http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54428
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54426
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54428
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek 2012-08-31
05:46:07 UTC ---
Reduced. Note that the typedef is needed to trigger ICE.
typedef double _Complex fftw_complex;
extern fftw_complex *fftw_alloc_complex (int);
int
cf (int n)
{
int K = 75;
int n
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54428
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||polacek at redhat dot com
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51222
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill 2012-08-31
02:50:35 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Aug 31 02:50:28 2012
New Revision: 190830
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=190830
Log:
PR c++/50545
PR c++/51222
* pt.c (insta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50545
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill 2012-08-31
02:50:33 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Aug 31 02:50:28 2012
New Revision: 190830
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=190830
Log:
PR c++/50545
PR c++/51222
* pt.c (insta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54433
Bug #: 54433
Summary: bogus -Wmissing-format-attribute warnings when "first
to check" is wrong
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54432
--- Comment #3 from Karl Kirch 2012-08-31 02:11:48
UTC ---
GCC info
gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-redhat-linux
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man
--infodir=/usr/share/info --enable-shared --enable-t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54432
--- Comment #2 from Karl Kirch 2012-08-31 02:10:38
UTC ---
GCC info
gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-redhat-linux
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man
--infodir=/usr/share/info --enable-shared --enable-t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54432
--- Comment #1 from Karl Kirch 2012-08-31 02:06:50
UTC ---
Another test case.
Looks like I end up with lost memory for every class I define.
#include
@interface Test : Object
{}
@end
@implementation Test
@end
int main()
{
id t = [[Test al
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54432
Bug #: 54432
Summary: Memory leak when linking libobjc with gcc
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54369
--- Comment #3 from chaoyingfu at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-31 00:38:39 UTC ---
The fall-through path of this jump has a barrier (resulted from
__builtin_unreachable), and the target of this jump has a return instruction.
The algorithm in reorg.c m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54369
Steve Ellcey changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #2 from Steve Ellcey 2012
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54431
Bug #: 54431
Summary: [C++11] g++ crashes when compiling the following file
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54398
--- Comment #1 from Ramana Radhakrishnan 2012-08-30 23:32:42 UTC ---
On 29 Aug 2012, at 01:21, asharif at gcc dot gnu.org
wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54398
>
> Bug #: 54398
> Summary: Incorrect ARM
On 29 Aug 2012, at 01:21, asharif at gcc dot gnu.org
wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54398
>
> Bug #: 54398
> Summary: Incorrect ARM assembly when building with
>-fno-omit-frame-pointer -O2
>Classification: Unclassified
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54430
Bug #: 54430
Summary: [C++11] Range Based For Loop lhs scoping issue
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51244
--- Comment #49 from Oleg Endo 2012-08-30
22:54:23 UTC ---
Kaz, if you have some time, could you please gather some CSiBE runtime numbers
for '-mpretend-cmove' and without it?
I've compared the result-size of the CSiBE set and with -mpretend-cmo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54429
Bug #: 54429
Summary: [SH] SImode values get ferried through FPUL and FP
regs for -O0
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54418
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo 2012-08-30 22:18:34
UTC ---
Unfortunately I was not able to reproduce this case without the -fopenmp
option, and that option requires threads, which are not available on the sh-sim
config I've got here for testing.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54425
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54422
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54419
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-08-30
20:37:59 UTC ---
> The instruction is generated by the compiler. If you try to compile a new
> compiler you have to make sure the tools used are recent enough to understand
> the output of the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54428
Bug #: 54428
Summary: ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:7591
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54419
--- Comment #2 from Ulrich Drepper 2012-08-30
20:19:35 UTC ---
The instruction is generated by the compiler. If you try to compile a new
compiler you have to make sure the tools used are recent enough to understand
the output of the compiler.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54427
Bug #: 54427
Summary: Expose more vector extensions
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50427
--- Comment #4 from Peter A. Bigot 2012-08-30 19:55:41
UTC ---
Thanks for the suggestion. At the time this bug was reported,
REGMODE_NATURAL_SIZE was not used as the target supported only 16-bit
registers, so I don't believe that macro has anyth
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54419
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-apple-darwin10 |x86_64-apple-darwin10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54005
--- Comment #13 from Benjamin Kosnik 2012-08-30
19:25:03 UTC ---
Author: bkoz
Date: Thu Aug 30 19:24:58 2012
New Revision: 190810
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=190810
Log:
2012-08-30 Benjamin Kosnik
PR libstdc++/5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54426
Bug #: 54426
Summary: [4.8 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/common_6.f90 -O
(internal compiler error) on powerpc-apple-darwin9
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48251
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||htl10 at users dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54418
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #28 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-08-30 17:32:35 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> > There are two curious things:
> > 1. why does the 2nd stage drops to only about 600 byte. (I assume 20-30k is
> > normal).
>
> That's certainly complet
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54425
Bug #: 54425
Summary: Rvalue/Lvalue overload resolution of templated
function
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54424
Bug #: 54424
Summary: Compiler crash with -std=gnu++0x
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54417
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|lto |middle-end
Summary|lto1: inter
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54252
--- Comment #9 from ramrad01 at arm dot com 2012-08-30 16:48:12 UTC ---
On 30/08/12 16:52, eric.batut at allegorithmic dot com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54252
>
> --- Comment #8 from Eric Batut
> 2012-08-30 15:52:20 UTC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54407
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-08-30
16:40:48 UTC ---
I don't know of any workaround so disabling the test seems like a good option
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54423
Bug #: 54423
Summary: building trunk on Darwin 12.1 fails in building
libraries
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54422
Bug #: 54422
Summary: Merge adjacent stores of elements of a vector (or
loads)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53787
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor 2012-08-30
15:58:40 UTC ---
The aggregate functions and their use in inlining/ipa-cp heuristics is
in, at least with my PHI predicate computing patch which I
re-submitted today we even get a predicate for known
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54252
--- Comment #8 from Eric Batut 2012-08-30
15:52:20 UTC ---
The original bug instance is fixed on trunk (rev 190803).
I had what I think is another instance of the same bug, where the error message
is "alignment of array elements is greater than e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54388
--- Comment #10 from Florian Weimer 2012-08-30
15:39:21 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> BTW, we definitely need a comment on why this particular code is so tricky.
>
> // NB: Interesting use of comma operator semantics.
>
> at the very lea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54388
--- Comment #9 from Benjamin Kosnik 2012-08-30
15:36:18 UTC ---
BTW, we definitely need a comment on why this particular code is so tricky.
// NB: Interesting use of comma operator semantics.
at the very least...
;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54394
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor 2012-08-30
15:32:53 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> > You can try whether it fixes your regression too.
>
> Yes, it does. Thanks.
Great, thanks.
>
> Did you check if you get the same run time with -flto an
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54421
Bug #: 54421
Summary: Extra movdqa when accessing quadwords in a 128-bit SSE
register
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50427
Catherine Gasnier changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lalhee at wanadoo dot fr
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50427
Catherine Gasnier changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lalhee at wanadoo dot fr
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #27 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-08-30 14:56:46 UTC ---
FWIW, I just filed the MFPR 3.1.x "make check" issue:
https://gforge.inria.fr/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=14806&group_id=136&atid=619
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54420
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||markus at trippelsdorf dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54409
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jam
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54420
Bug #: 54420
Summary: Segmentation in decl_mangling_context
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #26 from Hin-Tak Leung
2012-08-30 14:19:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> The sentence about newer versions is there for a reason. In fact, on
> Tru64 UNIX the situation is even worse: gmp 4.3.2 make check fails for
> me, so I'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54419
Bug #: 54419
Summary: [4.8 Regression] Compiling
libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/random.cc fails on
x86_64-apple-darwin10
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Ver
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
Hin-Tak Leung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #27346|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54365
--- Comment #8 from Florian Weimer 2012-08-30
13:56:04 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> This is not surprising, just use integer arithmetic instead of pointer
> arithmetic. Pointer arithmetic not only has undefined wrapping, it is defined
> on
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54365
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-08-30
13:45:13 UTC ---
This is not surprising, just use integer arithmetic instead of pointer
arithmetic. Pointer arithmetic not only has undefined wrapping, it is defined
only within the bounds of the obje
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54365
--- Comment #6 from Florian Weimer 2012-08-30
13:33:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> -fwrapv doesn't appear to make a difference:
>
> $ gcc compilerbug.c
> $ ./a.out
> it wraps
> $ gcc -O2 compilerbug.c
> $ ./a.out
> no wrap
> $ gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54365
--- Comment #5 from Greg Law 2012-08-30 13:23:54 UTC
---
-fwrapv doesn't appear to make a difference:
$ gcc compilerbug.c
$ ./a.out
it wraps
$ gcc -O2 compilerbug.c
$ ./a.out
no wrap
$ gcc -O2 -fwrapv compilerbug.c
$ ./a.out
no wrap
$
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54418
--- Comment #1 from Oleg Endo 2012-08-30 13:11:30
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
>
> It seems that cmpgeusi_t insn_and_split doesn't do its work.
>
> (define_insn_and_split "cmpgeusi_t"
> [(set (reg:SI T_REG)
> (geu:SI (match_operand:S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54407
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-08-30
12:53:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Do you mean does *not* happen on darwin12?
Well, I don't have access to darwin11 nor 12, so the only thing I am sure of is
that the failure does not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54418
Bug #: 54418
Summary: [4.8 Regression] [SH] Invalid operands for opcode
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54417
Bug #: 54417
Summary: lto1: internal compiler error: in edge_badness, at
ipa-inline.c:793
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54407
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-08-30
10:42:07 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> On powerpc-apple-darwin9 and x86_64-apple-darwin10, the test
> 30_threads/condition_variable/54185.cc is timed out (from
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testre
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54252
--- Comment #7 from Ramana Radhakrishnan 2012-08-30
10:21:59 UTC ---
Fixed now I believe on trunk.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54414
--- Comment #1 from amker.cheng 2012-08-30
10:17:15 UTC ---
I suspect that the call of arm_size_return_regs in function
thumb1_extra_regs_pushed should also be covered as in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-08/msg00830.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54252
--- Comment #6 from Ramana Radhakrishnan 2012-08-30
10:17:08 UTC ---
Author: ramana
Date: Thu Aug 30 10:17:04 2012
New Revision: 190800
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=190800
Log:
Fix PR target/54252
2012-08-29 Ramana Rad
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54403
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||54367
Severity|major
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54413
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-08-30
10:03:51 UTC ---
Perhaps we should for i and r etc. suffixes in C++11+ first try to look it up
as user-defined-literal and only if there are no corresponding operator""s,
treat it as the GNU extension?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54416
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54172
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-08-30
09:56:44 UTC ---
This is just the usual submission process, documented at
http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html#patches
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54413
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54416
Bug #: 54416
Summary: [4.8] ICE (segv) in codegen
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54413
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=54415
Bug #: 54415
Summary: GCC 4.4.4 build fails on solaris sparc with error as
undefined reference to `_Qp_xtoq'
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54414
Bug #: 54414
Summary: ARM:mis-compiled prologue/epilogue on cortex-m0 when
optimizing with -Os
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54172
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-08-30
08:19:56 UTC ---
Send to both gcc-patches at gcc.gnu.org and libstdc++ at gcc.gnu.org.
I think it would be better to send both hunks separately, as the first hunk is
shorter for backporting and the onl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54413
Bug #: 54413
Summary: Option for turning off compiler extensions for
-std=c++11 with respect to complex/fixed-point numbers
missing
Classification: Unclassified
Product:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54172
--- Comment #4 from Thiago Macieira 2012-08-30 07:52:31
UTC ---
I'll post today.
I haven't yet looked up which mailing list you're even talking about.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54392
--- Comment #14 from Michael Haubenwallner 2012-08-30 07:33:16 UTC ---
Indeed, the old buffer is freed before being copied.
Yep, this isn't a regression. In fact, with 4.4.3 it was the /empty string/
having the size of 1 in the comment#0 testcase
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54397
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-08-30
07:01:12 UTC ---
You need GDB 7.5 (or the changes mentioned in the other PR backported).
It doesn't make any sense to XFAIL the test, all debugging of code compiled by
GCC 4.8 is broken with older GDBs
81 matches
Mail list logo
