[Bug target/54051] [4.7 Regression] Invalid alignment specifier generated for vld3_lane_* and vld3_dup_* intrinsics.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54051 --- Comment #6 from Joey Ye 2013-02-05 07:48:48 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > This issue also impacts ldrexh/ldrexb as assembler doesn't accept ldrexh r1, > [r0, #0]. Better to backport to 4.7. and 4.6

[Bug target/54051] [4.7 Regression] Invalid alignment specifier generated for vld3_lane_* and vld3_dup_* intrinsics.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54051 Joey Ye changed: What|Removed |Added CC||joey.ye at arm dot com --- Comment #5

[Bug target/56211] gnulib yesno compiled incorrectly with -02 on x86_64

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56211 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86_64-*-* Status|UN

[Bug tree-optimization/56211] gnulib yesno compiled incorrectly with -02 on x86_64

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56211 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2013-02-05 07:08:44 UTC --- Do you have a testcase?

[Bug tree-optimization/56211] New: gnulib yesno compiled incorrectly with -02 on x86_64

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56211 Bug #: 56211 Summary: gnulib yesno compiled incorrectly with -02 on x86_64 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norm

[Bug c++/56208] [4.8 Regression] Some classic sfinae cases fail to work

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56208 --- Comment #5 from Daniel Krügler 2013-02-05 06:37:06 UTC --- I think I found the problem, the root is actually not related to sfinae (fortunately), but to the way how name-lookup in classes work in gcc. The problem can be fixed (as a workaroun

[Bug bootstrap/56182] [4.6 Regression] gcc/config/i386/t-linux64:29: recipe commences before first target

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56182 --- Comment #6 from Mike Frysinger 2013-02-05 05:37:08 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) yes, the Gentoo build has to undo all the magic checks that gcc adds in a naïve attempt to find the right multilib which makes it too fragile to be useful

[Bug bootstrap/56198] [4.8 Regression] Go profiledbootstrap error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56198 Ian Lance Taylor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug bootstrap/56198] [4.8 Regression] Go profiledbootstrap error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56198 --- Comment #1 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-05 01:11:05 UTC --- Author: ian Date: Tue Feb 5 01:11:01 2013 New Revision: 195747 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195747 Log: PR bootstrap/56198 compiler:

[Bug middle-end/56210] invalid -Warray-bounds warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56210 --- Comment #1 from jim at meyering dot net 2013-02-05 00:26:50 UTC --- Created attachment 29352 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29352 preprocessed k.c

[Bug middle-end/56210] New: invalid -Warray-bounds warning

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56210 Bug #: 56210 Summary: invalid -Warray-bounds warning Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority

[Bug middle-end/54685] [SH] Improve unsigned int comparison with 0x7FFFFFFF

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54685 --- Comment #6 from Kazumoto Kojima 2013-02-05 00:09:01 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > FAIL: gcc.target/sh/pr54685.c scan-assembler-not not > > I'm curious why this fails. On my sh-elf / newlib config it passes. Do you > have any

[Bug target/25967] Add attribute naked for x86

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25967 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akobets at mail dot ru --- Comm

[Bug target/56209] Function __attribute__((interrupt)), __attribute__((naked)) is needed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56209 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/54685] [SH] Improve unsigned int comparison with 0x7FFFFFFF

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54685 Oleg Endo changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comm

[Bug target/56209] New: Function __attribute__((interrupt)), __attribute__((naked)) is needed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56209 Bug #: 56209 Summary: Function __attribute__((interrupt)), __attribute__((naked)) is needed Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2 Status:

[Bug target/55146] jumptables with byte entries produce wrong code with -Os/-O2 for SH-1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55146 --- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo 2013-02-04 22:43:50 UTC --- Author: olegendo Date: Mon Feb 4 22:43:47 2013 New Revision: 195743 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195743 Log: PR target/55146 * gcc.target/sh/

[Bug tree-optimization/54386] [4.8 Regression] Unaligned mem load wrongly generated for inlined inline/static function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54386 --- Comment #15 from Oleg Endo 2013-02-04 22:41:47 UTC --- Author: olegendo Date: Mon Feb 4 22:41:44 2013 New Revision: 195742 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195742 Log: PR tree-optimization/54386 * gc

[Bug fortran/47517] [F03] Reallocate on assignment: Segfault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47517 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/56008] [F03] wrong code with lhs-realloc on assignment with derived types having allocatable components

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56008 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/47517] [F03] Reallocate on assignment: Segfault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47517 --- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas 2013-02-04 22:33:19 UTC --- Author: pault Date: Mon Feb 4 22:33:15 2013 New Revision: 195741 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195741 Log: 2013-02-04 Paul Thomas PR fortra

[Bug fortran/56008] [F03] wrong code with lhs-realloc on assignment with derived types having allocatable components

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56008 --- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas 2013-02-04 22:33:19 UTC --- Author: pault Date: Mon Feb 4 22:33:15 2013 New Revision: 195741 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195741 Log: 2013-02-04 Paul Thomas PR fortra

[Bug target/56200] queens benchmark is faster with -O0 than with any other optimization level

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56200 --- Comment #2 from Alexander Monakov 2013-02-04 21:36:38 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > What happens if you also use -fno-ivopts ? For me, -fno-ivopts gives a small improvement, but still slower than -O0. I think the slowdown is r

[Bug sanitizer/55617] static constructors are not being instrumented correctly on darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55617 m...@gcc.gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c++/56208] [4.8 Regression] Some classic sfinae cases fail to work

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56208 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[4.8 Regression] sizeof |[4.8 Regression] Some

[Bug sanitizer/55617] static constructors are not being instrumented correctly on darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55617 --- Comment #52 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-04 21:07:42 UTC --- Author: mrs Date: Mon Feb 4 21:07:35 2013 New Revision: 195737 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195737 Log: 2013-02-04 Alexander Potapenko

[Bug fortran/54195] [4.8 Regression][OOP] IMPORT fails with GENERIC TBP: "is already present in the interface"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195 Mikael Morin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c++/56208] [4.8 Regression] sizeof sfinae fails to work

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56208 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/55617] static constructors are not being instrumented correctly on darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55617 --- Comment #51 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-04 20:08:34 UTC --- Author: mrs Date: Mon Feb 4 20:08:29 2013 New Revision: 195735 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195735 Log: 2013-02-04 Alexander Potapenko

[Bug c++/56208] sizeof sfinae fails to work

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56208 --- Comment #2 from Daniel Krügler 2013-02-04 19:57:18 UTC --- The actually tested gcc version was 4.8.0 20130127 (experimental)

[Bug c++/56208] sizeof sfinae fails to work

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56208 --- Comment #1 from Daniel Krügler 2013-02-04 19:54:47 UTC --- I just notice that the problem is not restricted to sizeof sfinae. In fact if we define the first test overload as follows: template static one test(decltype( (make() << make(

[Bug libitm/55693] [4.8 Regression] libitm.c++/eh-1.C execution test fails on darwin from r193271

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55693 m...@gcc.gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mrs at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug inline-asm/56148] [4.8 Regression] inline asm matching constraint with different mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56148 --- Comment #4 from Sérgio Basto 2013-02-04 19:46:55 UTC --- Created attachment 29351 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29351 the questionable code hi, send in attach the code , (that in think) that is in discussion. To see if

[Bug c++/56208] New: sizeof sfinae fails to work

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56208 Bug #: 56208 Summary: sizeof sfinae fails to work Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P

[Bug libstdc++/56202] SIGFPE (division by zero) in std::binomial_distribution

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56202 --- Comment #13 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-04 19:28:47 UTC --- Author: paolo Date: Mon Feb 4 19:28:40 2013 New Revision: 195732 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195732 Log: 2013-02-04 Manuel López-Ibáñez

[Bug libstdc++/56202] SIGFPE (division by zero) in std::binomial_distribution

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56202 --- Comment #12 from Paolo Carlini 2013-02-04 19:23:38 UTC --- Ok, thanks Manuel. Let's go with this follow up then, mainline only. If nothing bad is reported may be suited for the branch too: Index: include/bits/random.h ==

[Bug fortran/54195] [4.8 Regression][OOP] IMPORT fails with GENERIC TBP: "is already present in the interface"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195 --- Comment #17 from Mikael Morin 2013-02-04 19:06:15 UTC --- Author: mikael Date: Mon Feb 4 19:06:06 2013 New Revision: 195730 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195730 Log: fortran/ PR fortran/54195 * r

[Bug libstdc++/56202] SIGFPE (division by zero) in std::binomial_distribution

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56202 --- Comment #11 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2013-02-04 19:00:22 UTC --- (In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #9) > > You are right, but then I don't understand why we should compute __e > > *before* > > checking __t == __x, per your fi

[Bug libstdc++/56202] SIGFPE (division by zero) in std::binomial_distribution

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56202 --- Comment #10 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2013-02-04 18:58:18 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) > You are right, but then I don't understand why we should compute __e *before* > checking __t == __x, per your first patch (I think I managed to confu

[Bug bootstrap/56182] [4.6 Regression] gcc/config/i386/t-linux64:29: recipe commences before first target

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56182 wbrana changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/54195] [4.8 Regression][OOP] IMPORT fails with GENERIC TBP: "is already present in the interface"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195 --- Comment #16 from Mikael Morin 2013-02-04 18:34:42 UTC --- Author: mikael Date: Mon Feb 4 18:34:30 2013 New Revision: 195729 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195729 Log: fortran/ PR fortran/54107 PR

[Bug fortran/54107] [4.8 Regression] [F03] Memory hog with abstract interface

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54107 --- Comment #32 from Mikael Morin 2013-02-04 18:34:41 UTC --- Author: mikael Date: Mon Feb 4 18:34:30 2013 New Revision: 195729 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195729 Log: fortran/ PR fortran/54107 PR

[Bug testsuite/56206] [4.7.3 regression] "dg-require-effective-target arm_hard_vfp_ok" triggers many test suite errors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56206 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug bootstrap/56182] [4.6 Regression] gcc/config/i386/t-linux64:29: recipe commences before first target

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56182 Matthias Klose changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vapier at gentoo dot org --- Comment #4

[Bug rtl-optimization/56151] [4.8 Regression] Performance degradation after r194054 on x86 Atom.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56151 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-02-04 18:20:09 UTC --- (In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #7) > > Created attachment 29350 [details] > > gcc48-pr56151.patch > > > > Untested patch for the peephole mentioned in previ

[Bug testsuite/56206] [4.7.3 regression] "dg-require-effective-target arm_hard_vfp_ok" triggers many test suite errors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56206 --- Comment #1 from Janis Johnson 2013-02-04 18:07:12 UTC --- Author: janis Date: Mon Feb 4 18:07:06 2013 New Revision: 195725 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195725 Log: PR testsuite/56206 * lib/target

[Bug testsuite/56207] New: 'make check-mpc' fails to build tests

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56207 Bug #: 56207 Summary: 'make check-mpc' fails to build tests Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal P

[Bug libstdc++/56202] SIGFPE (division by zero) in std::binomial_distribution

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56202 --- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini 2013-02-04 18:01:52 UTC --- You are right, but then I don't understand why we should compute __e *before* checking __t == __x, per your first patch (I think I managed to confuse myself exactly when I start

[Bug rtl-optimization/56151] [4.8 Regression] Performance degradation after r194054 on x86 Atom.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56151 --- Comment #8 from Steven Bosscher 2013-02-04 17:59:22 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) > Created attachment 29350 [details] > gcc48-pr56151.patch > > Untested patch for the peephole mentioned in previous comment. I don't think a ne

[Bug testsuite/56206] New: [4.7.3 regression] "dg-require-effective-target arm_hard_vfp_ok" triggers many test suite errors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56206 Bug #: 56206 Summary: [4.7.3 regression] "dg-require-effective-target arm_hard_vfp_ok" triggers many test suite errors Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version:

[Bug rtl-optimization/56131] [4.8 regression] gcc.dg/pr56035.c ICEs gcc on sparc-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56131 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code, patch

[Bug libstdc++/56202] SIGFPE (division by zero) in std::binomial_distribution

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56202 --- Comment #8 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2013-02-04 17:35:00 UTC --- I would understand something like: const double __e = -std::log(1.0 - __aurng()); if (__t == __x) { return __x; } el

[Bug libstdc++/56202] SIGFPE (division by zero) in std::binomial_distribution

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56202 --- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2013-02-04 17:29:41 UTC --- I don't understand the check for __e. If you continue, then neither __t nor __x change, the only difference is that you sample a new __e. But __e doesn't have any effect in th

[Bug middle-end/56077] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] volatile ignored when function inlined

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56077 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug sanitizer/55617] static constructors are not being instrumented correctly on darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55617 --- Comment #50 from Jack Howarth 2013-02-04 17:24:40 UTC --- (In reply to comment #49) > I agree with Jakub: it's better to return back to the qsort version of the > patch, since it fixes ASan as well, but also provides better support for

[Bug libstdc++/54314] [4.8 Regression] undefined references to 'construction vtable for std::ostream-in-std::basic_ostringstream, std::allocator >'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54314 --- Comment #34 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-02-04 17:20:05 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Mon Feb 4 17:19:56 2013 New Revision: 195723 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195723 Log: PR libstdc++/54314 * config/i3

[Bug rtl-optimization/56151] [4.8 Regression] Performance degradation after r194054 on x86 Atom.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56151 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-02-04 17:13:52 UTC --- Created attachment 29350 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29350 gcc48-pr56151.patch Untested patch for the peephole mentioned in previous comment.

[Bug libstdc++/56202] SIGFPE (division by zero) in std::binomial_distribution

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56202 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug libstdc++/56202] SIGFPE (division by zero) in std::binomial_distribution

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56202 --- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-04 17:11:15 UTC --- Author: paolo Date: Mon Feb 4 17:10:59 2013 New Revision: 195722 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195722 Log: 2013-02-04 Manuel López-Ibáñez

[Bug target/56186] [4.8 regression] function return ABI change for 128-bit types on Win64

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56186 Kai Tietz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug target/56186] [4.8 regression] function return ABI change for 128-bit types on Win64

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56186 --- Comment #1 from Kai Tietz 2013-02-04 16:37:51 UTC --- Author: ktietz Date: Mon Feb 4 16:37:44 2013 New Revision: 195721 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195721 Log: PR target/56186 * config/i

[Bug libstdc++/56202] SIGFPE (division by zero) in std::binomial_distribution

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56202 --- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2013-02-04 16:21:54 UTC --- Note: I think we want also to consider the possibility that __e is zero at the same time and in that case simply discard the iteration completely.

[Bug tree-optimization/56205] New: [4.8 Regression] stdarg pass confused by jump threading

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56205 Bug #: 56205 Summary: [4.8 Regression] stdarg pass confused by jump threading Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/47333] [4.6, 4.8 regression] g++.dg/lto/20091219 FAILs on Solaris 2 with SUN as

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47333 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[4.6 regression]|[4.6, 4.8 regression]

[Bug testsuite/56194] FAIL: g++.dg/init/const9.C -std=c++98 scan-assembler-not rodata

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56194 --- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2013-02-04 16:03:08 UTC --- One thought I had is to add the -fpic option. This should push the function descriptor into .data.

[Bug libstdc++/56202] SIGFPE (division by zero) in std::binomial_distribution

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56202 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|unas

[Bug tree-optimization/55890] [4.7 Regression] calling a builtin func through a cast triggers an ICE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55890 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/44061] [4.6 Regression] Warns about out-of-bounds array access inside __builtin_constant_p guarded section

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44061 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/55890] [4.7 Regression] calling a builtin func through a cast triggers an ICE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55890 --- Comment #11 from Richard Biener 2013-02-04 15:49:29 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Mon Feb 4 15:49:18 2013 New Revision: 195718 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195718 Log: 2013-02-04 Richard Biener

[Bug tree-optimization/44061] [4.6/4.7 Regression] Warns about out-of-bounds array access inside __builtin_constant_p guarded section

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44061 --- Comment #10 from Richard Biener 2013-02-04 15:49:29 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Mon Feb 4 15:49:18 2013 New Revision: 195718 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195718 Log: 2013-02-04 Richard Biener

[Bug libstdc++/56202] SIGFPE (division by zero) in std::binomial_distribution

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56202 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- Commen

[Bug rtl-optimization/56131] [4.8 regression] gcc.dg/pr56035.c ICEs gcc on sparc-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56131 --- Comment #9 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-02-04 15:39:09 UTC --- (In reply to comment #8) > Mikael, > > > I tested this on x86_64-linux and sparc64-linux. On x86_64 there were no > > test > > suite changes, > > Thanks for testing

[Bug target/56199] strcpy/strcat builtins for constant strings generates suboptimal code.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56199 Ondrej Bilka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|IN

[Bug rtl-optimization/56131] [4.8 regression] gcc.dg/pr56035.c ICEs gcc on sparc-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56131 vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment

[Bug target/56199] strcpy/strcat builtins for constant strings generates suboptimal code.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56199 --- Comment #3 from Ondrej Bilka 2013-02-04 15:15:12 UTC --- Created attachment 29349 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29349 icatche stressing benchmark

[Bug target/38134] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] speed regression with many loop invariants

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38134 --- Comment #20 from Richard Biener 2013-02-04 14:47:31 UTC --- Ok, the goal would be to have all !targetm.legitimate_constant_p () constants assigned to a pseudo (and in GIMPLE to an SSA name). One piece of code that defeats that purpose

[Bug libstdc++/56202] SIGFPE (division by zero) in std::binomial_distribution

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56202 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/55978] [4.8 Regression] class_optional_2.f90 -Os fails

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55978 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug target/56186] [4.8 regression] function return ABI change for 128-bit types on Win64

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56186 Kai Tietz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug middle-end/56188] [4.8 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-pta-10.c scan-ipa-dump pta "ESCAPED = { (ESCAPED )?(NONLOCAL )?}"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56188 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/56204] New: [4.8 regression] gfortran.dg/quad_[23].f90 FAIL on Solaris 9/x86

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56204 Bug #: 56204 Summary: [4.8 regression] gfortran.dg/quad_[23].f90 FAIL on Solaris 9/x86 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCO

[Bug middle-end/56188] [4.8 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-pta-10.c scan-ipa-dump pta "ESCAPED = { (ESCAPED )?(NONLOCAL )?}"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56188 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener 2013-02-04 13:31:35 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Mon Feb 4 13:31:28 2013 New Revision: 195713 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195713 Log: 2013-02-04 Richard Biener P

[Bug fortran/56203] New: gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90 times out on Solaris/SPARC

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56203 Bug #: 56203 Summary: gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90 times out on Solaris/SPARC Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: no

[Bug fortran/55978] [4.8 Regression] class_optional_2.f90 -Os fails

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55978 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug rtl-optimization/56131] [4.8 regression] gcc.dg/pr56035.c ICEs gcc on sparc-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56131 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target|sparc-linux |sparc-*-* CC|

[Bug libstdc++/56202] New: SIGFPE (division by zero) in std::binomial_distribution

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56202 Bug #: 56202 Summary: SIGFPE (division by zero) in std::binomial_distribution Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug go/56172] net FAILs on Solaris

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56172 --- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2013-02-04 13:00:59 UTC --- Thanks for the analysis. > Since you can recreate the bug, I guess the next step is to check the > mp->waitsema field in the runtime_semawakeup frame. My

[Bug lto/56168] [4.8 Regression] GCC seems to disregard -fno-builtin when compiling with LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56168 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug lto/56168] [4.8 Regression] GCC seems to disregard -fno-builtin when compiling with LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56168 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener 2013-02-04 12:19:34 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Mon Feb 4 12:19:25 2013 New Revision: 195709 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195709 Log: 2013-02-04 Richard Guenther

[Bug fortran/56201] New: Realloc on assignment: Wrong code when assigning a zero-sized array

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56201 Bug #: 56201 Summary: Realloc on assignment: Wrong code when assigning a zero-sized array Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRME

[Bug tree-optimization/55890] [4.7 Regression] calling a builtin func through a cast triggers an ICE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55890 --- Comment #10 from Richard Biener 2013-02-04 12:08:17 UTC --- Initial patch now backported, avoiding the C++ function overloading by using gimple_call_builtin_class_p.

[Bug lto/55660] [4.7 Regression] ICE instead of some warning during lto build with supplied different options (-funsigned-char vs none)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55660 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug middle-end/53844] [4.6 Regression] GCC generates suboptimal code for unused members of classes in some cases on multiple targets.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53844 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug lto/55660] [4.7 Regression] ICE instead of some warning during lto build with supplied different options (-funsigned-char vs none)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55660 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener 2013-02-04 12:04:43 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Mon Feb 4 12:04:35 2013 New Revision: 195708 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195708 Log: 2013-02-04 Richard Biener B

[Bug middle-end/53844] [4.6/4.7 Regression] GCC generates suboptimal code for unused members of classes in some cases on multiple targets.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53844 --- Comment #12 from Richard Biener 2013-02-04 12:04:42 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Mon Feb 4 12:04:35 2013 New Revision: 195708 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195708 Log: 2013-02-04 Richard Biener

[Bug tree-optimization/55890] [4.7 Regression] calling a builtin func through a cast triggers an ICE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55890 --- Comment #9 from Richard Biener 2013-02-04 12:04:41 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Mon Feb 4 12:04:35 2013 New Revision: 195708 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=195708 Log: 2013-02-04 Richard Biener B

[Bug rtl-optimization/56151] [4.8 Regression] Performance degradation after r194054 on x86 Atom.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56151 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug middle-end/56188] [4.8 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-pta-10.c scan-ipa-dump pta "ESCAPED = { (ESCAPED )?(NONLOCAL )?}"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56188 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener 2013-02-04 11:58:50 UTC --- ok, the difference is that in the working case we have Equivalence classes for Direct node node id 28:_10 are pointer: 11, location:0 Equivalence classes for Direct node node

[Bug tree-optimization/55970] [x86] Avoid reverse order of function argument gimplifying

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55970 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- Commen

[Bug libstdc++/54314] [4.8 Regression] undefined references to 'construction vtable for std::ostream-in-std::basic_ostringstream, std::allocator >'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54314 --- Comment #33 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-02-04 10:44:19 UTC --- Created attachment 29347 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29347 gcc48-pr54314.patch Ah, I see, solaris and mingw/cygwin have their own assemble_visibility

  1   2   >