https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62173
--- Comment #27 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jiong Wang from comment #24)
> (In reply to amker from comment #23)
>
> partially agree.
>
> at least for the single use case given by Seb, I think tree ivopt should do
> it. (I veri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64815
--- Comment #5 from Terry Guo ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> (In reply to Terry Guo from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > > I don't think you need to call volatile_refs_p on the notes part of the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64809
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64809
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
5.0.0 20150126 (experimental) [trunk revision 220102] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -O3 -c small.c
$ gcc-trunk -O2 -g -c small.c
$ gcc-4.9 -O3 -g -c small.c
$
$ timeout -s 9 30 gcc-trunk -O3 -g -c small.c
Killed
$
--
int a, b, d;
void
fn1 ()
{
for (b = 0; b < 9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64815
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Terry Guo from comment #2)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > I don't think you need to call volatile_refs_p on the notes part of the
> > instruciton.
>
> The volatile_refs_p work
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64815
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Terry Guo from comment #2)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > I don't think you need to call volatile_refs_p on the notes part of the
> > instruciton.
>
> The volatile_refs_p work
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64812
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #1)
> Please try to narrow down the issue and attach prepossessed testcases
> (of fmgridif.cxx and ColumnControl.cxx for a start).
> Also find out where the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64812
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64815
--- Comment #2 from Terry Guo ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> I don't think you need to call volatile_refs_p on the notes part of the
> instruciton.
The volatile_refs_p works in a recursive way which makes itself to scan the
no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64796
thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62173
--- Comment #26 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #17)
> I really wonder why IVOPTs calls convert_affine_scev with
> !use_overflow_semantics.
I don't understand below code in convert_affine_scev:
enforce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64816
Bug ID: 64816
Summary: gcc claims that constructor is private when it should
be accessible
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64815
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I don't think you need to call volatile_refs_p on the notes part of the
instruciton.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64815
Bug ID: 64815
Summary: ICE caused by volatile_refs_p doesn't skip NULL
operand
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64368
--- Comment #20 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #19)
> r220143 should fix a lot of these failures, I'll check the testresults to
> see what remains.
On x86_64-apple-darwin14, the failures are now
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64797
--- Comment #2 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
Created attachment 34587
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34587&action=edit
Trace in lldb of failing -m32 testcase of 22_locale/conversions/string/2.cc on
x86_64-apple-dar
1 -version -fmessage-length=0 -ffunction-sections
-fdata-sections -o 2.s
Process 39542 launched:
'/sw/src/fink.build/gcc50-5.0.0-1000/darwin_objdir/./gcc/cc1plus' (x86_64)
GNU C++11 (GCC) version 5.0.0 20150126 (experimental)
(x86_64-apple-darwin14.1.0)
compiled by GNU C version 5.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64814
Bug ID: 64814
Summary: std::copy_n advances InputIterator one *less* time
than necessary.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
.1.0
-I/sw/src/fink.build/gcc50-5.0.0-1000/darwin_objdir/x86_64-apple-darwin14.1.0/i386/libstdc++-v3/include
-I/sw/src/fink.build/gcc50-5.0.0-1000/gcc-5-20150126/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++
-I/sw/src/fink.build/gcc50-5.0.0-1000/gcc-5-20150126/libstdc++-v3/include/backward
-I/sw/src/fink.build/gcc50-5.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62173
--- Comment #25 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jiong Wang from comment #24)
> (In reply to amker from comment #23)
>
> partially agree.
>
> at least for the single use case given by Seb, I think tree ivopt should do
> it. (I veri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64797
howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||howarth at bromo dot med
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64349
yuta tomino changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||demoonlit at panathenaia dot
halfm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64812
Bug ID: 64812
Summary: [4.9 regression] x86 LibreOffice Build failure:
undefined reference to acquire
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64811
Bug ID: 64811
Summary: fold_inf_compare bogus for NaNs (given
-ftrapping-math)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39246
thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15184
thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64810
Bug ID: 64810
Summary: jit not working on armv7hl
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: jit
Assignee:
six
gcc version 5.0.0 20150126 (experimental) [trunk revision 220102] (GCC)
$
$ rm -f ./a.out
$ gcc-4.9 -m32 -O3 -g small.c >/dev/null 2>&1
$ ls ./a.out
./a.out
$ rm -f ./a.out
$ gcc-trunk -m32 -O3 small.c >/dev/null 2>&1
$ ls ./a.out
./a.out
$ rm -f ./a.out
$
$
$ gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64779
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 34585
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34585&action=edit
An untested patch
Try this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64257
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
r220149 is the actual change that r220150 describes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64807
Kenneth Zadeck changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zadeck at naturalbridge dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64257
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Tue Jan 27 00:28:45 2015
New Revision: 220150
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220150&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add PR jit/64257 to previous ChangeLog entry
Modified:
trunk/maint
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64779
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
configure.host has
i?86-*-freebsd* | i?86-*-openbsd*)
TARGET=X86_FREEBSD; TARGETDIR=x86
;;
and configure.ac has
if test x$TARGET = xX86 || test x$TARGET = xX86_WIN32 || test x$TARGET =
xX86_64;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49263
--- Comment #26 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Mon Jan 26 23:56:05 2015
New Revision: 220144
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220144&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/49263
* config/sh/sh.c (sh_split_treg_set_expr): In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64139
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||60871
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64368
--- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wakely ---
r220143 should fix a lot of these failures, I'll check the testresults to see
what remains.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64368
--- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Jan 26 23:42:39 2015
New Revision: 220143
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220143&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/64368
* config/locale/gnu/numeric_members.cc (numpu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57748
--- Comment #64 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Mikael Pettersson from comment #63)
> The backport request has been posted:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-01/msg02192.html
OK, fine.
If you want I can commit that for you now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64779
--- Comment #4 from Gerald Pfeifer ---
Created attachment 34584
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34584&action=edit
OBJ-0126-1523/i386-unknown-freebsd10.1/libffi/config.log
I did not find the respective check, but let me attac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64776
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64535
--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think we need to get a suppression into valgrind:
==21268== Memcheck, a memory error detector
==21268== Copyright (C) 2002-2013, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al.
==21268== Using Valgrind-3.9.0 and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62044
--- Comment #15 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Mon Jan 26 21:58:42 2015
New Revision: 220140
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220140&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-26 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/62044
* resolve.c (resolve_al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64730
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64421
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fixed on the trunk so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64730
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jan 26 21:33:11 2015
New Revision: 220139
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220139&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/64730
* ipa-inline.c (inline_small_functions): Print "unkno
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64778
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.9/5 Regression] ICE on |[4.9 Regression] ICE on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64778
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jan 26 21:32:09 2015
New Revision: 220138
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220138&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/64778
* c-typeck.c (convert_arguments): Return -1 if there ar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64421
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jan 26 21:28:57 2015
New Revision: 220137
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220137&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/64421
* omp-low.c (simd_clone_mangle): If DECL_ASSEM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64771
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Mon Jan 26 21:12:19 2015
New Revision: 220136
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220136&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-26 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/64771
gcc/fortran/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64799
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64795
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64795
--- Comment #5 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon Jan 26 20:49:22 2015
New Revision: 220134
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220134&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2015-01-26 Uros Bizjak
PR t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64708
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64708
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Mon Jan 26 20:30:12 2015
New Revision: 220133
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220133&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR jit/64708: remove libgccjit.so from COMPILERS
gcc/jit/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62044
--- Comment #14 from Damian Rouson ---
Correction: the backport I was discussing with Andre was for a different bug.
Nonetheless, I'm reasonably certain that the fix for this bug would benefit the
aforementioned project (pFUnit) so I'm still int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62044
--- Comment #13 from Damian Rouson ---
Paul,
In case it matters, I reported a duplicate of this bug that I isolated from
code in an open-source NASA project (http://sourceforge.net/projects/pfunit/).
NASA has expressed a desire for the fix to b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64795
--- Comment #4 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon Jan 26 20:12:26 2015
New Revision: 220132
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220132&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2015-01-26 Uros Bizjak
PR t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62044
--- Comment #12 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
Dear All,
As I just said on #gfortran, the previous explanation is wrong. The
problem is that, for the mold= case with no default initializer, the
code->expr winds up being NULL. This
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64806
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64806
--- Comment #5 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Jan 26 19:31:55 2015
New Revision: 220131
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220131&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Revert the last P_POPCNT order change
PR target/64806
* co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15184
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |law at redhat dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64730
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64806
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Allan Jensen from comment #3)
> I refer to this:
>
> /* Handle arch= if specified. For priority, set it to be 1 more than
> the best instruction set the processor can handle. For instance, if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||friend1992friend1992@yandex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64808
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64806
--- Comment #3 from Allan Jensen ---
I refer to this:
/* Handle arch= if specified. For priority, set it to be 1 more than
the best instruction set the processor can handle. For instance, if
there is a version for atom and a versio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64230
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64230
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Mon Jan 26 18:53:42 2015
New Revision: 220130
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220130&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-26 Janus Weil
Backport from mainline
PR fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64806
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Allan Jensen from comment #1)
> The logic is supposed to be that any arch that includes an extension is
> prioritized above that extension, and with POPCNT being part of SSE4a on AMD
> and part of SSE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #13 from Igor Zamyatin ---
(In reply to David Edelsohn from comment #12)
> GCC on AIX. One can use gcc111 in the GCC Compiler Farm.
>
Thanks! I've sent a request for an access to gcc111 but got no response so
far...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64795
--- Comment #3 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon Jan 26 18:49:21 2015
New Revision: 220128
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220128&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/64795
* config/i386/i386.md (*movdi_internal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64806
Allan Jensen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||linux at carewolf dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64808
--- Comment #1 from friend1992friend1992 at yandex dot ru ---
> get the result on Linux i686 with GCC 4.4.5:
Sorry, GCC 4.8.2:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64808
Bug ID: 64808
Summary: static_cast double to int on linux 32
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63504
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
2) == #c11 tracked now in PR64807.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64807
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64806
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ubizjak at gmail dot com
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64807
Bug ID: 64807
Summary: [5 Regression] Wrong-code because of wide-int division
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64806
Bug ID: 64806
Summary: [5 Regression] FAIL: FAIL: g++.dg/ext/mv1.C
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62044
--- Comment #11 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
Dear Dominique,
For some reason, the hash values are different in the vtable and the
TYPE IS. I had always worried that that we would have different names
giving the same hash sometim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62044
--- Comment #10 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
Hi Mikael,
Yes, you will see from my comment on the PR that I had come to the
same conclusion. However, rather than take PR62044 as a place holder,
I will open a new PR. Thanks for th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63504
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
For 2) a short testcase is:
__uint128_t
foo (void)
{
__uint128_t a = -1;
__uint128_t b = a - 0x8000ULL;
return a / b;
}
(even on x86_64 native).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64779
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Can you look at libffi's config.log if it is clear why the test failed then?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64708
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
[david@c64 install]$ ll $(find -name "libgccjit.so*")
-rwxr-xr-x. 1 david david 78637910 Jan 26 12:59
./libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/5.0.0/libgccjit.so
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 david david 14 Jan 26 12:59
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64776
--- Comment #14 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Created attachment 34581 [details]
> gcc5-pr64776.patch
>
> Untested fix.
The patch fixes the ICE and regtest cleanly (at least with
make -k check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="ipa.exp --target_board=unix'{-m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64779
Gerald Pfeifer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64800
--- Comment #2 from angelo ---
You mean the issue is into m68k-linux-as or what ?
The function i disassembled is inside memory.c. So i am calling m68k-linux-gcc,
wich generate object code and finally opcodes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64805
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64363
--- Comment #3 from Christian Otterstad
---
Great, it seems this corrected the issue, but a new problem that didn't appear
to exist before seems to have been introduced. I created a new bug issue for
it. Bug 64805: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
pporting -fcheck-pointer-bounds -mmpx do not feature this issue. However
since it is a bug of a different type I'm nevertheless opening a new bug for
this problem.
It appears gcc (GCC) 5.0.0 20150122 and up have this problem (latest version
tested: gcc (GCC) 5.0.0 20150126)
It appears that at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64776
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63504
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64776
--- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> May I please Dominique to put 'debug_tree(arg);' after following statement:
> error ("invalid argument to gimple call");
>
> And send the stderr output?
/opt/gcc/_clean/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/ipa/pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64776
--- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> May I please Dominique to put 'debug_tree(arg);' after following statement:
> error ("invalid argument to gimple call");
>
> And send the stderr output?
/opt/gcc/_clean/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/ipa/pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62258
M. Hanselmann changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||public at hansmi dot ch
--- Comment #7 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64795
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64776
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
May I please Dominique to put 'debug_tree(arg);' after following statement:
error ("invalid argument to gimple call");
And send the stderr output?
Thanks,
Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64230
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Mon Jan 26 15:56:03 2015
New Revision: 220125
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220125&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-26 Janus Weil
PR fortran/64230
* class.c (fi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64776
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Sorry for the duplicate comments 5 and 6. Bugzilla is very slow and I got a
confusing message about gateway timed out.
1 - 100 of 203 matches
Mail list logo
