http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50310
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-09-07
06:53:37 UTC ---
Created attachment 25212
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25212
gcc47-pr50310-c3.patch
The latter failure is an unrelated bug in the AVX2 support, untested fix for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50313
--- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson 2011-09-07
05:55:26 UTC ---
I suspect this is a dupe of PR48308.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50310
--- Comment #3 from Zdenek Sojka 2011-09-07 04:59:06
UTC ---
For a very similiar testcase:
double s1[4];
double s2[4];
long long e[4];
void foo(void)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 4; i++)
e[i] = __builtin_isunordered(s1[i], s2[i]) && s1[i] !
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50313
Bug #: 50313
Summary: ARM: PIC code references a non-existant label
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50298
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50249
Maxim Kuvyrkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mkuvyrkov at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49930
Michael Hope changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||michael.hope at linaro dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50022
Michael Hope changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||michael.hope at linaro dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50191
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|2011-09-05 00:00
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50191
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |UNCONFIRMED
Component|debug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50287
--- Comment #6 from Kazumoto Kojima 2011-09-07
00:26:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Testcase that fails on i686-linux for me.
FYI, the testcase is failing also for arm-eabi, mips-elf and sh-elf.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50312
Bug #: 50312
Summary: ICE when calling offsetof() illegally on incomplete
template class
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50191
--- Comment #17 from Peter Bergner 2011-09-06
23:07:22 UTC ---
This passed bootstrap and regtest on powerpc64-linux. Bill is on vacation for
a few days, so cannot test the patched compiler on the full benchmark, but I
assume Jakub you have alrea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50248
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48320
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50266
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
common.c (c_fully_fold_internal) : Fold offsetof-like
computations.
Added:
branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/20110906-1.c
- copied unchanged from r178611,
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/20110906-1.c
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/c-family/C
common.c (c_fully_fold_internal) : Fold offsetof-like
computations.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/20110906-1.c
Modified:
trunk/gcc/c-family/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48665
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse 2011-09-06
21:11:40 UTC ---
Created attachment 25210
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25210
Fix libiberty demangler
This patch seems to fix c++filt. It doesn't change anything to the g++ issues.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50310
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-pc-linux-gnu |x86_64-linux,
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50311
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50296
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zsojka at seznam dot cz
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50310
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50311
Bug #: 50311
Summary: [4.7 Regression] [C++0x] ICE: SIGSEGV in
cx_check_missing_mem_inits (semantics.c:5808) with
variadic template
Classification: Unclassified
Product:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50310
Bug #: 50310
Summary: [4.7 Regression] ICE: in gen_vcondv2div2df, at
config/i386/sse.md:1435 with -O -ftree-vectorize and
__builtin_isunordered()
Classification: Unclassified
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50309
Bug #: 50309
Summary: [4.6/4.7 Regression] [C++0x] ICE: tree check: expected
tree_list, have error_mark in comp_except_specs, at
cp/typeck.c:1014 on empty noexcept
Classification:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50287
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50295
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|mjambor at su
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50287
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|arm-eabi,sh*-*-*, |arm-eabi,sh*-*-*,
|arm-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50287
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor 2011-09-06
18:19:57 UTC ---
Created attachment 25207
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25207
Testcase for i686 (and probably x86_64 too)
Testcase that fails on i686-linux for me.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50296
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|jason at redh
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50296
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill 2011-09-06
18:09:07 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Sep 6 18:09:01 2011
New Revision: 178604
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178604
Log:
PR c++/50296
* semantics.c (register_conste
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50301
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor 2011-09-06
18:04:59 UTC ---
Proposed fix submitted to the mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-09/msg00427.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50308
Bug #: 50308
Summary: __attribute__((deprecated)) incorrectly generates
warning in ADL lookup
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCON
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50307
Bug #: 50307
Summary: SSA checking ICE when building Linux kernel
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-checking
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50191
--- Comment #16 from Peter Bergner 2011-09-06
17:21:14 UTC ---
I have kicked off a bootstrap and regtest of Jakub's patching in Comments #13
and #14.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50306
Bug #: 50306
Summary: g++ accepts code with ambiguous, templated conversion
operators
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50213
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-09-06
17:08:57 UTC ---
It seems that in the loop it is changed then again by RTL fwprop2. Why it
isn't done by fwprop2 with -fno-tree-forwprop is a question...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50305
Ulrich Weigand changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50305
Bug #: 50305
Summary: Inline asm reload failure when building Linux kernel
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44382
--- Comment #8 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-06
16:42:56 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Tue Sep 6 16:42:47 2011
New Revision: 178602
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178602
Log:
PR middle-end/44382: Tree reassociation impr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50257
--- Comment #16 from Paolo Carlini 2011-09-06
16:37:55 UTC ---
If you could have available a complete constexpr implementation of lower_bound,
it would make in principle possible to optimize to a constant all the cases
when it's called from a _M_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50099
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50304
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47025
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50257
--- Comment #15 from Justin SB 2011-09-06 15:55:31
UTC ---
That patch works for me - thanks; gcc optimizes away the array lookup.
I do still think that constexpr could be helpful here: every lookup for an
explicit (or default) unordered_map siz
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47025
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2011-09-06
15:56:26 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Sep 6 15:56:20 2011
New Revision: 178601
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178601
Log:
2011-09-06 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50213
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49997
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-09-06
15:48:32 UTC ---
Or finally drop the key dependence on the number of callers.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50213
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49886
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor 2011-09-06
15:09:18 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Sep 6 15:09:10 2011
New Revision: 178599
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178599
Log:
2011-09-06 Martin Jambor
Revert
2011-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47025
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50304
Bug #: 50304
Summary: poor code for accessing certain element of arrays
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50303
Bug #: 50303
Summary: Segfault with variadic template template parameters.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48149
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48149
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-09-06
14:36:06 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Sep 6 14:36:00 2011
New Revision: 178597
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178597
Log:
2011-09-06 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47025
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from Richard G
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49997
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka 2011-09-06
14:06:29 UTC ---
Hmm,
the problem is that with inline predicates the overall growth depends not only
on number of calls, but also at information known about call site. This
information could potentially
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48317
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48317
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2011-09-06
13:17:53 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Sep 6 13:17:50 2011
New Revision: 178595
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178595
Log:
2011-09-06 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50099
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48149
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50287
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|arm-eabi sh*-*-*|arm-eabi,sh*-*-*,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #15 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-06 12:19:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> > Ok, since class_45{a,b} is not really a run-time test, I think the best
> > solution would be to just convert it to "dg-do link":
>
> Good idea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48317
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50295
--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther 2011-09-06
11:59:46 UTC ---
Created attachment 25201
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25201
reduced testcase
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50301
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-linux-gnu
Status|UNCON
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50299
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-09-06
11:21:19 UTC ---
The disadvantage of the patch is that it will no longer emit
DW_TAG_call_site_parameter e.g. in
struct S { long a, b; };
void baz (void);
__attribute__((noinline, noclone))
int foo (s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50287
rsand...@gcc.gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50205
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50257
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50257
--- Comment #13 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-09-06 10:22:27 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Sep 6 10:22:21 2011
New Revision: 178581
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178581
Log:
2011-09-06 Paolo Carlini
PR lib
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50294
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou 2011-09-06
10:21:42 UTC ---
> And 32-bit for 32-bit targets? sizetype is 32bits there ...
No, 64-bit type are supported universally. Of course your mileage may vary for
array types indexed with a 64-bit type..
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50294
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de
2011-09-06 09:52:38 UTC ---
On Tue, 6 Sep 2011, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50294
>
> --- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou 2011-09-06
> 09:14:28 U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50257
--- Comment #12 from Paolo Carlini 2011-09-06
09:39:47 UTC ---
Thanks Jakub, for now we'd rather keep the library __builtin_constant_p-free (a
couple of weeks ago we had fun with Marc Glisse recollecting all the flames on
the mailing list the las
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50296
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i686-pc-linux-gnu, |i686-pc-linux-gnu,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50257
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50294
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou 2011-09-06
09:14:28 UTC ---
> My idea with fixing the Ada issue would be to conditionally use a signed
> or unsigned (sizetype) domain type. Not sure if all of the middle-end
> copes well with ssizetype domains
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50257
--- Comment #10 from Paolo Carlini 2011-09-06
09:14:40 UTC ---
Unfortunately constexpr functions are not going to help here, because of course
a call of such a function is never optimized to a constant unless *the
arguments* are all compile-time
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44646
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2011-09-06
08:28:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> TODO as follow up:
>
> * Replace "Sorry" by a real implementation in trans-stmt.c
Patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2011-09/msg5.html
> * Implemen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50294
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2011-09-06
08:31:56 UTC ---
My idea with fixing the Ada issue would be to conditionally use a signed
or unsigned (sizetype) domain type. Not sure if all of the middle-end
copes well with ssizetype domains (bu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50295
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-09-06
08:29:58 UTC ---
It is gimple_modified_p and gsi_insert_before does call build_stmt_operands on
it. Still debugging...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50295
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2011-09-06
08:26:44 UTC ---
Because gimple_build_debug_bind_stat does not set the stmt to modified? So
it's not automatically updated on gsi_insert_before ().
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50295
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2011-09-06
08:23:15 UTC ---
That would be the case if we're missing an update_stmt on the debug stmt.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50295
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50295
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50296
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i686-pc-linux-gnu, cris-elf |i686-pc-linux-gnu,
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50302
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38644
--- Comment #43 from Sebastian Huber
2011-09-06 07:45:29 UTC ---
How long will this middle to back end ping pong last until this bug is finally
fixed? It is now open since 2008.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49911
--- Comment #20 from Richard Guenther 2011-09-06
07:30:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> Created attachment 25199 [details]
> Patch preventing SRA from creating enumeration type replacements
>
> I'm currently testing this patch which will c
90 matches
Mail list logo
