It seems quite a major deficiency if we are going to keep adding warnings to
> > LTO, which are never tested and there is a high chance they are not working
> > at all. Is there a PR about it? Is Jan or someone else working on it?
> 
> I don't know about such PR.  Neither do I know whether Jan's planning to fix
> this soon.

I am not really dejagnu guru, so I have no immediate plans for fixing this - we need
way to test warnings&errors and also way to scan dumps.  Neither of this is implemented.
patches would be very welcome.

Honza
> 
> > I added the correct entry in my review. You could use that. It fixes several
> > deficiencies with the current entry.
> 
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg01905.html

[Bug middle-end/61913] ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr

[hubicka at ucw dot cz]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61913

--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> ---
> > It seems quite a major deficiency if we are going to keep adding warnings to
> > LTO, which are never tested and there is a high chance they are not working
> > at all. Is there a PR about it? Is Jan or someone else working on it?
> 
> I don't know about such PR.  Neither do I know whether Jan's planning to fix
> this soon.

I am not really dejagnu guru, so I have no immediate plans for fixing this - we
need
way to test warnings&errors and also way to scan dumps.  Neither of this is
implemented.
patches would be very welcome.

Honza
> 
> > I added the correct entry in my review. You could use that. It fixes several
> > deficiencies with the current entry.
> 
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg01905.html

Re: [Bug middle-end/61913] ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr

[Jan Hubicka]

> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61913
> 
> --- Comment #6 from Manuel LĂłpez-IbĂĄ??ez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Manuel LĂłpez-IbĂĄ??ez from comment #4)
> > > It is pretty strange that you need a Var() if it is not used anywhere.
> > 
> > It is, we have a bug for it: PR61480.
> 
> But there is no Init(1) there. In fact, I doubt Wodr is enabled by default as
> the documentation says without Init(1).

The warning is triggered by:
jan@linux-ujxe:~/trunk/build/gcc> cat tt.C
struct A {int b; virtual void t();};
  struct A *a;
void
m()
{
  a->t();
}
jan@linux-ujxe:~/trunk/build/gcc> cat tt2.C
struct A {short d; virtual void t();};
void
A::t(){
}
jan@linux-ujxe:~/trunk/build/gcc> ./xgcc -B ./ -O2 -flto tt.C tt2.C
tt2.C:1:8: warning: type Ă˘Â€Â˜struct A’ violates one definition rule [-Wodr]
 struct A {short d; virtual void t();};
        ^                                                                                                                                                                                   
tt.C:1:8: note: a different type is defined in another translation unit                                                                                                                     
 struct A {int b; virtual void t();};                                                                                                                                                       
        ^                                                                                                                                                                                   
tt2.C:1:17: note: the first difference of corresponding definitions is field Ă˘Â€Â˜d’                                                                                                            
 struct A {short d; virtual void t();};                                                                                                                                                     
                 ^                                                                                                                                                                          
tt.C:1:15: note: a field with different name is defined in another translation unit                                                                                                         
 struct A {int b; virtual void t();};                                                                                                                                                       

So my tree shows it by default. I am at a conference and have to go for talks,
but I will try to dig deeper today.

Honza
> 
> > The issue is that lto.exp does not allow to scan for 'warning:'.
> 
> Isn't that a bug/missing feature? It seems crucial if one wants to add
> warnings/errors generated by LTO.

[Bug middle-end/61913] ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr

[hubicka at ucw dot cz]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61913

--- Comment #12 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61913
> 
> --- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibá??ez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Manuel López-Ibá??ez from comment #4)
> > > It is pretty strange that you need a Var() if it is not used anywhere.
> > 
> > It is, we have a bug for it: PR61480.
> 
> But there is no Init(1) there. In fact, I doubt Wodr is enabled by default as
> the documentation says without Init(1).

The warning is triggered by:
jan@linux-ujxe:~/trunk/build/gcc> cat tt.C
struct A {int b; virtual void t();};
  struct A *a;
void
m()
{
  a->t();
}
jan@linux-ujxe:~/trunk/build/gcc> cat tt2.C
struct A {short d; virtual void t();};
void
A::t(){
}
jan@linux-ujxe:~/trunk/build/gcc> ./xgcc -B ./ -O2 -flto tt.C tt2.C
tt2.C:1:8: warning: type ‘struct A’ violates one definition rule [-Wodr]
 struct A {short d; virtual void t();};
        ^                                                                       
tt.C:1:8: note: a different type is defined in another translation unit         
 struct A {int b; virtual void t();};                                           
        ^                                                                       
tt2.C:1:17: note: the first difference of corresponding definitions is field
‘d’                                                                         
 struct A {short d; virtual void t();};                                         
                 ^                                                              
tt.C:1:15: note: a field with different name is defined in another translation
unit                                                                            
 struct A {int b; virtual void t();};                                           

So my tree shows it by default. I am at a conference and have to go for talks,
but I will try to dig deeper today.

Honza
> 
> > The issue is that lto.exp does not allow to scan for 'warning:'.
> 
> Isn't that a bug/missing feature? It seems crucial if one wants to add
> warnings/errors generated by LTO.
>From gcc-bugs-return-457291-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Jul 29 06:53:06 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-457291-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 544 invoked by alias); 29 Jul 2014 06:53:06 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 497 invoked by uid 48); 29 Jul 2014 06:53:00 -0000
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/61938] Vectorization not happening .
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 06:53:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-61938-4-M0Mdwx4vYY@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-61938-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-61938-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-07/txt/msg01882.txt.bz2
Content-length: 159

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ida938

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
array[selectvector[i]]
is not handled.

[Bug middle-end/61913] ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr

[manu at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61913

--- Comment #13 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #12)
> 
> So my tree shows it by default. I am at a conference and have to go for
> talks,

I cannot reproduce the above in trunk. Is it that a testcase that only works on
your working copy/branch? Do you have one that works on current trunk?
>From gcc-bugs-return-459060-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Fri Aug 22 18:44:26 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-459060-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 26090 invoked by alias); 22 Aug 2014 18:44:26 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 26042 invoked by uid 55); 22 Aug 2014 18:44:23 -0000
From: "steven at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/62135] ICE with invalid SELECT CASE selector
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 18:44:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.6.3
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic, ice-on-invalid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: steven at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-62135-4-O4jGVW6mEr@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-62135-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-62135-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-08/txt/msg01557.txt.bz2
Content-length: 657

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idb135

--- Comment #6 from Steven Bosscher <steven at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: steven
Date: Fri Aug 22 18:43:50 2014
New Revision: 214351

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev!4351&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
fortran/
    PR fortran/62135
    * resolve.c (resolve_select): Fix list traversal in case the
    last element of the CASE list was dropped as unreachable code.

testsuite/
    PR fortran/62135
    * gfortran.dg/pr62135.f90: New test.


Added:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr62135.f90
Modified:
    trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog

[Bug middle-end/61913] ICE in common_handle_option with -Wodr

[hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61913

--- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The testcase still seems to work for me (with and without linker plugin).

Without linker plugin collect2 will not execute LTO unless it can resolve
symbols. You need to link with g++ (and have runtime or path) or use -r
-nostdlib. Otherwise it fails with:

/tmp/ccHKdyQQ.o:(.rodata._ZTI1A[_ZTI1A]+0x0): undefined reference to `vtable
for __cxxabiv1::__class_type_info'

and warnings are not output.