||
--- Comment #78 from Jack Howarth 2010-12-16
06:26:13 UTC ---
Created attachment 22782
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22782
fixed version of updated darwin candidate function sect. patch
Made ext static to avoid...
In file included from ../../gcc-4.6-20101215/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46724
--- Comment #4 from Alexandre Oliva 2010-12-16
05:38:44 UTC ---
Considering that we create a decl for the implicit argument that holds the
address of , perhaps the best approach would be to emit debug info for
that artificial decl. The initial i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46916
Jack Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #22780|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46883
--- Comment #5 from Chung-Lin Tang 2010-12-16
05:10:23 UTC ---
Author: cltang
Date: Thu Dec 16 05:10:18 2010
New Revision: 167900
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167900
Log:
2010-12-16 Chung-Lin Tang
PR target/46883
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46916
--- Comment #76 from Jack Howarth 2010-12-16
05:01:08 UTC ---
The fixed version of Iain's patch works around the errors in Comment 74 on
x86_64-apple-darwin10.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46916
--- Comment #75 from Jack Howarth 2010-12-16
04:58:53 UTC ---
Created attachment 22780
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22780
fixed version of updated darwin candidate function sect. patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46893
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #22761|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46893
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|jakub at gcc dot gnu.org|aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44290
--- Comment #29 from Jie Zhang 2010-12-16 03:05:53
UTC ---
Serge, yes. But GCC 4.5 branch is frozen now again.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46977
Summary: [4.6 Regression] [C++0x] ICE: SIGSEGV in
htab_find_slot_with_hash (hashtab.c:650)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46976
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka 2010-12-16
01:47:12 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Dec 16 01:47:08 2010
New Revision: 167896
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167896
Log:
PR lto/46976
* gcc.dg/lto/pr46940_0.c: Fix
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44522
Nathan Froyd changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44523
Nathan Froyd changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46939
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka 2010-12-16
01:40:29 UTC ---
the idiv issue is fixed now. It would be nice to compare if the function now
has same speed as the other compilers.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46976
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu 2010-12-16 01:38:33
UTC ---
Executing on host: /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/bld/gcc/xgcc
-B/export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/bld/gcc/ -O0 -flto -flto-partition=none -c
-m32 -o c_lto_pr46940_0.o
/export/gnu/import/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44523
--- Comment #1 from Nathan Froyd 2010-12-16
01:36:14 UTC ---
Author: froydnj
Date: Thu Dec 16 01:36:09 2010
New Revision: 167895
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167895
Log:
gcc/cp/
PR c++/39859
PR c++/44522
PR c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44522
--- Comment #1 from Nathan Froyd 2010-12-16
01:36:13 UTC ---
Author: froydnj
Date: Thu Dec 16 01:36:09 2010
New Revision: 167895
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167895
Log:
gcc/cp/
PR c++/39859
PR c++/44522
PR c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39859
--- Comment #2 from Nathan Froyd 2010-12-16
01:36:15 UTC ---
Author: froydnj
Date: Thu Dec 16 01:36:09 2010
New Revision: 167895
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167895
Log:
gcc/cp/
PR c++/39859
PR c++/44522
PR c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46976
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr46940_0.c
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46852
--- Comment #2 from Nathan Froyd 2010-12-16
01:33:07 UTC ---
Author: froydnj
Date: Thu Dec 16 01:33:03 2010
New Revision: 167894
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167894
Log:
gcc/cp/
PR c++/46852
* parser.c (cp_parser
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46939
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka 2010-12-16
01:27:25 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Dec 16 01:27:23 2010
New Revision: 167893
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167893
Log:
PR middle-end/46939
* predic.c (predict_pat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46957
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46970
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at redhat dot com
--- Comment #3 from H.J
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46970
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu 2010-12-16 00:49:40
UTC ---
It is related to PR 34017.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46970
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46975
Summary: Replace 32 bit instructions with 16 bit instructions
in thumb2
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45786
Daniel Franke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.4.5
--- Comment #7 from Hin-Tak Leung
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
--- Comment #6 from Hin-Tak Leung
2010-12-16 00:22:07 UTC ---
Created attachment 22778
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22778
alphaev68-dec-osf5.1a/libjava/config.log from 4.4.5
4.4.5, alphaev68-dec-osf5.1a/libjava/config.log
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46916
--- Comment #74 from Jack Howarth 2010-12-16
00:17:20 UTC ---
Iain,
Why don't you see the errors...
../../gcc/gcc/config/darwin.c: In function 'darwin_emit_unwind_label':
../../gcc/gcc/config/darwin.c:1664:21: error: initialization discards
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46405
Daniel Franke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46868
Nathan Froyd changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |froydnj at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46916
--- Comment #73 from Jack Howarth 2010-12-15
23:44:30 UTC ---
RE:
+ /* FIXME: We should not be trying to output the same label for different
+ partitions of a function. */
Actually this may be implementing exactly what Jakub suggested
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45310
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46916
--- Comment #72 from Iain Sandoe 2010-12-15 23:35:34
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #71)
> Actually I would be surprised if the new patches don't have problems with eh
> under darwin9. See...
Yeah, the symbol error is gone.. but
... the linker wa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24998
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|MIPS16, FRV and |frv-*-*
|US_SOFTWARE_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46971
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2010-12-15
22:16:51 UTC ---
> Isn't this a duplicate of PR 46313?
I won't say so, but it is an instance of your fears in the comment #15 of PR
46313;-)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44290
Serge Belyshev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|REOPENED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46916
--- Comment #71 from Jack Howarth 2010-12-15
22:02:39 UTC ---
Actually I would be surprised if the new patches don't have problems with eh
under darwin9. See...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41313#c12
As I recall, the eh labels in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46815
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46404
--- Comment #6 from Sebastian Pop 2010-12-15 22:01:04
UTC ---
Author: spop
Date: Wed Dec 15 22:00:59 2010
New Revision: 167876
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167876
Log:
Add testcase for PR46404.
2010-12-15 Sebastian Pop
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46971
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46916
--- Comment #70 from Jack Howarth 2010-12-15
21:52:05 UTC ---
Has anyone tried running dwarfdump on the object files from one of these
failing -g testcases? If dwarfdump works, perhaps a comparison of the output
compare with the same testcase com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46971
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2010-12-15
21:45:06 UTC ---
Confirmed (on x86_64-apple-darwin10.5.0 the compilation hangs). The test passes
if I remove four characters to both Molecular_Abundances_Structure and
molecularAbundancesStructu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46974
Summary: ICE with TRANSFER using a C_PTR entity
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassig..
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46916
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #22768|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43136
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Koenig 2010-12-15
21:30:28 UTC ---
See also PR 31821.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46916
--- Comment #68 from Dominique d'Humieres
2010-12-15 21:29:07 UTC ---
> With the total patch [bb + darwin, comment #59]
> ...
> [not tested yet - fortran/ObjC*/Java]
With this patch I see ~78 new failures with -m32 -O3 -g of the kind "warning:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41736
--- Comment #6 from Dodji Seketeli 2010-12-15
21:28:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> I don't see the right results for Base. It is missing
> all the template parameters:
I think this problem is slightly different from what is happening in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46973
Dodji Seketeli changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39976
--- Comment #32 from Pat Haugen 2010-12-15
21:23:50 UTC ---
Forgot to also mention that the loop is no longer a branch on count loop, so
finding it in the original thin6d.f is a little tougher than the simple egrep
'^.L|bdnz' thin6d.s and looking
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46973
Summary: DW_TAG_structure_type can loose its
DW_TAG_template{type,value}_param et al children
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46972
Summary: __thread storage class variable gets optimized out on
ARM
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39976
--- Comment #31 from Pat Haugen 2010-12-15
21:14:46 UTC ---
Yes, the 2-block loop still exists with current trunk (r167858).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46972
--- Comment #1 from Paulius Zaleckas
2010-12-15 21:14:16 UTC ---
Created attachment 22776
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22776
assembler
This is what I get with gcc's -S -fverbose-asm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46971
Summary: ICE on long class names
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46404
--- Comment #5 from Sebastian Pop 2010-12-15 20:44:41
UTC ---
This commit fixed the reduced testcase:
Fix PR46845: handle scop parameters before scev analysis.
2010-12-14 Sebastian Pop
PR tree-optimization/46845
* sese.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46945
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-12-15
20:20:19 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 15 20:20:10 2010
New Revision: 167871
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167871
Log:
PR fortran/46945
* trans-array.c (gfc_array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46966
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46969
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46970
Summary: [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] wrong code with -Os
-ftree-loop-linear
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46967
Summary: lots of testsuite failures with libgomp on
hppa-hp-hpux11.31
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46969
--- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka 2010-12-15 19:29:53
UTC ---
Created attachment 22773
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22773
dumps - pr46969.*gkd
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46969
Summary: -O -ftree-vectorize -ftree-parallelize-loops=2
-fcompare-debug
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40947
--- Comment #5 from Ralf Wildenhues 2010-12-15
19:23:05 UTC ---
Can you attach alphaev68-dec-osf5.1a/libjava/config.log for this failure
please?
Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46670
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc at jey dot kottalam.net
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46968
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46968
--- Comment #1 from Jey Kottalam 2010-12-15
19:20:34 UTC ---
Created attachment 22771
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22771
testcase
This is from Intel TBB 3.0.
arget: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-trunk/configure --prefix=/home/jey/bins
--program-suffix=-trunk --with-cpu=native --with-arch=native
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.6.0 20101215 (experimental) (GCC)
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-v' '
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46966
Summary: [4.6 Regression] ICE: in execute_cse_reciprocals, at
tree-ssa-math-opts.c:474 with -floop-interchange
-fno-tree-copy-prop -fno-tree-loop-im
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46801
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou 2010-12-15
18:21:38 UTC ---
> Does this mean it also fails on i586 or is this a hppa thing?
It fails everywhere.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46801
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor 2010-12-15
18:13:27 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-11/msg02722.html
Does this mean it also fails on i586 or is this a hppa thing?
Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46404
--- Comment #3 from Zdenek Sojka 2010-12-15 17:52:09
UTC ---
I can't reproduce it neither with the reduced testcase, but the original one
still fails (I am sorry for not mentioning it was reduced from
gcc.dg/graphite/pr42284.c):
$ gcc -O -fgraph
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46232
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou 2010-12-15
17:58:51 UTC ---
> I see. I think this is not a P1 stuff then and should definitely not
> block a release. I'd rather not promise anything, but I'll add this
> to my TODO list and hope I will try to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46815
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-12-15
17:50:40 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 15 17:50:34 2010
New Revision: 167865
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167865
Log:
PR debug/46815
* cp-gimplify.c (cp_generici
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46404
--- Comment #4 from Sebastian Pop 2010-12-15 17:55:26
UTC ---
Ok, I will have a look at that one as well.
Thanks for pointing out that this error was not fixed, but probably hidden.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42083
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46232
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor 2010-12-15
17:40:00 UTC ---
I see. I think this is not a P1 stuff then and should definitely not
block a release. I'd rather not promise anything, but I'll add this
to my TODO list and hope I will try to addres
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45310
--- Comment #3 from Zdenek Sojka 2010-12-15 17:39:39
UTC ---
Created attachment 22769
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22769
another testcase
$ gcc -O -fnon-call-exceptions pr45310-2.C
pr45310-2.C: In destructor 'B::~B()':
pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46404
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42083
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-12-15 17:35:09 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Dec 15 17:35:04 2010
New Revision: 167862
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167862
Log:
/cp
2010-12-15 Paolo Carlini
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28105
--- Comment #11 from Janne Blomqvist 2010-12-15
17:15:31 UTC ---
Author: jb
Date: Wed Dec 15 17:15:25 2010
New Revision: 167860
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167860
Log:
PR 28105 Remove size<0 checks before calling malloc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46916
--- Comment #67 from Iain Sandoe 2010-12-15 17:11:28
UTC ---
Created attachment 22768
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22768
darwin-function-section-patch
OK - sorted out a couple of minor glitches...
...I'm going to reg-test
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46232
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou 2010-12-15
17:07:44 UTC ---
> Nevertheless, this has been the case in 4.5 as well, how come the
> testcase does not fail there?
The generated code is identical on mainline and 4.5 branch so there is no
actual re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46869
--- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2010-12-15 17:08:00 UTC ---
> --- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini
> 2010-12-15 12:20:12 UTC ---
> Rainer, if in order to reduce the noise you want to simply xfail for now the
> failing tests i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46964
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2010-12-15 16:57:07 UTC ---
On Wed, 15 Dec 2010, joel at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> does not define SAVE_REGS in gcc-go.c for ARM. Is this correct for ARM?
>
> #elif defined(__arm__)
> #define S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43548
--- Comment #6 from Alan Hourihane 2010-12-15
16:24:57 UTC ---
Ignore comment 3, wrong output. Here's the correct one.
m68k-atari-mint-g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -O2 -pipe -D_GNU_SOURCE -MT
pcrecpp_unittest.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/pcrecpp_unittest.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43548
Alan Hourihane changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alanh at fairlite dot co.uk
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46674
--- Comment #11 from Dave Korn 2010-12-15 16:17:54
UTC ---
Created attachment 22765
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22765
Lower all C identifiers to actual assembler symbols for comparison.
This should resolve the problem by
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46959
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab 2010-12-15 16:40:08
UTC ---
You cannot put reserved registers in the clobber list.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46221
Dave Korn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc-linux, i?86-linux, |powerpc-linux, i?86-linux,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45791
--- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor 2010-12-15
16:07:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> OK, main() code seems to optimize out that is an imrovement. Is it optimized
> away with your patch pre-IPA too?
Yes. Just before IPA, in fact.
>
> Der
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46965
Summary: SH Go Does not Compile (__builtin_return_address)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: go
AssignedTo: i..
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46959
--- Comment #1 from Joel Sherrill 2010-12-15 16:03:49
UTC ---
How does this look for m68k? I recall d0/d1/a0/a1 are clobbered by the caller.
a6 is a frame pointer, a7 is the stack pointer. So is this the set that needs
to be handled for m68k?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43548
--- Comment #7 from Alan Hourihane 2010-12-15
16:30:29 UTC ---
If I disable -O2 it works.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46964
Summary: ARM Not Supported by Go
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: go
AssignedTo: i...@airs.com
Reporte
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43548
Alan Hourihane changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #22766|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43548
--- Comment #4 from Alan Hourihane 2010-12-15
16:20:56 UTC ---
Created attachment 22766
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22766
preprocessed source
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39976
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #30
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46963
Summary: SPARC64 Not Supported by Go
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: go
AssignedTo: i...@airs.com
Rep
1 - 100 of 157 matches
Mail list logo
