http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51215
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51361
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51361
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 2011-12-08
04:58:51 UTC ---
This could also be related to PR 51449.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49772
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski 2011-12-08
04:54:41 UTC ---
A better non specific to tree-ssa-structaliasing patch:
Index: cgraphunit.c
===
--- cgraphunit.c(revision 18209
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50335
--- Comment #10 from sebpop at gmail dot com
2011-12-08 04:08:14 UTC ---
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 18:06, maxim_kuvyrkov at mentor dot com
wrote:
> Do I understand correctly that you are suggesting effectively disabling loop
> flattening completely
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21617
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ra
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski 201
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21617
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski 2011-12-08
03:37:28 UTC ---
-O1:
:
# __crc0_73 = PHI <__crc0_35(5), __crc0_54(7)>
# __data_75 = PHI <__data_32(5), data_7(7)>
D.1900_26 = __crc0_73 >> 56;
D.1901_27 = (int) D.1900_26;
D.1902_28 = MEM[b
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21617
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 2011-12-08
03:34:57 UTC ---
-O1:
.L2:
movl%eax, %edx
sarl$31, %edx
shrl$24, %edx
leal(%eax,%edx), %ecx
andl$255, %ecx
subl%edx, %ecx
movb%cl, (%ebx,%eax)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39509
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||
--- Comment #23 from Andrew Pinski 2011
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49084
--- Comment #15 from Cesar Strauss 2011-12-08
01:23:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> Unfortunately I don't seem to be able to reproduce on Linux. Could you see
> what object code has been generated for the line
>
> gcc_assert (Nkind (gnat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51440
--- Comment #2 from Chris 2011-12-08
01:04:18 UTC ---
When narrowing down the issue I stripped a detail which may be important. All
contents of the test.h file are in fact in extern "C" { } range. When the repro
case from my original report is mo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51401
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51401
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-08
00:50:29 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 8 00:50:26 2011
New Revision: 182097
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182097
Log:
PR c++/51401
* decl.c (grokdeclarator): Err
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51460
--- Comment #3 from Faraaz Sareshwala 2011-12-08
00:46:58 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> > Please submit a full bug report,
> > with preprocessed source if appropriate.
> > See for instructions.
> >
> > Please let me know if I have forgotte
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51460
--- Comment #2 from Faraaz Sareshwala 2011-12-08
00:46:04 UTC ---
Created attachment 26019
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26019
preprocessed source (gzipped because too large otherwise)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51460
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wak
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51460
Bug #: 51460
Summary: [4.6 regression] Struct with two boost mutexes
allocated on the heap inside of a while loop causes
compiler segfault
Classification: Unclassified
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50335
--- Comment #9 from maxim_kuvyrkov at mentor dot com 2011-12-08 00:06:40 UTC ---
On 7/12/2011, at 7:40 AM, sebpop at gmail dot com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50335
>
> --- Comment #8 from sebpop at gmail dot com
> 2011
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51454
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |WORKSFORME
Severity|trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51459
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.6 Regression] 'double|[4.7 Regression] 'double
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50051
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51420
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50051
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski 2011-12-07
22:59:10 UTC ---
Author: pinskia
Date: Wed Dec 7 22:59:06 2011
New Revision: 182092
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182092
Log:
2011-12-07 Andrew Pinski
PR libffi/50051
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51459
--- Comment #1 from kennytm at gmail dot com 2011-12-07 22:48:14 UTC ---
Created attachment 26018
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26018
The .ii file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51459
Bug #: 51459
Summary: [4.6 Regression] 'double free or corruption' involving
std::function, std::vector and lambdas
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51454
Pubby8 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50237
--- Comment #32 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-07
22:06:04 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 7 22:05:59 2011
New Revision: 182090
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182090
Log:
PR bootstrap/50237
* internal.h (_cpp_init
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50051
--- Comment #5 from Anthony Green 2011-12-07 21:48:29
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > Thanks Andrew. Does this force the generation of FP instructions, which are
> > then emulated through OS traps?
>
> Yes and th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48835
--- Comment #47 from Mikael Pettersson 2011-12-07
21:12:39 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #42)
> -O2 -W -Wall -gnatpg -nostdinc a-assert.adb -o a-assert.o
> +===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
> | 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51446
--- Comment #3 from lucier at math dot purdue.edu 2011-12-07 21:07:09 UTC ---
I've looked through the code in real.c a bit (and perhaps the component of this
bug report should be changed).
It appears that do_divide, when given 0.0/0.0, calls get_c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49973
--- Comment #10 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-12-07 20:56:01 UTC ---
On Wed, 7 Dec 2011, tromey at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Note that GCC also handles the tab case incorrectly here.
Yes, GCC should be fixed to follow the GCS there as
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51458
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51458
Bug #: 51458
Summary: [4.7 Regression] Accepts invalid designated
initializers
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51429
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51229
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51369
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51429
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-07
20:46:41 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 7 20:46:38 2011
New Revision: 182089
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182089
Log:
PR c++/51429
* typeck2.c (cxx_incomplete_ty
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51229
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-07
20:43:12 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 7 20:43:06 2011
New Revision: 182088
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182088
Log:
PR c++/51229
* decl.c (reshape_init_class):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51449
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51456
--- Comment #3 from junkmailnotread at yahoo dot com 2011-12-07 20:31:02 UTC ---
I'm using glibc-2.12.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51457
Bug #: 51457
Summary: Add warning about impossible boolean comparisons
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51386
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51446
--- Comment #2 from lucier at math dot purdue.edu 2011-12-07 19:55:32 UTC ---
I don't understand what you're saying.
On my linux box
heine:~/Downloads> uname -a
Linux heine 3.0.0-13-generic #22-Ubuntu SMP Wed Nov 2 13:27:26 UTC 2011 x86_64
x86_64
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51369
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-07
19:51:57 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 7 19:51:54 2011
New Revision: 182086
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182086
Log:
PR c++/51369
* init.c (build_value_init): A
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51386
--- Comment #8 from François Dumont 2011-12-07
19:47:08 UTC ---
Author: fdumont
Date: Wed Dec 7 19:47:03 2011
New Revision: 182085
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182085
Log:
2011-12-07 François Dumont
PR libstdc++/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51456
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2011-12-07
19:44:09 UTC ---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2005-07/msg00325.html for a problem against
MIPS for the same unaligned relocation.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51456
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-12-07
19:43:26 UTC ---
What version of glibc are you using? glibc should be handling the unaligned
relocation correctly. Also GCC is correct here in using the unaligned
relocation.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51456
Bug #: 51456
Summary: gcc-4.5.3 ARM misaligned relocation for
__gxx_personality_v0 in libstdc++
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.3
Status: UNCON
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51455
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51455
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-07
19:30:21 UTC ---
Probably time for you to read the docs.
E.g. AMD 24592 pdf, in 3.1.2 says:
"In general, byte and word operands are stored in the low 8 or 16
bits of GPRs without modifying their high 5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51455
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 2011-12-07
19:28:29 UTC ---
movzbl 0x20d(%rsp),%eax
is the same as:
movzbq 0x20d(%rsp),%rax
as all l instructions zero extend to q.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51455
--- Comment #2 from frederik.deweerdt at gmail dot com 2011-12-07 19:25:30 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> ((unsigned char *)offsets)[index] still sign extends to int.
I'm not sure how to parse this. My problem is that '((unsigned char
*)offse
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45416
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45416
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski 2011-12-07
19:23:13 UTC ---
Author: pinskia
Date: Wed Dec 7 19:23:10 2011
New Revision: 182084
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182084
Log:
2011-12-07 Andrew Pinski
PR middle-end/4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51454
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini 2011-12-07
19:19:17 UTC ---
Note that ICC and Comeau also reject it in strict mode.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51455
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-12-07
19:10:55 UTC ---
((unsigned char *)offsets)[index] still sign extends to int.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51051
--- Comment #12 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2011-12-07
19:07:27 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> I still have HP's patch in my local tree.
I assume you mean Bernd's patch referenced in this PR.
(I was only doing the legwork.)
> Should I remove i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51452
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-07
19:03:30 UTC ---
c++std-lib-30708 has Daniel's explanation of his interpretation, as implemented
in GCC.
FWIW I prefer your interpretation, but will peace Daniel to comment further
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51417
--- Comment #2 from Andi Kleen 2011-12-07
18:54:57 UTC ---
Hmm, you mean a copy with the version number in addition? Would be reasonable I
guess.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51452
--- Comment #5 from d...@boost-consulting.com 2011-12-07 18:41:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I think this is by design, see the thread beginning with c++std-lib-30698
>
> I've been surprised by that reasoning several times e.g.
> http://gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51455
Bug #: 51455
Summary: Possible uninitialized register use when array
subscript is unsigned
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51453
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51453
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |libstdc++
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carli
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49973
Tom Tromey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tromey at gcc dot gnu.org
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51454
Bug #: 51454
Summary: For loop improper scoping
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51453
Bug #: 51453
Summary: Feature request: Implement Empty Base Optimization in
std::tuple
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51354
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51448
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51452
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-07
17:38:39 UTC ---
yes, I keep forgetting that noexcept should be implied on dtors now
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51452
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51401
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51452
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51434
--- Comment #12 from Tobias Burnus 2011-12-07
17:20:14 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> > Draft patch - one probably needs to do something similar for derived types.
> The patch breaks the "Different CHARACTER lengths (%d/%d) in array
> constr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51452
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-07
17:16:58 UTC ---
I think this is by design, see the thread beginning with c++std-lib-30698
I've been surprised by that reasoning several times e.g.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2011-11/msg00015.ht
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51403
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51398
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51051
--- Comment #11 from Joel Sherrill 2011-12-07
16:56:46 UTC ---
I still have HP's patch in my local tree. Should I remove it? Or does it need
to be committed?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51452
Bug #: 51452
Summary: has_nothrow_.*constructor bugs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51395
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47687
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50747
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-07
16:13:14 UTC ---
The function in question is DECL_ABSTRACT (it's one of the B::B constructors).
Not sure why we have a cgraph node for it at all:
#0 cgraph_create_node (decl=0x75b92500)
at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51434
--- Comment #11 from Andy Nelson 2011-12-07
16:11:38 UTC ---
On Dec 6, 2011, at 7:17 PM, sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51434
>
> --- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl
> 2011-12-07 02:17
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50051
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski 2011-12-07
16:00:25 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Thanks Andrew. Does this force the generation of FP instructions, which are
> then emulated through OS traps?
Yes and the traps are always enabled in newis
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51451
Bug #: 51451
Summary: Premature EOF in stream
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51420
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill 2011-12-07
15:41:08 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Dec 7 15:41:03 2011
New Revision: 182083
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182083
Log:
PR c++/51420
* parser.c (lookup_literal_ope
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51434
--- Comment #10 from Tobias Burnus 2011-12-07
15:31:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Draft patch - one probably needs to do something similar for derived types.
The patch breaks the "Different CHARACTER lengths (%d/%d) in array constructor"
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51449
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-12-07 15:14:40 UTC ---
Here is a (somewhat) reduced testcase:
% cat test.ii
extern "C"
{
typedef long unsigned int size_t;
}
namespace std __attribute__ ((__visibility__ ("default")))
{
template
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49945
--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-07
14:59:52 UTC ---
Index: gcc/lto-streamer-out.c
===
--- gcc/lto-streamer-out.c (revision 182081)
+++ gcc/lto-streamer-out.c (
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49945
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51429
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51450
Bug #: 51450
Summary: configure's test for -fno-rtti -fno-exceptions broken
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40154
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #6 from Jorn W
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51447
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-07
14:06:41 UTC ---
I think goto ptr can't be nonlocal, so that testcase indeed would be invalid.
register void *ptr asm ("rbx");
int
foo (void)
{
__label__ nonlocal_lab;
__attribute__((noinline, n
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51447
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Bonzini 2011-12-07 14:04:04
UTC ---
Untested patch...
Index: df-problems.c
===
--- df-problems.c (revision 177688)
+++ df-problems.c (working c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51449
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
PR lto/48100
* gcc.dg/lto/20111207-1_0.c: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/lto/20111207-1_1.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/lto/20111207-1_2.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/lto/20111207-1_3.c: Likewise.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/20111207-1_0.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/20111207-1_1.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48100
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.6/4.7 Regression]|[4.6 Regression] Assertion
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51448
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51447
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Bonzini 2011-12-07 13:48:42
UTC ---
The bug is that rbx is added to the EXIT_BLOCK uses:
Basic block 1 , prev 2, loop_depth 0, count 0, freq 0.
Predecessors:
;; bb 1 artificial_defs: { }
;; bb 1 artificial_uses: { u-1(3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50601
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
