https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64739
Bug ID: 64739
Summary: Spurious "array subscript is above array bounds"
warning
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64737
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64705
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-*-* |x86_64-*-*, aarch64
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64726
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64704
--- Comment #8 from kathy ---
(In reply to Mikhail Maltsev from comment #5)
> (In reply to kathy from comment #3)
> > i think, form line:13082c7 to 1308348, the code is to doing something with
> > align?
> Yes
> 13082f0: 66 41 0f 6f 0b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64726
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Jan 23 07:01:34 2015
New Revision: 220028
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220028&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-23 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/64726
* trans-ope
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64610
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64705
--- Comment #2 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Loop dump before IVOPT is like below:
Loop 4, basic blocks 28/30;
:
count_54 = count_172 + 1;
_55 = i_161 + i_161;
prime_56 = _55 + 3;
k_57 = prime_56 + i_161;
if (size_26 >= k_57)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61933
--- Comment #19 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Jan 23 03:37:30 2015
New Revision: 220026
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220026&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-22 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/61933
* gfortran.dg/m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #12 from David Edelsohn ---
GCC on AIX. One can use gcc111 in the GCC Compiler Farm.
configure flags: --disable-werror --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,objc
--with-gmp=/opt/cfarm --with-cloog=no --with-ppl=no
--with-libiconv-prefix=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61933
--- Comment #16 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Jan 23 02:01:10 2015
New Revision: 220024
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220024&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-22 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran/61933
* io/inquir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64705
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61933
--- Comment #18 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Fixed on trunk. I am going to add a test case in the testsuite for the example
in Comment #7 before I close this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61933
--- Comment #17 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Jan 23 02:06:17 2015
New Revision: 220025
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220025&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-22 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/61933
* gfortran.dg/n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61933
--- Comment #15 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Jan 23 01:59:23 2015
New Revision: 220023
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220023&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-22 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/61933
* libgfortran.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64595
--- Comment #18 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Fri Jan 23 01:42:08 2015
New Revision: 220022
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220022&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/64595
* go.1, gofmt.1: New files.
* Makefile.am
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64704
--- Comment #7 from kathy ---
(In reply to Mikhail Maltsev from comment #5)
> (In reply to kathy from comment #3)
> > i think, form line:13082c7 to 1308348, the code is to doing something with
> > align?
> Yes
> 13082f0: 66 41 0f 6f 0b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64694
--- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #10)
> I would say it most probably just gone latent again. Is the ICE actually a
> failure to deliver an exception from simulated out-of-memory event?
>
Yes, the crash happ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64704
--- Comment #6 from kathy ---
(In reply to Mikhail Maltsev from comment #5)
> (In reply to kathy from comment #3)
> > i think, form line:13082c7 to 1308348, the code is to doing something with
> > align?
> Yes
> 13082f0: 66 41 0f 6f 0b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64694
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64672
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If the LTO marker in *.opt works, no objection from me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64672
--- Comment #18 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #15)
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2015, vries at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64672
> >
> > --- Comment #14 from vries
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64738
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I see in gotools/Makefile.am:
AM_LDFLAGS = -L $(libgodir) -L $(libgodir)/.libs -static-libgo
but why has the -static-libgo flag been added is unclear (and, IMHO very much
undesirable).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64738
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think they should be dynamic linked by default.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64738
--- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
My concern was that for people building their own GCC, the tools won't work
without setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
I think I will make it a configure option.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64738
Bug ID: 64738
Summary: go, gofmt and cgo binaries linked statically
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: go
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15184
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #29 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64694
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64737
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64737
Bug ID: 64737
Summary: [5 Regression] gcc -v print extra blank line
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: driver
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64672
--- Comment #17 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #13)
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2015, vries at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> > tentative patch, adding flag_ltrans || flag_wpa to the GOACC builtin guard
> > conditions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64365
Brooks Moses changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||brooks at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64736
Bug ID: 64736
Summary: [SH] ICE in dwarf2cfi.c:2318
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63858
cesar at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cesar at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64727
--- Comment #12 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #11)
> This seems to be because darwin_build_constant_cfstring uses CONST_DECL for
> a global variable, and the C++ front end expects CONST_DECL to be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64672
--- Comment #16 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 34536
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34536&action=edit
tentative patch, makes fopenacc an LTO option, adds lto-wrapper handling
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64707
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 34535
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34535&action=edit
tentative patch, makes fopenmp an LTO option, adds lto-wrapper handling
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64712
--- Comment #6 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Also reproduced with r219989.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64727
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52076
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #11 from Igor Zamyatin ---
Could you please provide details of your compiler configuration for me to try
to reproduce the problem?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52076
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Thu Jan 22 21:24:28 2015
New Revision: 220015
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220015&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/52076
* config/m68k/m68k.md (xorsi3_internal): Twiddle co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64735
Bug ID: 64735
Summary: std::future broken on armel
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64721
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #1)
> (B) seems best from the POV of a library that aims to be thread-safe: don't
> touch signal-handlers when inside libgccjit. I have a patch for this.
Patch posted
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64477
--- Comment #9 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Jan 22 20:25:23 2015
New Revision: 220012
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220012&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-22-01 Uros Bizjak
PR target/64688
PR target/64477
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64688
--- Comment #6 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Jan 22 20:25:23 2015
New Revision: 220012
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220012&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-22-01 Uros Bizjak
PR target/64688
PR target/64477
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64733
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64730
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64733
--- Comment #2 from aji at ti dot com ---
The issue is with this line of code:
asm volatile("mov X1, #0x1003");
If I modify the mov instruction to take a variable input it works.
val = 0x1003;
asm volatile("mov X1, %0":"=r"(val));
Just
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64694
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Jan 22 19:44:00 2015
New Revision: 220011
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220011&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/64694
* ipa-inline.c (inline_small_functions): Fix thinko
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64693
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 34534
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34534&action=edit
Test case
I've been working on a patch for the testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64694
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #6)
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64694
> >
> > --- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64694
> > >
> > > -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64694
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64694
>
> --- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64694
> >
> > --- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
> > r219076 introd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64694
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64694
>
> --- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
> r219076 introduced:
>
> if (current_badness != badness)
> {
> if (edge_heap.min () && badnes
./../cc1plus'
(x86_64)
GNU C++ (GCC) version 5.0.0 20150122 (experimental) (x86_64-apple-darwin14.1.0)
compiled by GNU C version 5.0.0 20150122 (experimental), GMP version 6.0.0,
MPFR version 3.1.2, MPC version 1.0.2
GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=30 --param ggc-min-heapsize=4096
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64731
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
Seems strongly related to PR55266 (which also references PR52436).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64580
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64694
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
r219076 introduced:
if (current_badness != badness)
{
if (edge_heap.min () && badness > edge_heap.min_key ())
^
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64557
--- Comment #3 from wmi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: wmi
Date: Thu Jan 22 17:59:23 2015
New Revision: 220010
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220010&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-22 Wei Mi
PR rtl-optimization/64557
* ds
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64734
Bug ID: 64734
Summary: ICE at omp lowering
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgomp
Assignee: una
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64733
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64733
Bug ID: 64733
Summary: MOV instruction error when inline assembly code is
used in a C function
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64712
--- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 34532
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34532&action=edit
compile.sh, script used to reproduce on command-line
Running 10 iterations:
...
$ ./compile.sh
./unch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64727
--- Comment #9 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
My mistake, I thought FX wasn't showing the errors.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64727
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Do you see the regression, with r219973 in place, if you bootstrap with gcc
> 4.9.2 rather than gcc 5.0svn? It also seems odd, if r219973 triggers this bug,
> that you see it when bootstrapping with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64712
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64727
--- Comment #7 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #6)
> > The only FE change among those is r219973.
>
> And indeed if I revert it, the ICE disappears.
Do you see the regression, with r219973
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64732
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64732
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64731
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 22 Jan 2015, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64731
>
> --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Doesn't look like a regression, I see roughl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64326
tbsaunde at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tbsaunde at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64731
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Doesn't look like a regression, I see roughly same code quality all the way
from 4.1 which I tried first to current trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64732
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #2)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> > Waiting for some kind of a testcase (or at least a pointer to what Julia
> > is).
>
> Judging by the .jl suffi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64728
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64731
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64732
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64732
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64712
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
I also don't see the failure.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64728
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 22 16:07:36 2015
New Revision: 220003
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220003&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-22 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/64728
* tree-ssa-co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64712
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64722
--- Comment #11 from Ilya Enkovich ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #10)
> which led to investigating this code in ix86_conditional_register_usage:
> 4394 j = PIC_OFFSET_TABLE_REGNUM;
> 4395 if (j != INVALID_REGNUM)
> 4396fixed_r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64727
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> The only FE change among those is r219973.
And indeed if I revert it, the ICE disappears.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64722
--- Comment #10 from David Malcolm ---
Notes to self on how I debugged this:
I added the following to harness.h:
gcc_jit_context_set_bool_option (
ctxt,
GCC_JIT_BOOL_OPTION_DUMP_EVERYTHING,
1);
gcc_jit_context_set_bool_option (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64732
Bug ID: 64732
Summary: [5 Regression] julia build failure: double free or
corruption in libgfortran.so.3
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64731
Bug ID: 64731
Summary: poor code when using vector_size((32)) for sse2
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 61403, which changed state.
Bug 61403 Summary: An opportunity for x86 gcc vectorizer (~40% gain)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61403
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64722
--- Comment #9 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Can you explain it? Usually when this function is called,
> pic_offset_table_rtx is NULL and your i386.h macro relies on that.
> When initializing default target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61403
Stupachenko Evgeny changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64722
--- Comment #8 from Ilya Enkovich ---
different hooks(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Can you explain it? Usually when this function is called,
> pic_offset_table_rtx is NULL and your i386.h macro relies on that.
> When initializing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64722
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> But then wonder if/how target_reinit works for i?86 32-bit.
> Perhaps pic_offset_table_rtx should be cleared in init_emit_regs before
> computing it?
> pic_offs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64688
--- Comment #5 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Jan 22 14:43:55 2015
New Revision: 22
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=22&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/64688
PR target/64477
* config/i386/sse.md (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64477
--- Comment #8 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Jan 22 14:43:55 2015
New Revision: 22
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=22&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/64688
PR target/64477
* config/i386/sse.md (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59107
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Updated patch for 5.0
--- ../_clean/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h2015-01-19 02:01:40.0 +0100
+++ gcc/fortran/gfortran.h2015-01-22 11:42:56.0 +0100
@@ -1451,7 +1451,7 @@ typedef struc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64231
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Andrew, are you going to post the patch? I think it is pretty obvious...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61403
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60570
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 34531
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34531&action=edit
gcc5-pr64511.patch
The #c13 testcase can be fixed by the attached patch. Not including the
testcase, as it ta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59366
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64722
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Also, if you keep pic_offset_table_rtx NULL, then PIC_OFFSET_TABLE_REGNUM will
be 3 instead of -1 in other places.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60570
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
dg-bogus is better, yet. FWIW, the patch has been successfully
regtested/bootstrapped now.
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
