[Bug fortran/55622] New: gfortran segfault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55622 Bug #: 55622 Summary: gfortran segfault Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug testsuite/55621] no gcc or g++ tests run for solaris2.11 target : missing $OBJDIR/gcc/testsuite/config/unix_{gcc,g++}.exp files

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55621 --- Comment #1 from Jason Vas Dias 2012-12-09 08:15:58 UTC --- After successfully building gcc-4.7.2 for multi-lib i386-pc-solaris2.11 target ( x86_64 Solaris 11 ) , with configure arguments : $ gcc -v Target: i386-pc-solaris2.11 Con

[Bug testsuite/55621] no gcc or g++ tests run for solaris2.11 target : missing $OBJDIR/gcc/testsuite/config/unix_{gcc,g++}.exp files

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55621 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2012-12-09 08:32:35 UTC --- I get on x86_64-linux-gnu: Using /usr/share/dejagnu/baseboards/unix.exp as board description file for target. Using /usr/share/dejagnu/config/unix.exp as generic interface file

[Bug testsuite/55621] no gcc or g++ tests run for solaris2.11 target : missing $OBJDIR/gcc/testsuite/config/unix_{gcc,g++}.exp files

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55621 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 2012-12-09 08:36:26 UTC --- Can you attach the runtest.exp for your installation of dejagnu? I am thinking they changed something in load_tool_target_config which broke this.

[Bug testsuite/55621] no gcc or g++ tests run for solaris2.11 target : missing $OBJDIR/gcc/testsuite/config/unix_{gcc,g++}.exp files

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55621 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/55622] gfortran segfault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55622 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2012-12-09 08:48:33 UTC --- >the minimum source file to cause the segfault is attached. Must have been too big. Please gzip it and try attaching it again.

[Bug testsuite/55621] no gcc or g++ tests run for solaris2.11 target : missing $OBJDIR/gcc/testsuite/config/unix_{gcc,g++}.exp files

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55621 --- Comment #5 from Jason Vas Dias 2012-12-09 08:55:38 UTC --- Created attachment 28903 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28903 /usr/GNU/lib/dejagnu/runtest.exp

[Bug testsuite/55621] no gcc or g++ tests run for solaris2.11 target : missing $OBJDIR/gcc/testsuite/config/unix_{gcc,g++}.exp files

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55621 --- Comment #6 from Jason Vas Dias 2012-12-09 08:59:34 UTC --- Oops, I picked the last of : $ lftp ftp.gnu.org lftp ftp.gnu.org:~> cd pub/gnu/dejagnu cd ok, cwd=/pub/gnu/dejagnu lftp ftp.gnu.org:/pub/gnu/dejagnu> ls

[Bug testsuite/55621] no gcc or g++ tests run for solaris2.11 target : missing $OBJDIR/gcc/testsuite/config/unix_{gcc,g++}.exp files

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55621 Jason Vas Dias changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/55593] [4.8 Regression] Bogus error on passing DO LOOP variable

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55593 --- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig 2012-12-09 09:15:42 UTC --- Author: tkoenig Date: Sun Dec 9 09:15:36 2012 New Revision: 194329 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194329 Log: 2012-12-09 Thomas Koenig PR

[Bug fortran/55593] [4.8 Regression] Bogus error on passing DO LOOP variable

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55593 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug tree-optimization/55623] New: [ARM] GCC should not prefer long dependency chains, they inhibit performance on superscalar processors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55623 Bug #: 55623 Summary: [ARM] GCC should not prefer long dependency chains, they inhibit performance on superscalar processors Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Ve

[Bug tree-optimization/55623] [ARM] GCC should not prefer long dependency chains, they inhibit performance on superscalar processors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55623 --- Comment #1 from Siarhei Siamashka 2012-12-09 10:00:59 UTC --- Created attachment 28904 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28904 badsched.c

[Bug target/54062] extraneous move due to register allocation issue on x86_64

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54062 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug bootstrap/55196] GCC 4.8 build error : link error on OS X 10.6

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55196 Félix Faisant changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/55623] [ARM] GCC should not prefer long dependency chains, they inhibit performance on superscalar processors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55623 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target||arm*-*-*, aarch64-*-*

[Bug target/54952] Program crash on M32C when stack frame is more then 128 bytes

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54952 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/55279] New pseudo registers aren't supported in CSE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55279 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/55623] [ARM] GCC should not prefer long dependency chains, they inhibit performance on superscalar processors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55623 --- Comment #3 from Siarhei Siamashka 2012-12-09 11:18:56 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > This is an ARM (both arm32 and arm64) specific issue due to the shifts being > "free". If you look at the mips assembly, it looks good for a dual

[Bug middle-end/55623] [ARM] GCC should not prefer long dependency chains, they inhibit performance on superscalar processors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55623 --- Comment #4 from Siarhei Siamashka 2012-12-09 11:21:42 UTC --- Created attachment 28905 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28905 badschedmul.c The testcase, converted to use multiplications. Can be used to demonstrat

[Bug middle-end/55623] [ARM] GCC should not prefer long dependency chains, they inhibit performance on superscalar processors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55623 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Target|arm*-*-*, aarch64-*-* | --- Comment #5 from Steven B

[Bug middle-end/55623] [ARM] GCC should not prefer long dependency chains, they inhibit performance on superscalar processors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55623 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added CC||steven at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug middle-end/55623] [ARM] GCC should not prefer long dependency chains, they inhibit performance on superscalar processors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55623 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added CC|steven at gcc dot gnu.org | --- Comment #7 from Steven B

[Bug c++/55624] New: internal compiler error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55624 Bug #: 55624 Summary: internal compiler error Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug rtl-optimization/55547] [4.8 Regression] Alias analysis does not handle AND addresses correctly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55547 --- Comment #5 from Uros Bizjak 2012-12-09 13:52:06 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > Uros, I'm regstrapping this on x86_64; would you please give it a spin on > alpha? TIA, Thanks, I have started the bootstrap, please expect result

[Bug target/55344] Cross compiling for alpha-linux fails because doesn't exist

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55344 Uros Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ubizjak at gmail dot com Target

[Bug c++/55624] internal compiler error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55624 --- Comment #1 from Uros Bizjak 2012-12-09 14:23:56 UTC --- Please report the bug as outlined in the instructions[1]. [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/#report

[Bug debug/54230] g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/pubnames-2.C failures on darwin12

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54230 Jack Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug testsuite/55429] new UNRESOLVED: 20_util/enable_shared_from_this/cons/constexpr.cc scan-assembler on darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55429 --- Comment #9 from Jack Howarth 2012-12-09 14:54:58 UTC --- Should be fixed at... Author: schwab Date: Sun Dec 9 14:31:27 2012 New Revision: 194330 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194330 Log: * testsuite/lib

[Bug tree-optimization/55625] New: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-prof/tracer-1.c scan-tree-dump-times tracer "c =" 2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55625 Bug #: 55625 Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-prof/tracer-1.c scan-tree-dump-times tracer "c =" 2 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status:

[Bug target/54257] gcc.target/i386/pr53249.c failure at -m64 on x86_64-apple-darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54257 Jack Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug target/54255] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/asm-dialect-1.c (test for excess errors) fails on x86_64/i686 darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54255 Jack Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug tree-optimization/55626] New: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-prof/val-prof-2.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55626 Bug #: 55626 Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-prof/val-prof-2.c Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pri

[Bug c++/55624] internal compiler error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55624 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/55626] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-prof/val-prof-2.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55626 --- Comment #1 from John David Anglin 2012-12-09 15:24:02 UTC --- Created attachment 28908 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28908 Tree dump

[Bug middle-end/55279] New pseudo registers aren't supported in CSE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55279 --- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu 2012-12-09 15:33:53 UTC --- Any passes which allocate a table for maximum number of registers can't deal with new pseudo registers. But there is nothing to check and enforce it.

[Bug rtl-optimization/55627] New: [4.8 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/bprob/g++-bprob-1.C execution, -Os -fprofile-arcs

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55627 Bug #: 55627 Summary: [4.8 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/bprob/g++-bprob-1.C execution,-Os -fprofile-arcs Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0

[Bug c++/55628] New: Segmentation fault (segfault) on invalid template oneliner

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55628 Bug #: 55628 Summary: Segmentation fault (segfault) on invalid template oneliner Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2 Status: UNCONFIRME

[Bug tree-optimization/55629] New: Missed value numbering to a constant

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55629 Bug #: 55629 Summary: Missed value numbering to a constant Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pr

[Bug tree-optimization/55629] Missed value numbering to a constant

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55629 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization

[Bug rtl-optimization/55627] [4.8 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/bprob/g++-bprob-1.C execution, -Os -fprofile-arcs

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55627 --- Comment #1 from John David Anglin 2012-12-09 15:59:24 UTC --- (gdb) p for_val2 $2 = 6 (gdb) p goto_val $3 = 11 (gdb) p for_val1 $4 = 12 (gdb) p for_val2 $5 = 6 (gdb) p goto_val $6 = 11 (gdb) p ifelse_val1 $7 = 31 (gdb) p ifel

[Bug middle-end/55279] New pseudo registers aren't supported in CSE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55279 --- Comment #6 from Steven Bosscher 2012-12-09 16:09:04 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) There shouldn't be any such tables. Before the DF merge, there was no_new_pseudos, but it had its problems. Why can't cse_reg_info_table() be mo

[Bug middle-end/55279] New pseudo registers aren't supported in CSE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55279 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added CC||steven at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug middle-end/55279] New pseudo registers aren't supported in CSE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55279 --- Comment #8 from Steven Bosscher 2012-12-09 16:13:12 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #5) > > Why can't cse_reg_info_table() be modified to intercept this? > Correction: get_cse_reg_info() Like so, quick-and-d

[Bug middle-end/55630] New: [4.8 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/pr48660.C -std=c++98 (internal compiler error)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55630 Bug #: 55630 Summary: [4.8 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/pr48660.C -std=c++98 (internal compiler error) Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0

[Bug c++/55631] New: Several ext/ headers can not be #included on their own

Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org ReportedBy: ppluzhni...@google.com The following headers: ext/string_conversions.h ext/alloc_traits.h ext/pointer.h can't be '#included' on their own (using "4.8.0 20121209"

[Bug c++/55631] Several ext/ headers can not be #included on their own

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55631 --- Comment #1 from Paul Pluzhnikov 2012-12-09 16:55:52 UTC --- Google ref b/7699405

[Bug rtl-optimization/52714] ICE in fixup_reorder_chain, at cfglayout.c:880

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52714 --- Comment #4 from Thorsten Glaser 2012-12-09 18:03:08 UTC --- Created attachment 28910 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28910 preprocessed source, xz compressed I ran into this as well, native compilation on Debian/m68k:

[Bug target/55344] Cross compiling for alpha-linux fails because doesn't exist

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55344 --- Comment #3 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-09 18:16:07 UTC --- Author: uros Date: Sun Dec 9 18:15:59 2012 New Revision: 194334 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194334 Log: PR target/55344 * config

[Bug target/55344] Cross compiling for alpha-linux fails because doesn't exist

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55344 --- Comment #4 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-09 18:21:44 UTC --- Author: uros Date: Sun Dec 9 18:21:41 2012 New Revision: 194336 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194336 Log: PR target/55344 * config

[Bug target/55344] Cross compiling for alpha-linux fails because doesn't exist

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55344 Uros Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED URL|

[Bug middle-end/54470] FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/iinline-4.c scan-ipa-dump inline "hooray4[^\\n]*inline copy in test4"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54470 --- Comment #3 from John David Anglin 2012-12-09 18:24:32 UTC --- Author: danglin Date: Sun Dec 9 18:24:27 2012 New Revision: 194337 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194337 Log: PR middle-end/54470 * gcc

[Bug c++/55631] Several ext/ headers can not be #included on their own

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55631 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/55632] New: trunk/gcc/cp/decl.c:10614: strange line of code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55632 Bug #: 55632 Summary: trunk/gcc/cp/decl.c:10614: strange line of code Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor

[Bug pch/54117] [4.8 Regression] FAIL: ./decl-3.h -O0 -g (internal compiler error)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54117 --- Comment #3 from John David Anglin 2012-12-09 20:15:15 UTC --- I just noticed that the tests no longer ICE: FAIL: gcc.dg/pch/decl-3.c -O0 -g assembly comparison FAIL: gcc.dg/pch/decl-3.c -O3 -g assembly comparison FAIL: gcc.dg/pc

[Bug rtl-optimization/52714] ICE in fixup_reorder_chain, at cfglayout.c:880

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52714 --- Comment #5 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-12-09 20:22:53 UTC --- Thorsten's test case also ICEs gcc-4.7-20121208 and gcc-4.8 r194325.

[Bug fortran/55633] New: [4.8 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/f90-intrinsic-bit.f -Os execution test

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55633 Bug #: 55633 Summary: [4.8 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/f90-intrinsic-bit.f -Os execution test Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Vers

[Bug tree-optimization/55614] [4.6/4.7 Regression] vector extensions cause movdqa to be generated for memcpy on unaligned buffer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55614 --- Comment #8 from Siarhei Siamashka 2012-12-09 20:59:42 UTC --- FWIW, the current gentoo patchset for gcc-4.7.2 contains 10_all_default-fortify-source.patch intended to "Enable -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 by default". It makes this bug non-repro

[Bug testsuite/55429] new UNRESOLVED: 20_util/enable_shared_from_this/cons/constexpr.cc scan-assembler on darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55429 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target|*-apple-darwin* | Host|*-apple-darw

[Bug c++/55624] internal compiler error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55624 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2012-12-09 21:46:08 UTC --- >gcc: internal compiler error: Killed (program cc1plus) Also means the program was killed by the kernel because out of memory.

[Bug target/55634] New: ARM: gcc vector extensions: storing vector to unaligned memory location does not use VST1.8 NEON instruction

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55634 Bug #: 55634 Summary: ARM: gcc vector extensions: storing vector to unaligned memory location does not use VST1.8 NEON instruction Classification: Unclassified

[Bug target/55454] [PPC] unaligned memory accesses do not work correctly for vector extensions when using altivec

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55454 Siarhei Siamashka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug tree-optimization/55614] [4.6/4.7 Regression] vector extensions cause movdqa to be generated for memcpy on unaligned buffer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55614 --- Comment #9 from Siarhei Siamashka 2012-12-09 22:25:17 UTC --- *** Bug 55454 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug rtl-optimization/55547] [4.8 Regression] Alias analysis does not handle AND addresses correctly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55547 --- Comment #6 from Uros Bizjak 2012-12-09 22:44:02 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > Uros, I'm regstrapping this on x86_64; would you please give it a spin on > alpha? TIA, The patch bootstraps and regtests OK on alpha [1]. The sav

[Bug c/55457] Having some predefined macros to get more information about gcc vector extensions capabilities would be nice

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55457 Hans-Peter Nilsson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/39469] Calculated values replaced with constants even if the constants cost more than the calculations

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39469 --- Comment #5 from Siarhei Siamashka 2012-12-09 23:31:33 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > The ARM backend should do a splitter just like the rs6000 back-end does if it > is faster/smaller to load a constant via the instructions. I'm

[Bug c++/55635] New: Deallocation function ("operator delete") not called when destructor throws exception

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55635 Bug #: 55635 Summary: Deallocation function ("operator delete") not called when destructor throws exception Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2

[Bug testsuite/55429] new UNRESOLVED: 20_util/enable_shared_from_this/cons/constexpr.cc scan-assembler on darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55429 Andreas Schwab changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug target/39469] Calculated values replaced with constants even if the constants cost more than the calculations

lis 10,array@ha slwi 6,3,1 la 9,array@l(10) slwi 7,3,2 slwi 8,3,3 stw 3,array@l(10) stw 6,4(9) stw 7,8(9) stw 8,12(9) blr .sizebar, .-bar .ident"GCC: (GNU) 4.8.0 20121209 (experimental)" .section.note.GNU-stack,"

[Bug fortran/55636] New: [4.8 Regression] Fortran name mangling collides with user namespace

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55636 Bug #: 55636 Summary: [4.8 Regression] Fortran name mangling collides with user namespace Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: U

[Bug fortran/55636] [4.8 Regression] Fortran name mangling collides with user namespace

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55636 David Edelsohn changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||assemble-failure, build,

[Bug c++/55635] Deallocation function ("operator delete") not called when destructor throws exception

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55635 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/55279] New pseudo registers aren't supported in CSE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55279 --- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu 2012-12-10 01:05:09 UTC --- (In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #7) > > (In reply to comment #5) > > > Why can't cse_reg_info_table() be modified to intercept this? > > Correction: get_cse_reg_info

[Bug target/43364] Suboptimal code for the use of ARM NEON intrinsic "vset_lane_f32"

6[0]}, [r1] vld1.32{d17[0]}, [r2] vadd.f32d16, d16, d17 vst1.32{d16[0]}, [r0] bxlr .sizeneon_add, .-neon_add .ident"GCC: (GNU) 4.8.0 20121209 (experimental)"

[Bug libgcj/55637] New: FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637 Bug #: 55637 Summary: FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal