https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64801
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64801
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Jan 29 07:43:14 2015
New Revision: 220230
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220230&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/64801
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr64801.c: New testcase.
* cgra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64686
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
Hmm, seems to be some kind of out-of-sync issues when dealing with speculative
calls...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56061
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.8/4.9/5 Regression] ICE |[4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64043
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64340
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka ---
Richard, isn't it the streamer being out of sync again - the prevoius problem
(reason I dropped pid_t) is that at the moment we preload something that is
NULL in one FE and not in another, we end up with tree i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62173
--- Comment #30 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.
>
> Note that for the original testcase 'i' may be negative or
: posix
gcc version 5.0.0 20150128 (experimental) [trunk revision 220198] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -O1 small.c; ./a.out
$ gcc-4.9 -Os small.c; ./a.out
$
$ gcc-trunk -Os small.c
$ ./a.out
Aborted (core dumped)
$
-
struct S
{
int f1;
};
static struct S a = { 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64801
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
Introduced already in https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-05/msg02574.html
We may need to inform inliner that calls inside thunk are cheap (and count them
with code/size cost 1) for better size results.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64801
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
OK, we do not inline it because creae_wrapper decides so:
Index: cgraphunit.c
===
--- cgraphunit.c(revision 220229)
+++ cgraphunit.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64801
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
OK, the testcase is buggy: fsp_detect should be static inline. GCC is valid to
not inline it and not produce offline copy because that should be produced by
other unit.
What happens is that icf merge elantech
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64810
--- Comment #17 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #15)
[...snip..]
> I still see another failure in:
> FAIL: test-expressions.c.exe killed: 12479 exp8 0 0 CHILDKILLED SIGSEGV
> {segmentation violation}
> which appears
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64852
Bug ID: 64852
Summary: C++ accepts invalid(?) constants only at -O0
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64844
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |target
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64852
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64774
--- Comment #2 from Michael Bruck ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #1)
> Although the compiler tries to find some common cases, it is generally
> infeasible to detect all the possible permutations that exist. Furthermore,
> in real
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64843
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Richard Smith from comment #2)
> libstdc++ uses these builtins in bits/atomic_base.h:
>
> __pointer_type
> fetch_add(ptrdiff_t __d,
> memory_order __m = memory_orde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64843
--- Comment #5 from Richard Smith ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #3)
> The first question is whether this code is actually valid.
To my reading, the C11 standard says that these operations must work on all
atomic integer t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64797
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The test has been introduced at r219780. The first failure I see is for r219808
(the previous tested revision is r219776). It is likely that the test has never
worked on darwin.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64832
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64799
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64779
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64843
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
(And this shows an admission from the tests - a new
gcc.dg/atomic/stdatomic-op-*.c test should be added that tests _add and
_sub for pointer types.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64843
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
The first question is whether this code is actually valid. C11 says "All
of these operations are applicable to an object of any atomic integer
type.", not mentioning pointer types as valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64851
Bug ID: 64851
Summary: [SH] Add atomic not
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64849
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I think this has been fixed by r220181.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64277
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||siddhesh at redhat dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64739
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64810
--- Comment #16 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14)
> Wouldn't it be better to move the minimal spec parsing stuff from gcc.c to a
> separate source file that you could link into libgccjit.so?
> Adding another nati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64810
--- Comment #15 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #13)
> Am investigating.
What appears to be happening is the 1st time through arm_option_override,
arm_selected_cpu is NULL, but is set to non-NULL at:
arm_selected
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64850
--- Comment #1 from John David Anglin ---
We also have:
FAIL: c-c++-common/goacc/acc_on_device-2-off.c -std=c++98 scan-rtl-dump-times
expand "
\\(call [^\\n]*\\"acc_on_device" 1
FAIL: c-c++-common/goacc/acc_on_device-2-off.c -std=c++11 scan-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64850
Bug ID: 64850
Summary: FAIL: gfortran.dg/goacc/acc_on_device-1.f95 -O
scan-rtl-dump-times expand "\\(call
[^\\n]*\\"acc_on_device" 4
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64849
Bug ID: 64849
Summary: FAIL: gfortran.dg/class_allocate_18.f90 -O0 (test
for excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64843
--- Comment #2 from Richard Smith ---
libstdc++ uses these builtins in bits/atomic_base.h:
__pointer_type
fetch_add(ptrdiff_t __d,
memory_order __m = memory_order_seq_cst) noexcept
{ return __atomic_fetch_add(&_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64810
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Wouldn't it be better to move the minimal spec parsing stuff from gcc.c to a
separate source file that you could link into libgccjit.so?
Adding another native build only restriction is undesirable.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64810
--- Comment #13 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #12)
> Created attachment 34612 [details]
> WIP patch to inject configure-time options into jit's toplev::main (no
> ChangeLog yet)
With this patch, the 1st iteration
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64810
--- Comment #12 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 34612
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34612&action=edit
WIP patch to inject configure-time options into jit's toplev::main (no
ChangeLog yet)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64635
mrs at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64635
--- Comment #25 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mrs
Date: Wed Jan 28 21:25:19 2015
New Revision: 220220
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220220&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-28 Jack Howarth
PR libgomp/64635
* configure.t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64848
Bug ID: 64848
Summary: G++ internal compiler error with templated lambdas
capturing variable
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64635
--- Comment #24 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mrs
Date: Wed Jan 28 21:23:14 2015
New Revision: 220218
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220218&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-28 Jack Howarth
PR libgomp/64635
* configure.t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64659
--- Comment #3 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Wed Jan 28 21:11:37 2015
New Revision: 220217
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220217&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/64659
* config/sh/predicates.md (atomic_arith_operan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64805
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
*** Bug 64804 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64804
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64810
--- Comment #11 from David Malcolm ---
A breakpoint on "do_option_spec" in the driver shows that the options come from
configure_default_options and option_default_specs.
configure_default_options comes from configargs.h, written out by
gcc/conf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64635
--- Comment #23 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
Patch posted at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-01/msg02536.html.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64847
Bug ID: 64847
Summary: FAIL:
30_threads/shared_lock/requirements/explicit_instantia
tion.cc (test for excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64846
Bug ID: 64846
Summary: FAIL: 22_locale/conversions/string/2.cc execution test
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64823
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63577
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.8.5 |6.0
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64844
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64-linux-gnu
Status|UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64843
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation, wrong-code
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63504
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Jan 28 20:30:30 2015
New Revision: 220216
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220216&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR other/63504
* dwarf2out.c (add_AT_wide, mem_loc_descriptor, lo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63577
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
It's not a very new regression, and it is quite risky in my opinion;
I prefer to have this dealt with in stage1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64845
Bug ID: 64845
Summary: FAIL:
libgomp.oacc-c/../libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/reduction-
4.c -DACC_DEVICE_TYPE_host_nonshm=1 -DACC_MEM_SHARED=0
(test for excess errors)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64840
--- Comment #7 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2015-01-28 11:22 AM, howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu wrote:
> Try the proposed patch athttps://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34609
> which is enhanced to handle hpux.
The patch works
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64660
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64844
Bug ID: 64844
Summary: Vectorization inhibited in gcc5 when loop starts with
elem[1], aarch64 perf regression from 4.9.1
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64837
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64837
--- Comment #5 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Jan 28 19:39:42 2015
New Revision: 220212
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220212&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Call release_input_file in claim_file_handler
PR lto/64837
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64843
Bug ID: 64843
Summary: miscompilation of atomic_fetch_add on atomic pointer
type
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64813
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|23_containers/unordered_map |[5 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64487
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64837
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
A patch is posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-01/msg02508.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64804
Bug ID: 64804
Summary: Specific use of __attribute ((always_inline)) breaks
MPX functionality with -fcheck-pointer-bounds -mmpx
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64807
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62173
--- Comment #29 from Jiong Wang ---
(In reply to amker from comment #20)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #18)
> > It's probably not correct to simply transfer range info from *idx to
> > iv->base.
> > Instead SCEV analysis needs to tra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64810
--- Comment #10 from David Malcolm ---
Trying a hw watchpoint:
(gdb) watch global_options.x_arm_float_abi
shows this is never touched within test-empty.c.exe
Invoking ./xgcc verbosely on an empty C file:
$ ./xgcc -c -xc -v -B. -save-temps /
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64837
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
There is also a gold bug:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17896
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64842
Bug ID: 64842
Summary: Implicitly defined constructor isn't constexpr
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64810
--- Comment #9 from David Malcolm ---
Thanks Ramana.
I attempted a build of the jit with the configuration you suggested,
specifically:
$ ../src/configure \
--enable-host-shared \
--enable-languages=jit,c++ \
--disable-boots
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63522
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 58597, which changed state.
Bug 58597 Summary: [5 Regression] ICE with lambda in default argument of
template function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58597
What|Removed |A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58597
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64799
--- Comment #5 from Richard Henderson ---
Duh, that should have been obvious.
Thanks for the fix. I'll push them
upstream at the same time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64514
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64514
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Jan 28 17:21:06 2015
New Revision: 220210
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220210&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/64514
* pt.c (coerce_template_parameter_pack): Return NULL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64785
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #1)
>
> Another more radical approach could be to insert an RTL pass that
> pre-allocates the R0 reg for those insns that have "z" constraint
> alternatives, similar to what K
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64635
--- Comment #22 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Just pick it from say libgomp/config/linux/proc.h, replace 2011-2015 with 2015
and put your name in there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64635
--- Comment #21 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
Can someone please take this patch over and add the necessary license comments
for the new files? Thanks in advance.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64840
--- Comment #6 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2015-01-28 11:22 AM, howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu wrote:
> ps I assume it will be sufficient to match libgomp-plugin-host_nonshm.sl.1 as
> it is unclear why hpux automatically appends .0 to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64635
--- Comment #20 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
Created attachment 34610
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34610&action=edit
proposed fix with aix and hpux support added and changelog
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64803
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64635
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to howarth from comment #18)
> Created attachment 34609 [details]
> proposed fix with aix and hpux support added
>
> Add support to handle hpux suffix nomenclature.
Please use a space between SON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64840
--- Comment #5 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
(In reply to dave.anglin from comment #4)
> On 2015-01-28 10:34 AM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> > Similar to (dup of) pr64635?
> Search wasn't working for me this morning, so reassign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64635
--- Comment #18 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
Created attachment 34609
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34609&action=edit
proposed fix with aix and hpux support added
Add support to handle hpux suffix nomenclature.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64757
--- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> > Actually pr49213 is a collection of different bugs, one being this PR. IMO
> > pr49213 should be split along the different bugs.
>
> The patch of comment #7 fixes the above as well.
> It bootstra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64774
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64841
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I wonder if the correct fix would be:
--- a/libsanitizer/asan/asan_new_delete.cc
+++ b/libsanitizer/asan/asan_new_delete.cc
@@ -103,6 +103,7 @@ CXX_OPERATOR_ATTRIBUTE
void operator delete[](void *ptr, std
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64789
Bug ID: 64789
Summary: gcc generates unreliable code on arm with
-mstructure-size-boundary=32
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.3
Status: RESOLVED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64840
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2015-01-28 10:35 AM, howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu wrote:
> Do you have any files with the basename of libgomp-plugin-host_nonshm in
> /test/g
> nu/gcc/objdir/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/./libgomp/.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64840
--- Comment #4 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2015-01-28 10:34 AM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> Similar to (dup of) pr64635?
Search wasn't working for me this morning, so reassign if dup.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64828
--- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6)
> But not in libstdc++ any longer. Please re-open and change the component if
> you want it fixed in libsanitizer, otherwise I'm closing this as fixed.
True. Libsa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64841
Bug ID: 64841
Summary: libsanitizer/asan/asan_new_delete.cc:107:6: warning:
‘void operator delete(void*, size_t)’ is a usual
(non-placement) deallocation function in C++14 (or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64840
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Similar to (dup of) pr64635?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64840
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=64840
Bug ID: 64840
Summary: FAIL:
libgomp.oacc-c/../libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/abort-2.c
-DACC_DEVICE_TYPE_host_nonshm=1 -DACC_MEM_SHARED=0
execution test
Prod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64828
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Jan 28 15:02:28 2015
New Revision: 220207
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220207&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/64828
* libsupc++/Makefile.am: Compile del_opvs.cc a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64828
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
Bug ID: 64839
Summary: libsanitizer shouldn't require
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: sanitizer
1 - 100 of 167 matches
Mail list logo
