http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61049
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jvdelisle at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61049
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Created attachment 32734
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32734&action=edit
Patch pending
This patch places eat_separator back in but leaves the portion below which was
added to finish_sepa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42145
--- Comment #11 from Marcel Telka ---
It is reproducible even with -O1:
int f(void);
int
main(void)
{
int a, b;
a = f();
if (a)
b = f();
if (a && b)
return 1;
return 0;
}
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61050
--- Comment #2 from Guido MartÃnez ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> This is undefined behavior.
> See OpenMP 4.0, 2.6, lines 18-26 on page 52:
>
> "The following restrictions also apply:
>
> - If test-expr is of the form var rel
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61059
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|4.10.0 |
Target Milestone|4.9.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61059
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60940
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61057
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||emsr at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60984
--- Comment #12 from David Edelsohn ---
Are you using GNU Bash as your SHELL (recommended in the target-specific
installation instructions). It should not take that long to bootstrap GCC on a
recent system. AIX /bin/sh runs configure very slowly.
ble-languages=c,c++,lto,fortran
--prefix=/mnt/svn/gcc-trunk/binary-210047-lto-fortran-checking-yes-rtl-df/
--without-cloog --without-ppl
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.10.0 20140504 (experimental) (GCC)
Tested revisions:
Tested revisions:
r210047 - ICE
4.9 r209651 - ICE
4.8 r209342 - OK
4.7 r209345 - OK
4.6 r197894 - OK
-enable-languages=c,c++,lto,fortran
--prefix=/mnt/svn/gcc-trunk/binary-210047-lto-fortran-checking-yes-rtl-df/
--without-cloog --without-ppl
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.10.0 20140504 (experimental) (GCC)
Built with RTL checking enabled.
Tested revisions:
r210047 - ICE
4.9 r209651 - ICE
4.8 r209342 - ICE
4.7 r209345 - ICE
4.6 r197894 - OK
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60014
--- Comment #1 from Fredrik Hallenberg ---
Same results with gcc 4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61057
Bug ID: 61057
Summary: [C++11] operator . considered part of User Defined
Literal invocation.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61043
--- Comment #3 from Andi Kleen ---
>Unfortunately, gcc does not allow using SIMD intrinsics if not enabled by
>>compiler switches, so leaving the compiler options for a generic target CPU
>>wouldn't work. At least that is the case with gcc 4.8.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61056
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> 1) your testcase uses strrchr rather than strchr
Sorry, typo/pasto. It was meant to be "strchr".
> 2) why do you think it is desirable to convert strchr (x, 0) to x
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61056
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=60884
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo ---
I was trying to see how to implement the strchr builtin function which could
also utilize the cmp/str insn. However, it seems that the necessary builtin
expansion code for strchr is not there (yet).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61056
Bug ID: 61056
Summary: strchr (x, 0) is not converted to strlen (x)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61023
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61054
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
N.B. as well as custom allocators it affects the built-in delete[], which
performs an implicit null check that can be optimized away in buggy code. We
documented it on that page because of case where that ha
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59832
--- Comment #3 from Paul Pluzhnikov ---
Still reproduces on current trunk at r210049
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45179
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61054
Harald van Dijk changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51945
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I have the patches in comments 4 and 7 for several months. They fix the issues
without regression. Would it helps if I do the packaging?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61054
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
We already documented it, see "null pointer checks optimized away more
aggressively" at http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/porting_to.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61055
Bug ID: 61055
Summary: [avr] wrong test instruction after increment with -O1
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61054
Bug ID: 61054
Summary: Clearly note effect of memcpy optimization
improvements in 4.9 changes
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhanceme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60965
--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka ---
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60965
>
> --- Comment #11 from Andrew Haley ---
> (In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #9)
> > (In reply to Andrew Haley from comment #8)
> > > While it's true
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60965
--- Comment #12 from Jan Hubicka ---
> (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #4)
> > Mine, probably 4.9 regression, too.
>
> It is, and Jonathan Wakely's earlier reduction exposes it on 4.9 too.
>
> (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #6)
> >
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61053
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61053
Bug ID: 61053
Summary: _Alignas(long long) reduces alignment of long long
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59498
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61049
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #34 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #33 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #32 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #31 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #30 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #29 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41936
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Is the following patch OK?
--- ../_clean/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c2014-04-30 21:41:33.0 +0200
+++ gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c2014-05-04 00:42:50.0 +0200
@@ -6504,6 +6504,20 @@ gfc_c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #28 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #27 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #26 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #25 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #24 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #23 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60965
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Haley ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #9)
> (In reply to Andrew Haley from comment #8)
> > While it's true that we can play hardball on this one by insisting that only
> > char arrays should be used with pla
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #22 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #21 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #20 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #19 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #18 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #17 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #16 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #15 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #14 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
--- Comment #13 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
Thomas Preud'homme changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||thomas.preudhomme at arm dot
com
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61043
--- Comment #2 from andysem at mail dot ru ---
(In reply to Andi Kleen from comment #1)
> Yes LTO doesn't support different options for different files, and combines
> some of them (which happens in your case) and ignores some others.
>
> You coul
59 matches
Mail list logo
