[Bug testsuite/53028] add dg-pedantic

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53028 --- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-04-19 07:03:30 UTC --- grep -F "pedantic-errors" testsuite/gcc.dg/*.c Most of those testcases are duplicated or triplicated. Another alternative could be if -pedantic warnings always were associated

[Bug target/53038] New: cfi_restore for cr before cr is actually restored

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53038 Bug #: 53038 Summary: cfi_restore for cr before cr is actually restored Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/53038] cfi_restore for cr before cr is actually restored

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53038 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Target||powerpc-linux Known to fail|

[Bug fortran/53035] Internal Compiler Error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53035 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug c++/53039] New: [C++11]including breaks std::is_convertible with template-pack expansion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53039 Bug #: 53039 Summary: [C++11]including breaks std::is_convertible with template-pack expansion Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCON

[Bug c++/53039] [C++11]including breaks std::is_convertible with template-pack expansion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53039 --- Comment #1 from Radics Péter 2012-04-19 07:59:06 UTC --- Created attachment 27186 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27186 4.8.0 output test run by sam of #c++ on freenode

[Bug c++/53039] [C++11]including breaks std::is_convertible with template-pack expansion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53039 --- Comment #2 from Radics Péter 2012-04-19 08:00:00 UTC --- Created attachment 27187 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27187 4.7.0 output test run on arch linux

[Bug debug/45088] pointer type information lost in debuginfo

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45088 Pawel Sikora changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pluto at agmk dot net --- Comment #10 from

[Bug libgcj/52579] [4.8 regression] i386_w32_fallback_frame_state should care ffi raw-closure stub function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52579 --- Comment #1 from gee 2012-04-19 08:23:39 UTC --- i came into conclusion that we need to separate ffi_closure_raw_THISCALL from ffi_closure_raw_SYSV(not using such as jmp .stubraw), because ffi_closure_raw_THISCALL is not transparent by CFI so t

[Bug bootstrap/52878] [4.8 regression] bootstrap failure: "MASK_LONG_DOUBLE_128" redefined

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52878 --- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou 2012-04-19 08:40:53 UTC --- > One approach is to provide masks.opt to provide those masks without > switch. masks.opt should be used when long-double-switch.opt isn't > used. How ugly. Please do something in

[Bug c++/53039] [C++11]including breaks std::is_convertible with template-pack expansion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53039 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/44688] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Excessive code-size growth at -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44688 --- Comment #9 from Richard Guenther 2012-04-19 08:51:57 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Apr 19 08:51:50 2012 New Revision: 186585 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=186585 Log: 2012-04-19 Richard Guenther PR rtl-opt

[Bug tree-optimization/44688] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Excessive code-size growth at -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44688 --- Comment #10 from Richard Guenther 2012-04-19 08:53:37 UTC --- There are still other prologue/epilogue loops that would need similar handling on their generation. The vectorizer needs to be re-organized to better separate those loop versions

[Bug target/52790] Problems using x86_64-w64-mingw-w32-gfortran with mcmodel=large and medium

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52790 Janne Blomqvist changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86_64-w64-mingw32 Status|U

[Bug c++/53032] [4.8 Regression] 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to build

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53032 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0

[Bug tree-optimization/44688] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Excessive code-size growth at -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44688 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|unassigned

[Bug bootstrap/53030] [4.8 Regression] LTO bootstrap failed with bootstrap-profiled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53030 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0

[Bug middle-end/53031] [4.8 Regression] gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp54.c scan-tree-dump-not vrp1 "link_error"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53031 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/53035] Internal Compiler Error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53035 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/52283] "error: case label does not reduce to an integer constant" for constant folded cast expr

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52283 chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/52831] extract_bit_field_1: issue when str_rtx unsafe from target

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52831 Aurelien Buhrig changed: What|Removed |Added Version|4.8.0 |4.6.3 --- Comment #2 from Aurelien Buhr

[Bug target/50751] SH Target: Displacement addressing does not work for QImode and HImode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50751 --- Comment #28 from Oleg Endo 2012-04-19 09:29:41 UTC --- The prophecy in comment #3 finally came true (again) while I was testing the patch for PR 52941 ;) The problem is that when reload tries to swap regs from/to stack, it will try to use the

[Bug c/37985] [4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] unsigned char shift lacks "statement with no effect" warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37985 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c++/53039] [4.7/4.8 Regression] including breaks std::is_convertible with template-pack expansion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53039 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC|mitchnull+gcc at gmail dot |hjl.tools at gmail dot com

[Bug target/53040] New: nested functions may trash floating point registers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53040 Bug #: 53040 Summary: nested functions may trash floating point registers Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/53033] [avr]: Wrong register number for 3-byte loads via X

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53033 --- Comment #3 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-04-19 11:29:20 UTC --- Author: gjl Date: Thu Apr 19 11:29:13 2012 New Revision: 186588 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=186588 Log: PR target/53033 * config/avr/avr.c (avr_ou

[Bug target/53033] [avr]: Wrong register number for 3-byte loads via X

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53033 --- Comment #4 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-04-19 11:33:08 UTC --- Author: gjl Date: Thu Apr 19 11:33:01 2012 New Revision: 186589 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=186589 Log: Backport from 2012-04-19 mainline r186588.

[Bug target/53033] [avr]: Wrong register number for 3-byte loads via X

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53033 Georg-Johann Lay changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c/53041] New: Changing of array is leading to changing of another variable

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53041 Bug #: 53041 Summary: Changing of array is leading to changing of another variable Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/53041] Changing of array is leading to changing of another variable

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53041 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-04-19 12:06:13 UTC --- This is not a proper bug report, please read http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/ What are you claiming is a bug in GCC? Your program is dangerous and has undefined behaviour if more than one

[Bug c/53041] Changing of array is leading to changing of another variable

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53041 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug fortran/53015] free_pi_tree(): Unresolved fixup is back

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53015 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug c++/53036] [c++11] trivial class fails std::is_trivial test

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53036 --- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse 2012-04-19 12:14:04 UTC --- Created attachment 27189 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27189 basic patch The patch detects D as trivial. Sadly, on this case: struct A { A()=default; A(int=2)

[Bug middle-end/27193] dump-tree-original-raw does not print the linkage for a variable with file scope.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27193 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/28525] ICE after duplicate_decls

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28525 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/53036] [c++11] trivial class fails std::is_trivial test

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53036 --- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler 2012-04-19 12:24:12 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > Sadly, on this case: > struct A { > A()=default; > A(int=2); > }; > it says A is trivial whereas I guess the ambiguity makes it non-trivial. I agree. T

[Bug c++/53036] [c++11] trivial class fails std::is_trivial test

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53036 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 f

[Bug translation/37457] pp_base_format, pretty-print.c:529

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37457 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/45521] [F08] GENERIC resolution with ALLOCATABLE/POINTER and PROCEDURE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45521 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/45521] [F08] GENERIC resolution with ALLOCATABLE/POINTER and PROCEDURE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45521 --- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-19 12:53:05 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > Here is a preliminary patch which makes gfortran accept the code in comment > #2: Of course we need to do more. As quoted in comment #0: "Two dum

[Bug fortran/45521] [F08] GENERIC resolution with ALLOCATABLE/POINTER and PROCEDURE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45521 --- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-19 13:04:18 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > "Two dummy arguments are distinguishable if > - one is a procedure and the other is a data object, Here is a test case for this item: module m

[Bug tree-optimization/52868] [4.7/4.8 Regression] 4.6 is faster on Atom

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52868 --- Comment #1 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-04-19 13:09:07 UTC --- Experimental patch that fixes the regression: diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c b/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c index 3c11c0e..9c04516 100644 --- a/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c +++ b

[Bug fortran/45521] [F08] GENERIC resolution with ALLOCATABLE/POINTER and PROCEDURE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45521 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7

[Bug tree-optimization/52272] [4.7/4.8 regression] Performance regresswion of 410.bwaves on x86.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52272 --- Comment #11 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-04-19 13:09:25 UTC --- Another version of the experimental patch is here - http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52868 It fixes bwaves regression on x86 and might not trigger performance on other pla

[Bug fortran/45521] [F08] GENERIC resolution with ALLOCATABLE/POINTER and PROCEDURE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45521 --- Comment #8 from wangmianzhi 2012-04-19 13:20:57 UTC --- if replace the input argument for test2() with pr, the program will compile but gives seg fault at run time. 于 2012年04月19日 09:04, janus at gcc dot gnu.org 写道: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bu

[Bug middle-end/53031] [4.8 Regression] gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp54.c scan-tree-dump-not vrp1 "link_error"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53031 --- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2012-04-19 13:21:50 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Thu Apr 19 13:21:44 2012 New Revision: 186592 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=186592 Log: 2012-04-19 Richard Guenther PR tree-op

[Bug libgomp/52738] libgomp configured with --enable-tls=no crash inside pthread function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52738 --- Comment #2 from Mateusz Kielar 2012-04-19 13:23:17 UTC --- The only way I see to resolve this issue is to check if pthread_getspecific returns null in gomp_thread and if yes then allocate new thread struct and use pthread_setspecific to store

[Bug bootstrap/53042] New: AIX bootstrap: cgraph symbol table error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53042 Bug #: 53042 Summary: AIX bootstrap: cgraph symbol table error Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority:

[Bug c/52977] [4.8 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault with `-x c-header' or `-x cxx-header' option

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52977 --- Comment #6 from Michael Matz 2012-04-19 13:29:34 UTC --- Author: matz Date: Thu Apr 19 13:29:29 2012 New Revision: 186593 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=186593 Log: PR middle-end/52977 * tree.h (VECTOR_CST_NELT

[Bug fortran/45521] [F08] GENERIC resolution with ALLOCATABLE/POINTER and PROCEDURE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45521 --- Comment #9 from wangmianzhi 2012-04-19 13:22:24 UTC --- if replace the input argument for test2() with pr, the program will compile but gives seg fault at run time.

[Bug fortran/45521] [F08] GENERIC resolution with ALLOCATABLE/POINTER and PROCEDURE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45521 --- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-19 13:36:46 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > "Two dummy arguments are distinguishable if > > - one is a procedure and the other is a data object, > > Here is a te

[Bug bootstrap/53042] [4.8 Regression] AIX bootstrap: cgraph symbol table error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53042 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Target||powerpc-ibm-aix5.3 Version|

[Bug middle-end/53031] [4.8 Regression] gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp54.c scan-tree-dump-not vrp1 "link_error"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53031 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug bootstrap/53042] AIX bootstrap: cgraph symbol table error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53042 David Edelsohn changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug bootstrap/53042] [4.8 Regression] AIX bootstrap: cgraph symbol table error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53042 --- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2012-04-19 14:09:20 UTC --- Patch: Index: gcc/symtab.c === --- gcc/symtab.c(revision 186594) +++ gcc/symtab.c(working copy) @@ -

[Bug fortran/48438] Several gfortran tests FAIL on Tru64 UNIX

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48438 Janne Blomqvist changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug middle-end/52997] [4.8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/c99-intconst-1.c (internal compiler error)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52997 Bernd Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |bernds at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug middle-end/53043] New: [4.8 Regression] gcc.target/i386/pr45830.c scan-tree-dump switchconv "Expanding as bit test is preferable"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53043 Bug #: 53043 Summary: [4.8 Regression] gcc.target/i386/pr45830.c scan-tree-dump switchconv "Expanding as bit test is preferable" Classification: Unclassified Product: gc

[Bug fortran/40766] this fortran program is too slow

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40766 Janne Blomqvist changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jb at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #22 f

[Bug tree-optimization/53044] New: completely peel loops that do not run a constant time

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53044 Bug #: 53044 Summary: completely peel loops that do not run a constant time Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimi

[Bug c++/53039] [4.7/4.8 Regression] including breaks std::is_convertible with template-pack expansion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53039 --- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu 2012-04-19 14:49:32 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > HJ, can you help with the search? (mind the -std=c++11) My regression hunt machine is down. It will take a while to get it back.

[Bug middle-end/53043] [4.8 Regression] gcc.target/i386/pr45830.c scan-tree-dump switchconv "Expanding as bit test is preferable"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53043 --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu 2012-04-19 14:55:54 UTC --- It may be caused by revision 186576: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2012-04/msg00527.html

[Bug c/51834] -Wsequence-point fails when convoluted expressions with multiple side effects are used

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51834 --- Comment #4 from Vincent Lefèvre 2012-04-19 15:06:58 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > (i++, i) + i is undefined. The sequence point only orders i++ and i inside > the > parens, but not the operands of +. The third example is not undefined

[Bug middle-end/53043] [4.8 Regression] gcc.target/i386/pr45830.c scan-tree-dump switchconv "Expanding as bit test is preferable"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53043 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug other/46770] Replace .ctors/.dtors with .init_array/.fini_array on targets supporting them

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46770 --- Comment #95 from Jan Hubicka 2012-04-19 15:07:27 UTC --- > It is misleading to think that the linker accumulates code in translation unit > order for a C++ program. E.g., that is not what happens for template code or > string constants. And

[Bug middle-end/53043] [4.8 Regression] gcc.target/i386/pr45830.c scan-tree-dump switchconv "Expanding as bit test is preferable"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53043 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug rtl-optimization/44214] Compiler does not optimize vector divide with -freciprocal-math (or -ffast-math)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44214 William J. Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bergner at vnet dot

[Bug target/53040] nested functions may trash floating point registers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53040 --- Comment #1 from Alan Modra 2012-04-19 15:24:30 UTC --- Created attachment 27191 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27191 obvious fix

[Bug target/53038] cfi_restore for cr before cr is actually restored

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53038 --- Comment #2 from Alan Modra 2012-04-19 15:27:47 UTC --- testing a fix

[Bug target/53038] cfi_restore for cr before cr is actually restored

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53038 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/52927] "procps" do not work with -Os flag.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52927 --- Comment #9 from Jonatan GOebel 2012-04-19 15:14:27 UTC --- Hi. The problem actually happen when using -Os and -frename-registers. Also the source code may note help, because it randomly happens on different parts of the code depending on co

[Bug target/53040] nested functions may trash floating point registers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53040 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/53037] warn_if_not_aligned(X)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037 --- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu 2012-04-19 15:47:14 UTC --- Given typedef unsigned long long __u64 __attribute__((aligned(4))); all most all __u64 will be aligned at 4. The only case we may do something about is typedef unsigned long long __u64

[Bug c/53037] warn_if_not_aligned(X)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037 --- Comment #3 from H. Peter Anvin 2012-04-19 15:51:35 UTC --- Logically, about half of u64's will be properly aligned at the moment... Linus' request is that we flag the currently misaligned __[su]64's as __compat_[su]64 and make __[su]64 aligne

[Bug c++/53039] [4.7/4.8 Regression] including breaks std::is_convertible with template-pack expansion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53039 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6 f

[Bug c/53037] warn_if_not_aligned(X)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037 --- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu 2012-04-19 16:00:41 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > Logically, about half of u64's will be properly aligned at the moment... > Linus' No necessarily. For u64 x; int y; u64 z; both x and z may be 4 byte aligned.

[Bug bootstrap/53042] [4.8 Regression] AIX bootstrap: cgraph symbol table error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53042 --- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka 2012-04-19 16:03:09 UTC --- Thanks for working on this. The patch is pre-approved if it passes testing. The new symtab verifier is just old cgraph verifier and only change is that we now do same testing for varia

[Bug c/53037] warn_if_not_aligned(X)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037 --- Comment #5 from H. Peter Anvin 2012-04-19 16:05:29 UTC --- On 04/19/2012 09:00 AM, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote: > >> request is that we flag the currently misaligned __[su]64's as >> __compat_[su]64 >> and make __[su]64 aligned, so at

[Bug c/53037] warn_if_not_aligned(X)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037 --- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu 2012-04-19 16:53:18 UTC --- For a global or local 64bit variable, x, inside kernel, why should it be 4 byte aligned if it isn't part of system call interface?

[Bug c/53037] warn_if_not_aligned(X)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037 --- Comment #7 from H. Peter Anvin 2012-04-19 16:57:14 UTC --- The __u64/__s64 types are used for interfaces only. The kernel itself is x86-64 and uses aligned types for internal uses. The mismatch between i386 and x86-64 alignment has a tenden

[Bug tree-optimization/53045] New: Missing loop termination

, -8.394, -93.3, 7.9, 84.94 }; int i; for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) foo0.d[i] = bar[i].d; return 0; } -- cut here-- segfaults when compiled with -O2, xgcc (GCC) 4.8.0 20120419 (experimental) [trunk revision 186596] Loop termination is missing from asm dump: .L2: movsd %xmm0, foo0(%

[Bug c/53037] warn_if_not_aligned(X)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037 --- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu 2012-04-19 17:07:20 UTC --- Shouldn't typedef unsigned long long __u64 __attribute__((aligned(4))); only be used in system call interface?

[Bug c/53037] warn_if_not_aligned(X)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037 --- Comment #9 from H. Peter Anvin 2012-04-19 17:11:00 UTC --- Yes. The point is: WE WANT TO MIGRATE THE SYSTEM CALL INTERFACE TO AN ALIGNED __[us]64 INTERFACE, mostly so that new interfaces are properly aligned from the start. In order to do t

[Bug bootstrap/52878] [4.8 regression] bootstrap failure: "MASK_LONG_DOUBLE_128" redefined

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52878 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #27184|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug c/53037] warn_if_not_aligned(X)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037 --- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu 2012-04-19 17:20:42 UTC --- Isn't checking alignment of x in: typedef unsigned long long __u64 __attribute__((aligned(4),warn_if_not_aligned(8))); struct foo { int i1; int i2; int i3; __u64 x; }; sufficien

[Bug middle-end/53046] New: [4.8 Regression] New libstdc++ test failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53046 Bug #: 53046 Summary: [4.8 Regression] New libstdc++ test failures Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug middle-end/53047] New: [4.8 Regression] 482.sphinx3 in SPEC CPU 2006 miscompiled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53047 Bug #: 53047 Summary: [4.8 Regression] 482.sphinx3 in SPEC CPU 2006 miscompiled Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/53048] New: [4.8 Regression] 256.bzip2 in SPEC CPU 2000 failed to build

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53048 Bug #: 53048 Summary: [4.8 Regression] 256.bzip2 in SPEC CPU 2000 failed to build Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/52880] -Woverride-init emitts unexpected error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52880 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-04-19 17:42:01 UTC --- Created attachment 27193 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27193 gcc48-pr52880.patch This patch works for me on this testcase, not sure if it is the right fix though

[Bug c/53037] warn_if_not_aligned(X)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037 --- Comment #11 from H. Peter Anvin 2012-04-19 17:42:28 UTC --- Sorry, that should be sufficient. I'm not awake today, it seems.

[Bug middle-end/53049] New: expand/TER unappropriate moving unspec volatile

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53049 Bug #: 53049 Summary: expand/TER unappropriate moving unspec volatile Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pr

[Bug middle-end/53049] expand/TER unappropriate moving unspec volatile

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53049 --- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-04-19 18:32:37 UTC --- Created attachment 27194 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27194 C source code

[Bug middle-end/53049] expand/TER unappropriate moving unspec volatile

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53049 --- Comment #2 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-04-19 18:34:38 UTC --- Created attachment 27195 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27195 .150r.expand dump Notice the Replacing Expressions val_2 replace with --> val_2 = 65535 / val_1(

[Bug middle-end/53049] expand/TER unappropriate moving unspec volatile

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53049 Georg-Johann Lay changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug bootstrap/53042] [4.8 Regression] AIX bootstrap: cgraph symbol table error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53042 --- Comment #4 from David Edelsohn 2012-04-19 18:57:38 UTC --- Both Richi and Honza's patches independently progress past the failure point.

[Bug debug/45088] pointer type information lost in debuginfo

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45088 --- Comment #11 from Jason Merrill 2012-04-19 19:09:14 UTC --- (In reply to comment #10) > what about 4.7 branch? The fix was on the trunk before 4.7 branched, so yes.

[Bug middle-end/53049] expand/TER unappropriate moving unspec volatile

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53049 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 2012-04-19 19:18:37 UTC --- I think there is an already closed bug about this issue and we decided last time, it is not something which we want to implement an unspec volatile or an volatile inline-asm as a full

[Bug middle-end/53049] expand/TER unappropriate moving unspec volatile

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53049 --- Comment #4 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-04-19 19:31:12 UTC --- In tree-ssa-ter.c:is_replaceable_p() there is: /* Leave any stmt with volatile operands alone as well. */ if (gimple_has_volatile_ops (stmt)) return false; and in tree-

[Bug c++/53050] New: ssa_forward_propagate_and_combine: segmentation fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53050 Bug #: 53050 Summary: ssa_forward_propagate_and_combine: segmentation fault Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/53050] ssa_forward_propagate_and_combine: segmentation fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53050 --- Comment #1 from dcb 2012-04-19 20:02:12 UTC --- Created attachment 27196 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27196 gzipped C++ source code

  1   2   >