public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug bootstrap/64213] New: gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
@ 2014-12-07 18:37 ubizjak at gmail dot com
2014-12-08 13:30 ` [Bug bootstrap/64213] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 more replies)
0 siblings, 8 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: ubizjak at gmail dot com @ 2014-12-07 18:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64213
Bug ID: 64213
Summary: gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not
declared in this scope
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ubizjak at gmail dot com
/space/homedirs/uros/gcc-build/./prev-gcc/xg++
-B/space/homedirs/uros/gcc-build/./prev-gcc/
-B/usr/local/alphaev68-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ -nostdinc++
-B/space/homedirs/uros/gcc-build/prev-alphaev68-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/src/.libs
-B/space/homedirs/uros/gcc-build/prev-alphaev68-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/.libs
-I/space/homedirs/uros/gcc-build/prev-alphaev68-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/alphaev68-unknown-linux-gnu
-I/space/homedirs/uros/gcc-build/prev-alphaev68-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include
-I/space/homedirs/uros/gcc-svn/trunk/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++
-L/space/homedirs/uros/gcc-build/prev-alphaev68-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/src/.libs
-L/space/homedirs/uros/gcc-build/prev-alphaev68-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/.libs
-c -g -O2 -gtoggle -DIN_GCC -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -W -Wall -Wno-narrowing -Wwrite-strings
-Wcast-qual -Wmissing-format-attribute -Woverloaded-virtual -pedantic
-Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros -Wno-overlength-strings -Werror -fno-common
-Wno-unused -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../gcc-svn/trunk/gcc
-I../../gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/. -I../../gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/../include
-I../../gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/../libcpp/include
-I../../gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/../libdecnumber
-I../../gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/../libdecnumber/dpd -I../libdecnumber
-I../../gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/../libbacktrace -o gimple-match.o -MT
gimple-match.o -MMD -MP -MF ./.deps/gimple-match.TPo gimple-match.c
gimple-match.c: In function ‘bool gimple_simplify(code_helper*, tree_node**,
gimple_statement_base**, tree_node* (*)(tree), code_helper, tree, tree)’:
gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
if ((GIMPLE && useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (captures[0]))) ||
(0 && type == TREE_TYPE (captures[0])))
^
gimple-match.c:1573:7: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
if (((GIMPLE && useless_type_conversion_p (type, inside_type)) || (0 &&
TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (type) == TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (inside_type))) && (((inter_int
|| inter_ptr) && final_int) || (inter_float && final_float)) && inter_prec >=
final_prec)
^
gimple-match.c:1821:7: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
if (((GIMPLE && useless_type_conversion_p (type, inside_type)) || (0 &&
TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (type) == TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (inside_type))) && (((inter_int
|| inter_ptr) && final_int) || (inter_float && final_float)) && inter_prec >=
final_prec)
^
gimple-match.c:2086:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
if ((GIMPLE && useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (captures[0]))) ||
(0 && type == TREE_TYPE (captures[0])))
^
gimple-match.c:2190:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
if ((GIMPLE && useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (captures[0]))) ||
(0 && type == TREE_TYPE (captures[0])))
^
gimple-match.c:2240:7: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
if (((GIMPLE && useless_type_conversion_p (type, inside_type)) || (0 &&
TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (type) == TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (inside_type))) && (((inter_int
|| inter_ptr) && final_int) || (inter_float && final_float)) && inter_prec >=
final_prec)
^
gimple-match.c:2488:7: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
if (((GIMPLE && useless_type_conversion_p (type, inside_type)) || (0 &&
TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (type) == TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (inside_type))) && (((inter_int
|| inter_ptr) && final_int) || (inter_float && final_float)) && inter_prec >=
final_prec)
^
gimple-match.c:2718:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
if ((GIMPLE && useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (captures[0]))) ||
(0 && type == TREE_TYPE (captures[0])))
^
gimple-match.c:2768:7: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
if (((GIMPLE && useless_type_conversion_p (type, inside_type)) || (0 &&
TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (type) == TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (inside_type))) && (((inter_int
|| inter_ptr) && final_int) || (inter_float && final_float)) && inter_prec >=
final_prec)
^
gimple-match.c:3016:7: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
>From gcc-bugs-return-469673-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sun Dec 07 18:40:20 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-469673-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 11945 invoked by alias); 7 Dec 2014 18:40:20 -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 11920 invoked by uid 48); 7 Dec 2014 18:40:16 -0000
From: "ubizjak at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug bootstrap/64213] gimple-match.c:1523:6: error:=?UTF-8?Q? ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope?Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2014 18:40:00 -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: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ubizjak at gmail 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: cf_gcctarget
Message-ID: <bug-64213-4-QfeLej1iy9@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-64213-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-64213-4@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: 2014-12/txt/msg00680.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1054
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64213
Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target| |alphaev68-linux-gnu
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> ---
It looks that GIMPLE is not substituted with "1", leaving following in
generated gimple-match.c:
...
CASE_CONVERT:
{
{
/* #line 612 "../../gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/match.pd" */
tree captures[1] ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED = {};
captures[0] = op0;
/* #line 610 "../../gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/match.pd" */
if ((GIMPLE && useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (captures[0]))) || (0
&& type == TREE_TYPE (captures[0])))
{
if (dump_file && (dump_flags & TDF_DETAILS)) fprintf (dump_file, "Applying
pattern match.pd:612, %s:%d\n", __FILE__, __LINE__);
res_ops[0] = captures[0];
*res_code = TREE_CODE (res_ops[0]);
return true;
...
Pleae note the above "if ((GIMPLE && ...)) condition.
>From gcc-bugs-return-469674-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sun Dec 07 20:37:45 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-469674-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 19090 invoked by alias); 7 Dec 2014 20:37:44 -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 19061 invoked by uid 48); 7 Dec 2014 20:37:40 -0000
From: "anlauf at gmx dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libfortran/62296] EXECUTE_COMMAND_LINE not F2008 conforming
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2014 20:37:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libfortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: anlauf at gmx dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
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-62296-4-VdUITzSkl6@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-62296-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-62296-4@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: 2014-12/txt/msg00681.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1459
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idb296
--- Comment #6 from Harald Anlauf <anlauf at gmx dot de> ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #5)
> (In reply to Harald Anlauf from comment #4)
> > (In reply to Harald Anlauf from comment #3)
> > > One might be able to do better on any reasonable Unix/Linux system.
> >
> > Replying to myself: Intel has changed/fixed their implementation of
> > EXECUTE_COMMAND_LINE in version 15.1, and it appears to work
> > reasonably now.
>
> What does it mean for gfortran?
The remaining issue for cmdstat, reduced from comment #1, can be seen as
follows:
integer :: stat, cstat
character(len%5) :: cmdmsg
stat = 0; cstat = 0; cmdmsg = ""
call execute_command_line ("/nosuchfile",exitstat=stat, cmdstat=cstat,
cmdmsg=cmdmsg)
print *, stat, cstat, "'", trim (cmdmsg), "'"
stat = 0
call execute_command_line ("/nosuchfile",exitstat=stat)
print *, stat
end
produces with gfortran:
sh: /nosuchfile: No such file or directory
127 0 ''
sh: /nosuchfile: No such file or directory
127
and with ifort:
sh: /nosuchfile: No such file or directory
0 124 'Invalid command supplied to EXECUTE_COMMAND_LINE'
sh: /nosuchfile: No such file or directory
forrtl: severe (124): Invalid command supplied to EXECUTE_COMMAND_LINE
cmdstat=0 is not a useful return value if the command cannot be executed.
The other cases from comment #0 appear correct.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug bootstrap/64213] gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
2014-12-07 18:37 [Bug bootstrap/64213] New: gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope ubizjak at gmail dot com
@ 2014-12-08 13:30 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-12-08 20:23 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com
` (6 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-12-08 13:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64213
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed| |2014-12-08
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Hmm, it definitely works on x86_64-linux. It is supposed to work via doing
cpp_define (r, gimple ? "GIMPLE=1": "GENERIC=1");
cpp_define (r, gimple ? "GENERIC=0": "GIMPLE=0");
in genmatch.c which should cause 'GIMPLE' to lex as '1'. And indeed on
x86_64-linux I see in gimple-match.c:
/* #line 610 "/space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/gcc/match.pd" */
if ((1 && useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (captures[0]))) || (0 &&
type == TREE_TYPE (captures[0])))
which means libcpp is miscompiled...? I notice that stage1 seems to work
for you?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug bootstrap/64213] gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
2014-12-07 18:37 [Bug bootstrap/64213] New: gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope ubizjak at gmail dot com
2014-12-08 13:30 ` [Bug bootstrap/64213] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-12-08 20:23 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com
2014-12-09 11:29 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com
` (5 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: ubizjak at gmail dot com @ 2014-12-08 20:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64213
Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC| |hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> which means libcpp is miscompiled...? I notice that stage1 seems to work
> for you?
Yes, it is a miscompilation due to r218161.
Backing out r218161 with following patch allows bootstrap to proceed to stage3:
--cut here--
Index: combine.c
===================================================================
--- combine.c (revision 218489)
+++ combine.c (working copy)
@@ -1580,7 +1580,7 @@ setup_incoming_promotions (rtx_insn *first)
/* The mode and signedness of the argument as it is actually passed,
see assign_parm_setup_reg in function.c. */
- mode3 = promote_function_mode (TREE_TYPE (arg), mode1, &uns1,
+ mode3 = promote_function_mode (DECL_ARG_TYPE (arg), mode2, &uns3,
TREE_TYPE (cfun->decl), 0);
/* The mode of the register in which the argument is being passed. */
--cut here--
>From gcc-bugs-return-469802-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Dec 08 20:29:03 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-469802-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 15682 invoked by alias); 8 Dec 2014 20:29:02 -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 15642 invoked by uid 48); 8 Dec 2014 20:28:59 -0000
From: "ubizjak at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/64037] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Miscompilation with -Os and enum class : char parameter
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 20:29:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.8.4
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ABI, wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ubizjak at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.8.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-64037-4-C6Wt9ilrZK@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-64037-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-64037-4@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: 2014-12/txt/msg00809.txt.bz2
Content-length: 150
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64037
--- Comment #19 from Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> ---
This patch caused PR64213.
>From gcc-bugs-return-469803-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Dec 08 20:37:55 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-469803-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 19526 invoked by alias); 8 Dec 2014 20:37:55 -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 19503 invoked by uid 48); 8 Dec 2014 20:37:51 -0000
From: "mathewc at nag dot co.uk" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/64230] New: Segmentation fault - invalid memory reference in a compiler-generated finalizer for a complicated type hierarchy when a polymorphic variable is allocated in an external procedure.
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 20:37:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: mathewc at nag dot co.uk
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-64230-4@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: 2014-12/txt/msg00810.txt.bz2
Content-length: 2001
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idd230
Bug ID: 64230
Summary: Segmentation fault - invalid memory reference in a
compiler-generated finalizer for a complicated type
hierarchy when a polymorphic variable is allocated in
an external procedure.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mathewc at nag dot co.uk
> uname -a
Linux whakarewarewa.nag.co.uk 3.17.4-301.fc21.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Nov 27 19:09:10
UTC 2014 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
> gfortran --version
GNU Fortran (GCC) 4.9.2 20141101 (Red Hat 4.9.2-1)
> cat test.f90
Module m
Implicit None
Type, Public :: t1
Integer, Allocatable :: i(:)
End Type
Type, Public :: t2
Integer, Allocatable :: i(:)
End Type
Type, Public :: t3
Type (t2) :: t
End Type
Type, Public :: t4
End Type
Type, Public, Extends (t4) :: t5
Type (t1) :: t_c1
End Type
Type, Public, Extends (t4) :: t6
Type (t5) :: t_c2
End Type
Type, Public, Extends (t6) :: t7
Type (t3) :: t_c3
End Type
End Module
Program main
Use m
Implicit None
Interface
Subroutine s(t)
Use m
Class (t4), Allocatable, Intent (Out) :: t
End Subroutine
End Interface
Class (t4), Allocatable :: t
Call s(t)
Deallocate (t)
End Program
Subroutine s(t)
Use m
Class (t4), Allocatable, Intent (Out) :: t
Allocate (t7 :: t)
End Subroutine
> gfortran test.f90 && ./a.out
Program received signal SIGSEGV: Segmentation fault - invalid memory reference.
Backtrace for this error:
#0 0x2B18DDE51517
#1 0x2B18DDE51B5E
#2 0x3E2B23494F
#3 0x401294 in __final_m_T6.2389 at test.f90:?
#4 0x400BEE in __final_m_T7.2378 at test.f90:?
#5 0x40159A in MAIN__ at test.f90:?
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
PS This works OK with 4.8.3.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug bootstrap/64213] gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
2014-12-07 18:37 [Bug bootstrap/64213] New: gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope ubizjak at gmail dot com
2014-12-08 13:30 ` [Bug bootstrap/64213] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-12-08 20:23 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com
@ 2014-12-09 11:29 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com
2014-12-09 11:41 ` rguenther at suse dot de
` (4 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: ubizjak at gmail dot com @ 2014-12-09 11:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64213
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> ---
One of several testsuite failures (with non-bootstrapped compiler) is:
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020805-1.c -Os execution test
--cut here--
extern void abort (void);
extern void exit (int);
void check (unsigned int m)
{
if (m != (unsigned int) -1)
abort ();
}
unsigned int n = 1;
int main (void)
{
unsigned int m;
m = (1 | (2 - n)) | (-n);
check (m);
exit (0);
}
--cut here--
So, the difference between trunk (+) and trunk with reverted patch (-) starts
at _.214r.combine, where "check" function gets miscompiled:
4: NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK 2
2: NOTE_INSN_DELETED
3: NOTE_INSN_FUNCTION_BEG
- 6: r71:DI=zero_extend($16:SI)
- REG_DEAD $16:DI
+ 6: NOTE_INSN_DELETED
7: r73:DI=0xffffffffffffffff
8: r72:DI=r73:DI 0>>0x20
REG_DEAD r73:DI
REG_EQUAL 0xffffffff
- 9: r74:DI=r71:DI==r72:DI
+ 9: r74:DI=$16:DI==r72:DI
+ REG_DEAD $16:DI
REG_DEAD r72:DI
- REG_DEAD r71:DI
10: pc={(r74:DI!=0)?L16:pc}
REG_DEAD r74:DI
REG_BR_PROB 9996
This results in an asm code difference, where needed SI->DI zero_extend is
missing:
@@ -18,7 +18,6 @@
lda $1,-1($31)
lda $30,-16($30)
.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
- zapnot $16,15,$16
srl $1,32,$1
stq $26,0($30)
.cfi_offset 26, -16
I propose to revert H.J.'s patch for PR64037.
>From gcc-bugs-return-469860-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Dec 09 11:32:59 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-469860-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 29026 invoked by alias); 9 Dec 2014 11:32:58 -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 28975 invoked by uid 48); 9 Dec 2014 11:32:53 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/42108] [4.8/4.9/5 Regression] 50% performance regression
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 11:32:00 -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: 4.5.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.8.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status assigned_to
Message-ID: <bug-42108-4-807hiznzXf@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-42108-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-42108-4@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: 2014-12/txt/msg00867.txt.bz2
Content-length: 561
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idB108
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #60 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Ok, so I have a patch that teaches LIM to move the division by using the
value-range information we now store.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug bootstrap/64213] gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
2014-12-07 18:37 [Bug bootstrap/64213] New: gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope ubizjak at gmail dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2014-12-09 11:29 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com
@ 2014-12-09 11:41 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2014-12-09 14:35 ` uros at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: rguenther at suse dot de @ 2014-12-09 11:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64213
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
On Tue, 9 Dec 2014, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64213
>
> --- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> ---
> One of several testsuite failures (with non-bootstrapped compiler) is:
>
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020805-1.c -Os execution test
>
> --cut here--
> extern void abort (void);
> extern void exit (int);
>
> void check (unsigned int m)
> {
> if (m != (unsigned int) -1)
> abort ();
> }
>
> unsigned int n = 1;
>
> int main (void)
> {
> unsigned int m;
> m = (1 | (2 - n)) | (-n);
> check (m);
> exit (0);
> }
> --cut here--
>
> So, the difference between trunk (+) and trunk with reverted patch (-) starts
> at _.214r.combine, where "check" function gets miscompiled:
>
> 4: NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK 2
> 2: NOTE_INSN_DELETED
> 3: NOTE_INSN_FUNCTION_BEG
> - 6: r71:DI=zero_extend($16:SI)
> - REG_DEAD $16:DI
> + 6: NOTE_INSN_DELETED
> 7: r73:DI=0xffffffffffffffff
> 8: r72:DI=r73:DI 0>>0x20
> REG_DEAD r73:DI
> REG_EQUAL 0xffffffff
> - 9: r74:DI=r71:DI==r72:DI
> + 9: r74:DI=$16:DI==r72:DI
> + REG_DEAD $16:DI
> REG_DEAD r72:DI
> - REG_DEAD r71:DI
> 10: pc={(r74:DI!=0)?L16:pc}
> REG_DEAD r74:DI
> REG_BR_PROB 9996
>
> This results in an asm code difference, where needed SI->DI zero_extend is
> missing:
>
> @@ -18,7 +18,6 @@
> lda $1,-1($31)
> lda $30,-16($30)
> .cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
> - zapnot $16,15,$16
> srl $1,32,$1
> stq $26,0($30)
> .cfi_offset 26, -16
>
> I propose to revert H.J.'s patch for PR64037.
Agreed and approved. Please make sure to re-open bugs that were
fixed by the patch.
>From gcc-bugs-return-469862-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Dec 09 11:53:41 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-469862-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 9134 invoked by alias); 9 Dec 2014 11:53:41 -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 8662 invoked by uid 55); 9 Dec 2014 11:53:35 -0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/64203] shared_mutex compile errors on bare-metal targets
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 11:53:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.2
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi 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:
Message-ID: <bug-64203-4-9qACU8nKnC@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-64203-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-64203-4@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: 2014-12/txt/msg00869.txt.bz2
Content-length: 604
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idd203
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Dec 9 11:53:03 2014
New Revision: 218512
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev!8512&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/64203
* include/std/shared_mutex: Fix preprocessor conditions.
* testsuite/experimental/feat-cxx14.cc: Check conditions.
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_9-branch/libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_9-branch/libstdc++-v3/include/std/shared_mutex
branches/gcc-4_9-branch/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/experimental/feat-cxx14.cc
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug bootstrap/64213] gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
2014-12-07 18:37 [Bug bootstrap/64213] New: gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope ubizjak at gmail dot com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2014-12-09 11:41 ` rguenther at suse dot de
@ 2014-12-09 14:35 ` uros at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-12-09 14:41 ` uros at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: uros at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-12-09 14:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64213
--- Comment #6 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Tue Dec 9 14:34:32 2014
New Revision: 218516
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218516&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/64213
Revert:
2014-11-28 H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
PR rtl-optimization/64037
* combine.c (setup_incoming_promotions): Pass the argument
before any promotions happen to promote_function_mode.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR bootstrap/64213
Revert:
2014-11-28 H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
PR rtl-optimization/64037
* g++.dg/pr64037.C: New test.
Removed:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr64037.C
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/combine.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug bootstrap/64213] gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
2014-12-07 18:37 [Bug bootstrap/64213] New: gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope ubizjak at gmail dot com
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2014-12-09 14:35 ` uros at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-12-09 14:41 ` uros at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-12-09 14:44 ` uros at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-12-09 14:50 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: uros at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-12-09 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64213
--- Comment #7 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Tue Dec 9 14:40:40 2014
New Revision: 218517
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218517&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/64213
Revert:
2014-11-28 H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
PR rtl-optimization/64037
* combine.c (setup_incoming_promotions): Pass the argument
before any promotions happen to promote_function_mode.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR bootstrap/64213
Revert:
2014-11-28 H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
PR rtl-optimization/64037
* g++.dg/pr64037.C: New test.
Removed:
branches/gcc-4_9-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr64037.C
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_9-branch/gcc/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_9-branch/gcc/combine.c
branches/gcc-4_9-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug bootstrap/64213] gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
2014-12-07 18:37 [Bug bootstrap/64213] New: gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope ubizjak at gmail dot com
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2014-12-09 14:41 ` uros at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-12-09 14:44 ` uros at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-12-09 14:50 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: uros at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-12-09 14:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64213
--- Comment #8 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Tue Dec 9 14:44:06 2014
New Revision: 218518
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218518&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/64213
Revert:
2014-11-28 H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
PR rtl-optimization/64037
* combine.c (setup_incoming_promotions): Pass the argument
before any promotions happen to promote_function_mode.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR bootstrap/64213
Revert:
2014-11-28 H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
PR rtl-optimization/64037
* g++.dg/pr64037.C: New test.
Removed:
branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr64037.C
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/combine.c
branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug bootstrap/64213] gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope
2014-12-07 18:37 [Bug bootstrap/64213] New: gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope ubizjak at gmail dot com
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2014-12-09 14:44 ` uros at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-12-09 14:50 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: ubizjak at gmail dot com @ 2014-12-09 14:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64213
Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.4
--- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> ---
Fixed by reverting PR64037 patch everywhere.
>From gcc-bugs-return-469905-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Dec 09 14:53:22 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-469905-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 16240 invoked by alias); 9 Dec 2014 14:53:22 -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 15761 invoked by uid 48); 9 Dec 2014 14:53:16 -0000
From: "trippels at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/64237] [5 Regression] glibc build failure
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 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: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-64237-4-vNZwpZoyZz@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-64237-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-64237-4@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: 2014-12/txt/msg00912.txt.bz2
Content-length: 252
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idd237
--- Comment #7 from Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> Adding -fuse-ld=gold to the crtn.o link command posted above, also fixes the
> issue.
It should read: "nscd link command"
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-12-09 14:50 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-12-07 18:37 [Bug bootstrap/64213] New: gimple-match.c:1523:6: error: ‘GIMPLE’ was not declared in this scope ubizjak at gmail dot com
2014-12-08 13:30 ` [Bug bootstrap/64213] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-12-08 20:23 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com
2014-12-09 11:29 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com
2014-12-09 11:41 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2014-12-09 14:35 ` uros at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-12-09 14:41 ` uros at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-12-09 14:44 ` uros at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-12-09 14:50 ` ubizjak 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).