This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] x86 memset/memcpy expansion is broken
- From: "michael.v.zolotukhin at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 16:54:35 +0000
- Subject: [Bug target/51134] [4.7 Regression] x86 memset/memcpy expansion is broken
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-51134-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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, Â-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?