http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55748
--- Comment #6 from warrenbear 2012-12-20
06:53:16 UTC ---
Sorry!
It's my fault to got the wrong size specification of the update file.
the preprocessed file has been compressed and attached at Comment 5.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55748
--- Comment #5 from warrenbear 2012-12-20
06:41:16 UTC ---
Created attachment 29010
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29010
It is the preprocessed file.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55748
--- Comment #4 from warrenbear 2012-12-20
06:39:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Can you try to compress it and attach it?
Yes.the original file is 1,860KB. after compress ,the result file is 228KB, and
is bigger then 100KB.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55750
--- Comment #2 from Dmitry Gorbachev
2012-12-20 05:55:22 UTC ---
Tried i686-pc-linux-gnu, i686-w64-mingw32.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55750
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2012-12-20
05:51:02 UTC ---
What target is this for?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55750
Bug #: 55750
Summary: [4.8 Regression] :-( in expand_expr_addr_expr_1, at
expr.c:7646
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCON
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29294
--- Comment #10 from Siarhei Siamashka
2012-12-20 05:47:30 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
And some performance measurements (for working with L1 cache):
> $ arm-none-eabi-gcc-4.7.2 -O2 -mcpu=cortex-a8 -c test.c
> $ objdump -d test.o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55749
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55748
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 2012-12-20
04:55:54 UTC ---
Can you try to compress it and attach it?
which means you don't
> need
> that at all and GCC should generate it without an increment. Oh and this is a
> RTL opt issue.
Seems like gcc 4.7.2 and 4.8.0 20121219 (experimental) are already doing this,
which hides the postincrement issue for the currently attached
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55748
--- Comment #2 from warrenbear 2012-12-20
04:43:31 UTC ---
the compiler output :
> widgets/qtoolbararealayout.cpp:1056: warning: 'k' is used uninitialized in
> this function
> widgets/qtoolbararealayout.cpp: In member function 'QList
> Q
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55749
Bug #: 55749
Summary: gcc 4.7.1 removes labels mistakenly
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55748
warrenbear changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||mips64-linux
Host|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55748
Bug #: 55748
Summary: compile eror when -fprefetch-loop-arrays is added ,
while everything goes well without the option.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55724
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55724
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill 2012-12-20
02:58:20 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Dec 20 02:58:16 2012
New Revision: 194627
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194627
Log:
PR c++/55724
* pt.c (type_unifi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55747
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2012-12-20
01:22:11 UTC ---
Actually noreturns are handled special in the compiler. I filed this bug over
6 years ago and it was closed as invalid back then.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55747
Bug #: 55747
Summary: Extra registers are saved in functions that only call
noreturn functions
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Stat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55745
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55746
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55746
Bug #: 55746
Summary: vfprintf behaves differently variable on stack vs
const argument.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.1
Status: UNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55742
Sriraman Tallam changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||davidxl at google dot com
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55733
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus 2012-12-19
23:05:54 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Wed Dec 19 23:05:49 2012
New Revision: 194621
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194621
Log:
2012-12-19 Tobias Burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55745
Bug #: 55745
Summary: [4.8 regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr26246_2.f90 -O
scan-tree-dump-times original "static int" 0
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55724
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill 2012-12-19
22:22:42 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Dec 19 22:22:36 2012
New Revision: 194620
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194620
Log:
PR c++/55724
* pt.c (type_unifi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55744
Bug #: 55744
Summary: Use of ebx as output register in inline asm on x86_64
PIC mcmodel=medium
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Stat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55699
Denis Excoffier changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
Jack Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||howarth at nitro dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55741
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-12-19
20:35:46 UTC ---
Created attachment 29009
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29009
check for and use Sleep()
Does this patch work?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55722
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-12-19
20:14:08 UTC ---
I've just encountered this bug again when trying to replace
constexpr unique_ptr(nullptr_t) noexcept
: _M_t()
{ static_assert(!std::is_pointer::value,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54884
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55710
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini 2012-12-19
18:03:23 UTC ---
Thanks Daniel for the new testcase in Comment #6. I'm afraid however we still
don't have a regression, because the testcase compiles but doesn't link in
4.6.x too.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54884
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Benson 2012-12-19
18:02:44 UTC ---
I spoke to soon! I just compiled r194618 of gcc and now I find the same
problem.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #32 from Joost VandeVondele
2012-12-19 18:00:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #28)
> I'd say as a first step try to make sure -lasan is linked at the very
> beginning, before all other libraries, there are numerous libasan crash
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55743
--- Comment #1 from Wookey 2012-12-19 17:54:16 UTC
---
Created attachment 29008
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29008
Remove unnecessary limits.h references in libgcc2.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55743
Bug #: 55743
Summary: limits.h included unnecessarily in libgcc2.c - can
break --without-headers bootstrap
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55734
--- Comment #21 from Teresa Johnson 2012-12-19
17:35:08 UTC ---
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 8:48 AM, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
wrote:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55734
>
> --- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-19
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54884
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Benson 2012-12-19
17:31:47 UTC ---
The fix for this bug has been working for me, but I'm getting reports from
several colleagues (who are trying to install the FoX library so that they can
install my software) th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55734
--- Comment #20 from Teresa Johnson 2012-12-19
17:07:51 UTC ---
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 8:39 AM, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
wrote:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55734
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
>What
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55739
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu 2012-12-19 16:58:34
UTC ---
The symbol size is always available at link-time or run-time.
We just never find a use for it in program itself. We can add
relocations for "foo@BOUND", which resolve to original
ca
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55734
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-19
16:57:31 UTC ---
Of course v >> HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT can't be assigned to r, it needs some new
temporary, with unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT or gcov_type_unsigned type (and use that
temporary instea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55734
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-19
16:48:00 UTC ---
Perhaps
if (v > 0)
{
#if IN_LIBGCOV
r = 63 - __builtin_clzll (v);
#else
if (sizeof (v) <= sizeof (HOST_WIDE_INT))
r = floor_log2 (v);
else
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55742
Bug #: 55742
Summary: __attribute__ in class function declaration cause
"prototype does not match" errors.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55674
--- Comment #18 from Teresa Johnson 2012-12-19
16:44:21 UTC ---
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 9:25 AM, hubicka at ucw dot cz
wrote:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55674
>
> --- Comment #17 from Jan Hubicka 2012-12-18 17:25:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55734
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36044
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55737
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-12-19
16:13:08 UTC ---
because it doesn't instantiate a template that requires the divide-by-zero in
an integer constant context
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55737
--- Comment #4 from GS 2012-12-19 16:11:11 UTC
---
Always nice to read friendly replies :). Sure I could. As I said, I'm not sure
I was right in the first place. Just wanted to help to make gcc better than
clang. Where I need no workaround
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #31 from Joost VandeVondele
2012-12-19 16:08:14 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #27)
> This time it looks like a valid error report (stack buffer overflow), but asan
> crashes while reporting it.
If I add -fno-omit-frame-poi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #30 from Joost VandeVondele
2012-12-19 15:57:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #28)
> I'd say as a first step try to make sure -lasan is linked at the very
> beginning, before all other libraries, there are numerous libasan crash
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55737
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-12-19
15:54:22 UTC ---
(Your testcase would be a lot easier to read without all those comments inside
the conditional expression, I think it's safe to assume everyone here knows
which is the false b
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55741
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55686
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55686
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener 2012-12-19
15:29:21 UTC ---
Happens in quite some packages for us: clisp, evince, pstoedit and ruby19
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55683
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55741
Bug #: 55741
Summary: [4.8 Regression] bootstrap fails in
libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/thread.cc
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55740
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Component|mid
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55734
--- Comment #16 from Teresa Johnson 2012-12-19
15:07:54 UTC ---
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:07 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
wrote:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55734
>
> --- Comment #15 from Richard Biener 2012-12-1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55740
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i?86-*-*|i?86-*-*, x86_64-*-*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55740
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener 2012-12-19
14:44:02 UTC ---
Reducing.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #29 from Joost VandeVondele
2012-12-19 14:36:00 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #27)
> This time it looks like a valid error report (stack buffer overflow), but asan
> crashes while reporting it.
>
> Take a look at DescribeAdd
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54283
--- Comment #15 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-12-19 14:33:55 UTC ---
> --- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-19
> 12:04:19 UTC ---
> Given that -static-libstdc++ has been added to trunk in 2009-06-25, and gcc
> 4.4
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #28 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-19
14:33:13 UTC ---
I'd say as a first step try to make sure -lasan is linked at the very
beginning, before all other libraries, there are numerous libasan crashes if it
is not so.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #27 from Kostya Serebryany 2012-12-19
14:29:12 UTC ---
This time it looks like a valid error report (stack buffer overflow), but asan
crashes while reporting it.
Take a look at DescribeAddressIfStack in asan/asan_report.cc,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55740
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
ed-local-typedefs -Wno-long-long
-version -fomit-frame-pointer -fmessage-length=0 -o tDirectories.s
GNU C++ (SUSE Linux) version 4.8.0 20121219 [trunk revision 194606]
(i586-suse-linux)
compiled by GNU C version 4.8.0 20121219 [trunk revision 194606], GMP
version 5.0.5, MPFR version 3.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55736
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55703
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55703
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener 2012-12-19
13:53:32 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Dec 19 13:53:18 2012
New Revision: 194609
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194609
Log:
2012-12-19 Richard Biener
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55736
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener 2012-12-19
13:53:31 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Dec 19 13:53:18 2012
New Revision: 194609
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194609
Log:
2012-12-19 Richard Biener
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53786
--- Comment #4 from Hristo Venev 2012-12-19
13:51:08 UTC ---
That bug was fixed. However there is still another one:
template
struct List{};
template
using Tail=List;
template
using Tail2=Tail;
using A=Tail2;
fail.cpp: In substitution of ‘temp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55739
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-19
13:49:35 UTC ---
That would look like too big hack.
Perhaps we could emit the common symbols as .bss .weak objects with padding,
and register as global a local alias to those symbols. Not sure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55739
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu 2012-12-19 13:42:12
UTC ---
If upper address or size of the common symbol is
available to ASAN at compile time as a special
symbol generated by assembler/linker, will it
help?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55739
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-19
13:26:34 UTC ---
That is not a bug, it can't. Asan needs to insert padding after it, but you
don't know if the symbol will be defined by the current CU, or some other, and
whether there will be
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55726
--- Comment #4 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-12-19 13:25:16 UTC ---
I understand your concern, Marc.
I think that the compiler shall either prefer double or produce
"error: call of overloaded 'f(float&)' is ambiguous"
I'm even more worried of
vo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55739
Bug #: 55739
Summary: asan doesn't work on common symbols
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55734
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener 2012-12-19
13:07:01 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> (In reply to comment #10)
> > Ah yes, now I remember. Yes, there is a problem with libgcov.a. I
> > wasn't seeing it because I was only buildin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54120
--- Comment #4 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-12-19 12:58:32 UTC ---
On 19-Dec-12, at 5:54 AM, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Or is it libgfortran itself that when built with r189365 works and
> when r189366
> doesn't? If so,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55703
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener 2012-12-19
12:37:53 UTC ---
Happens to be fixed by the fix for PR55736.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55738
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55730
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55730
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-19
12:17:05 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 19 12:16:56 2012
New Revision: 194607
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194607
Log:
PR debug/55730
* dwarf2out.c (m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55738
Bug #: 55738
Summary: missed memory store optimization.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54283
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-19
12:04:19 UTC ---
Given that -static-libstdc++ has been added to trunk in 2009-06-25, and gcc 4.4
has been branched 2009-03-27, you'd need to have local patches on top of 4.4 if
it would support
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54283
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou 2012-12-19
11:58:33 UTC ---
> I don't think so: even on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, when building an
> i686-unknown-linux-gnu compiler with an unbundled gcc 4.4 (which does
> support -static-libstdc++) wher
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55727
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55683
--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka 2012-12-19
11:47:06 UTC ---
The acutal ICE should be fixed. Martinj, I will leave the PR open just to make
you to double check that ipa-cp is doing properly the translation from
constants to binfos, too.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55683
--- Comment #12 from Jan Hubicka 2012-12-19
11:42:34 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Dec 19 11:42:30 2012
New Revision: 194606
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194606
Log:
PR tree-optimization/55683
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55736
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener 2012-12-19
11:28:45 UTC ---
Created attachment 29005
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29005
patch
Patch I am testing (works for the testcase).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52123
--- Comment #6 from Rainer Emrich 2012-12-19
10:55:55 UTC ---
Here's the status for gcc-4.8.0 rev. 194494 on x86_64-w64-mingw32:
g++ -c -g -DIN_GCC -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti -fasynchronous-unwind-tables
-W -Wall -Wno-narrowing -Wwrit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54120
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55736
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
Status|UNCONFIR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52123
--- Comment #5 from Rainer Emrich 2012-12-19
10:50:15 UTC ---
Last Chunk is not part of the patch, it's for a different issue, see PR55707.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52123
--- Comment #4 from Rainer Emrich 2012-12-19
10:40:30 UTC ---
Ok, long standing issue caused by the transition to g++ as bootstrap compiler.
Here's the status for gcc-4.7.3 rev. 194494 on x86_64-w64-mingw32:
/SCRATCH/tmp.wOrMZOydvQ/gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #25 from Kostya Serebryany 2012-12-19
10:32:29 UTC ---
>> So, to fix this, either libasan should for memset ignore any diagnostics for
>> stores into shadow memory area,
That's not a good choice. I remember actually catching
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55737
--- Comment #2 from GS 2012-12-19 10:31:45 UTC
---
Hey Andrew. You words completely logical,. But I think it can be avoided when
condition can be calculated during compilation. Though it's only my opinion.
Though I still have a couple
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55562
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55731
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener 2012-12-19
10:27:22 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > The reason is that unrolling early can be harmful to for example
> > vectorization
> > and thus cunrolli restricts its
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20097
--- Comment #7 from Steven Bosscher 2012-12-19
10:07:41 UTC ---
*** Bug 20018 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
1 - 100 of 119 matches
Mail list logo
