https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65126
--- Comment #3 from Maxim Kuvyrkov ---
Hi Tom,
I can't reproduce this. I'm trying "make check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="vect.exp"" on
a native x86_64 bootstrap.
What is required to trigger this?
[FWIW, I see that code handling additional_source has d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65131
Bug ID: 65131
Summary: Integer overflow in .size() for std::vector
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: libstd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65122
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Benoit Jacob from comment #6)
> (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #4)
> > "the storage is obtained by
> > calling ::operator new(std::size_t)" so we can't use posix_memalign
>
> Ouch. That
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65123
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ra, wrong-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65126
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65128
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||*-*-linux, *-*-unix,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65130
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64530
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64373
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65063
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Feb 20 07:32:08 2015
New Revision: 220835
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220835&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-02-20 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2015-01-12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63593
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Feb 20 07:32:08 2015
New Revision: 220835
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220835&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-02-20 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2015-01-12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64373
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Feb 20 07:32:08 2015
New Revision: 220835
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220835&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-02-20 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2015-01-12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64530
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Feb 20 07:32:08 2015
New Revision: 220835
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220835&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-02-20 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2015-01-12
: posix
gcc version 5.0.0 20150219 (experimental) [trunk revision 220822] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-4.9 -flto -O1 -c foo.c
$ gcc-4.9 -flto -O2 -c main.c
$ gcc-4.9 -flto -O1 foo.o main.o
$ ./a.out
$
$ gcc-trunk -flto -O1 -c foo.c
$ gcc-trunk -flto -O2 -c main.c
$ gcc-trunk -flto -O1 foo.o main.o
gcc-trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65028
--- Comment #57 from Jan Hubicka ---
> Another issue is propagate_constants_accross_call has
>
> for (; (i < args_count) && (i < parms_count); i++)
> {
> struct ipa_jump_func *jump_func = ipa_get_ith_jump_func (args, i);
> stru
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58123
--- Comment #10 from asmwarrior ---
(In reply to Jan Kratochvil from comment #8)
> (In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #7)
> > Putting this aside for a second, my question is, do we really want a
> > debugging experience where we jump from b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65128
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
bcc76966 (ghazi 2003-11-29 03:08:13 + 45) builtin_define_std
("linux"); \
bcc76966 (ghazi 2003-11-29 03:08:13 + 46) builtin_define_std
("unix");
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65129
Bug ID: 65129
Summary: gcc manual index entry of __builtin_assume_aligned
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: trivial
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65128
Bug ID: 65128
Summary: remove "linux" and "unix" from preprocessor macros
from cpp-5
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65127
--- Comment #1 from Luke Allardyce ---
Sorry, make_item() should be template make_item()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65127
Bug ID: 65127
Summary: internal compiler error: tree check: expected tree
that contains 'decl minimal' structure, have
'addr_expr' in parsing_nsdmi, at cp/parser.c:18311
Pro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62630
--- Comment #16 from Mircea Namolaru ---
Yes, but it seems to me that the cast (not in the original code) should not
be generated at all if it could not be guaranteed that the casted-to type is
larger
enough to accommodate it. Otherwise you intr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63150
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Created attachment 34812
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34812&action=edit
Patch referenced in comment #2 with conflicts resolved and test for pr53199
re-enabled.
The test no longer fails
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65116
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.9/5 Regression] |[4.9/5 Regression] ERROR:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65126
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Presumably same thing happens for pr47218.C, which saves temps:
...
/* { dg-options "-save-temps" } */
...
And cleans them up:
...
// { dg-final { cleanup-saved-temps }
...
but also has additiona
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65028
--- Comment #56 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Feb 19 23:31:40 2015
New Revision: 220826
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220826&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/65028
* ipa-cp.c (propagate_alignment_accross_jump_functio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65126
Bug ID: 65126
Summary: additional_sources not defined anymore during dg-final
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62116
Richard Smith changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||richard-gccbugzilla@metafoo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58315
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #8 from Aldy Hernan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58315
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65120
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65122
--- Comment #9 from Benoit Jacob ---
s/compiler/standard library
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65122
--- Comment #8 from Benoit Jacob ---
If there is a defect in the standard, isn't it in the part that forces the
compiler to not use the useful type information that it has, that is, the
above-quoted "the storage is obtained by calling ::operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65122
--- Comment #7 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Benoit Jacob from comment #6)
> I would still be interested in how you understand 3.11/9
I consider it a defect in the standard, so it needs fixing, not
understanding...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65122
--- Comment #6 from Benoit Jacob ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #4)
> "the storage is obtained by
> calling ::operator new(std::size_t)" so we can't use posix_memalign
Ouch. That's very unfortunate. I see. I would still be interested
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65122
--- Comment #5 from Benoit Jacob ---
So while the standard says that over-aligned types dont have to be supported,
it also says in 3.11/9 in
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4296.pdf that:
> If a request for a specific ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58357
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu Feb 19 20:57:40 2015
New Revision: 220823
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220823&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/58357
* include/bits/algorithmfwd.h (rotate): Move t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65122
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Benoit Jacob from comment #3)
> I'd be interested in an explanation of why the default STL allocator can't
> just honor the alignment of the value_type ?
[allocator.members] "It is implementation-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58357
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62204
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Fixed by r218729 I think.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65122
--- Comment #3 from Benoit Jacob ---
I'd be interested in an explanation of why the default STL allocator can't just
honor the alignment of the value_type ? (The document linked in comment 2
seemed to assume that that goes without saying?)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65028
--- Comment #55 from H.J. Lu ---
Another issue is propagate_constants_accross_call has
for (; (i < args_count) && (i < parms_count); i++)
{
struct ipa_jump_func *jump_func = ipa_get_ith_jump_func (args, i);
struct ipcp_param_la
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65116
Maxim Kuvyrkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65116
--- Comment #9 from Maxim Kuvyrkov ---
Author: mkuvyrkov
Date: Thu Feb 19 19:57:30 2015
New Revision: 220822
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220822&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR testsuite/65116
PR testsuite/65116
* lib/target-suppo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65028
--- Comment #54 from Jan Hubicka ---
>
> diff --git a/gcc/ipa-cp.c b/gcc/ipa-cp.c
> index 440ced4..3bf068a 100644
> --- a/gcc/ipa-cp.c
> +++ b/gcc/ipa-cp.c
> @@ -1451,7 +1451,7 @@ propagate_alignment_accross_jump_function (struct
> cgraph_edge *
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65116
--- Comment #8 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Maxim Kuvyrkov from comment #5)
> It was tested, but, obviously, not as well as it should. I'll revert the
> change for now.
Hi Maxim,
The change was reverted on 4-9 branch. Did you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65093
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65028
--- Comment #53 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #52)
> So, as you might have guessed from the previous comment, this is the
> fix. I should have left the office half an hour ago so I will
> properly bootstrap and test an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65125
Bug ID: 65125
Summary: ISO_10646 characters and transfer statement
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65093
--- Comment #2 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Author: hp
Date: Thu Feb 19 19:30:03 2015
New Revision: 220821
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220821&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR testsuite/65093
* testsuite/26_numerics/random/binomial_distr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65122
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
IMHO the only sensible solution is in this direction:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2012/n3396.htm
I hope Clark is still working on this...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65028
--- Comment #52 from Martin Jambor ---
So, as you might have guessed from the previous comment, this is the
fix. I should have left the office half an hour ago so I will
properly bootstrap and test and submit it tomorrow, but feel free to
do all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65124
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65028
--- Comment #51 from Martin Jambor ---
So unless I made some mistake, we are looking a the following chain of
calls and aliases
main/48071 -> _ZN18eonImageCalculatorC1Ev/50391 ->alias->
_ZN18eonImageCalculatorC2Ev/50390 ->
->_ZN12ggPhotometerC1E
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62204
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62204
--- Comment #1 from David Koes ---
Okay, I figured this out. It is a use after free error. Line numbers are for
4.8.4. The root cause was that I had these two lines in different header files:
typedef long int128_t __attribute__((mode(TI))) __at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65109
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
Created attachment 34809
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34809&action=edit
Test patch to let it pass.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65109
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
There's the following comment in the test:
/* Testcase could break on future gcc's, if parameter regs
are changed before this asm. */
Moving the locals out of the function lets the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65116
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58123
--- Comment #9 from Aldy Hernandez ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-02/msg01216.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65109
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hpenner at de dot ibm.com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65121
--- Comment #2 from Richard Henderson ---
Created attachment 34808
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34808&action=edit
proposed patch
Also remove a silly test vs TREE_STATIC that is only relevant to
VAR_DECL, not FUNCTION_DECL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65124
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65109
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65124
Bug ID: 65124
Summary: wstring_convert not recognised as a template class.
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65123
Bug ID: 65123
Summary: lra remat places insn which breaks data flow
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46102
--- Comment #11 from Aldy Hernandez ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-02/msg01208.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65028
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #50 from Martin Jam
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65028
--- Comment #49 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
The same issue also happen when I build Firefox on my amdfam10 testbox.
With "-flto -march=native" Firefox crashes:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to Thread 0x7fff9a5f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65109
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64432
--- Comment #25 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #24)
> (In reply to Harald Anlauf from comment #22)
> > count_rate(8),count_max(1) =0 127
> >
> > OK, but the last line looks strange: lacking d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65122
--- Comment #1 from Benoit Jacob ---
Homologous libc++ bug report: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=22634
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64317
--- Comment #13 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #12)
>
> One of the things I notice is that LRA is generating sequences like:
> (insn 581 89 90 6 (set (reg:SI 3 bx [107])
> (mem/c:SI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65074
--- Comment #7 from Richard Henderson ---
Author: rth
Date: Thu Feb 19 15:48:50 2015
New Revision: 220817
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220817&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/65074
* g++.dg/opt/pr65074.C: New file.
Added:
trun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65121
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|arm-none-eabi |arm*
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65106
--- Comment #2 from Andrey Riabushenko
---
Thanks Joseph for pointing out relevant standard sections, hence standard does
not allow for that.
Given that implicit copies of structs with constant members are happening today
(pass as argument by
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65074
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64748
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65074
--- Comment #6 from Richard Henderson ---
Author: rth
Date: Thu Feb 19 15:14:24 2015
New Revision: 220816
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220816&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/65074
* varasm.c (default_binds_local_p_2): Don't test n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53900
Benoit Jacob changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jacob.benoit.1 at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65122
Bug ID: 65122
Summary: std::vector doesn't honor element alignment
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64876
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46102
--- Comment #10 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 34806
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34806&action=edit
proposed patch
Proposed patch. I will comment on the list shortly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65121
Bug ID: 65121
Summary: long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm_none_eabi
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65106
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Function arguments and return values don't modify existing objects, the copies
are new objects. In the assignment in your code you modify an existing object.
If it was allowed what would prevent you from do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65120
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64935
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62251
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61949
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57955
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, it seems the .LC0 VAR_DECL that is newly created undergoes
DATA_ABI_ALIGNMENT, DATA_ALIGNMENT and CONSTANT_ALIGNMENT treatment, but the
rs6000 backend doesn't consider it worthwhile to bump the alignment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64277
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64277
--- Comment #20 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Feb 19 14:13:16 2015
New Revision: 220815
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220815&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-02-19 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2014-12-0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64365
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59124
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Feb 19 14:13:16 2015
New Revision: 220815
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220815&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-02-19 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2014-12-0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64365
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Feb 19 14:13:16 2015
New Revision: 220815
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220815&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-02-19 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2014-12-0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64495
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Feb 19 14:13:16 2015
New Revision: 220815
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220815&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-02-19 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2014-12-09
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56273
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Feb 19 14:13:16 2015
New Revision: 220815
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220815&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-02-19 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2014-12-0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64493
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Feb 19 14:13:16 2015
New Revision: 220815
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220815&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-02-19 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2014-12-09
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64199
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Feb 19 14:13:16 2015
New Revision: 220815
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220815&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-02-19 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2014-12-09
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65118
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
That's been there since 2008, why hasn't it caused a problem before now?
1 - 100 of 125 matches
Mail list logo
