https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65321
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65120
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65120
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 10 06:38:57 2015
New Revision: 221299
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221299&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/65120
* c-common.c (warn_logical_not_parentheses): Don't war
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65321
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 10 06:36:50 2015
New Revision: 221298
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221298&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/65321
* cfgexpand.c (expand_debug_expr): Ensu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65367
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65286
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44563
--- Comment #19 from Jan Hubicka ---
Hmm, it is definitely wasteful to call the call stmt redirection so many times
- it only needs
to be called once per statement. We probably could call it only on newly
introduced BBs, I will
take a look.
Hon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65355
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Tue Mar 10 04:24:21 2015
New Revision: 221297
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221297&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/65355
* varasm.c (notice_global_symbol): Do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63354
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65372
Bug ID: 65372
Summary: -mprofile-kernel undocumented
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: gcov-profile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65371
Bug ID: 65371
Summary: arm loop with volatile variable
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61636
--- Comment #12 from Adam Butcher ---
If the containing context is made a template (as per pr64382 and pr64466) or if
the patch below is made to lambda.c, the synthesized default 'this' looks to
get captured OK, but gimplification process crashes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65353
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65353
--- Comment #4 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Tue Mar 10 00:14:58 2015
New Revision: 221293
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221293&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/65353.
cmd/cgo: Add all gccgo GOARCH values to size maps.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64382
Adam Butcher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61636
Adam Butcher changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lh_mouse at 126 dot com
--- Comment #11 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65370
--- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose ---
reduced test case:
namespace Parma_Polyhedra_Library {
class NNC_Polyhedron;
enum Complexity_Class { ANY_COMPLEXITY };
template class Pointset_Powerset;
}
template class Parma_Polyhedra_Library::Pointset_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64382
Adam Butcher changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abutcher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65349
--- Comment #2 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Mon Mar 9 23:43:16 2015
New Revision: 221292
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221292&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/65349
runtime: Don't crash if explicitly freeing small ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65349
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65349
--- Comment #1 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Mon Mar 9 23:40:58 2015
New Revision: 221291
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221291&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/65349
runtime: Don't call malloc from __go_file_line call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65242
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65370
Bug ID: 65370
Summary: [5 Regression] rejects valid code on
powerpc64le-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65369
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
>it's enough to build the md4.c file with -O2.
I know there is an endian test in md4.c file to speed up md4. Maybe the wrong
one is being selected.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65286
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65286
--- Comment #5 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Mon Mar 9 23:19:44 2015
New Revision: 221290
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221290&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/65286
* config.gcc (powerpc*-*-linux*): Arrange for powerp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65286
--- Comment #4 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Mon Mar 9 23:19:19 2015
New Revision: 221289
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221289&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/65286
* config.gcc (powerpc*-*-linux*): Arrange for powerp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65286
--- Comment #3 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Mon Mar 9 23:18:57 2015
New Revision: 221288
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221288&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/65286
* config.gcc (powerpc*-*-linux*): Arrange for powerp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65369
Bug ID: 65369
Summary: [5 Regression] nettle test failure on
powerpc64le-linux-gnu when built with -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65368
Bug ID: 65368
Summary: _bzhi_u32 intrinsic generates incorrect code when -O1
or above is specified and index is an immediate
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64999
--- Comment #41 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
I really don't want libbacktrace to be processor-dependent. That makes all
uses of it more complex for no significant gain. Maybe we should change
libbacktrace, but definitely not by making it processor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65310
Pat Haugen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65242
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #34996|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65367
Bug ID: 65367
Summary: indefinite loop occurs with sanitize enabled and
certain optimization options
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65366
Bug ID: 65366
Summary: gdbhooks.py is incompatible with Python3
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65242
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #34994|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65242
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64999
--- Comment #40 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
Created attachment 34995
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34995&action=edit
Proposed fix
Here is my proposed fix to correct the problem on Power, and mostly fix it for
s390/s390
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64807
Bug 64807 depends on bug 63988, which changed state.
Bug 63988 Summary: heap-buffer-overflow in combine.c on ppc64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63988
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63988
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25672
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63504
Bug 63504 depends on bug 63988, which changed state.
Bug 63988 Summary: heap-buffer-overflow in combine.c on ppc64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63988
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65365
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63988
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65242
--- Comment #9 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 34994
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34994&action=edit
Proposed patch to fix the problem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65339
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65284
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65365
Bug ID: 65365
Summary: false positive signed negation
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: sanitizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65339
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65361
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Mar 9 20:19:34 2015
New Revision: 221286
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221286&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR lto/65361
* ipa-devirt.c (add_type_duplicate): Don't use DECL_C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65361
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65339
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Mar 9 19:59:54 2015
New Revision: 221285
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221285&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/65339
* call.c: Don't call maybe_resolve_dummy when calling
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65364
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2015-03-09 2:08 PM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65364
>
> --- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> See https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-pat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63958
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63958
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fixed for GCC 5 now, but the problem will likely reappear during next merge :(.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60780
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Is 40958 a duplicate of this PR or is there something else lurking?
AFAIU pr40958 comment 13, Janne was anticipating possible exponential behaviors
from a rather theoretical point of view. This PR i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60780
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65120
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Mar 9 18:26:52 2015
New Revision: 221284
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221284&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/65120
* c-typeck.c (parser_build_binary_op): Don't warn for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63958
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Mar 9 18:25:28 2015
New Revision: 221283
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221283&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/63958
Reapply:
2014-10-14 David S. Miller
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65364
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
See https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-02/msg00557.html for a patch and
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-02/msg00737.html for some analysis for
darwin.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65364
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65222
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65364
Bug ID: 65364
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/uninit-19.c (test for warnings, line 22)
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64317
--- Comment #23 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
So with a functional prototype in place, I can get good code for this test.
However, deeper testing of that prototype is proving difficult simply because
the postreload-gcse.c code very rarely does anythin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65345
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
FWIW, my testcase was
/* PR c/65345 */
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options "" } */
_Atomic int i = 3;
int g1 = sizeof (i + 1) + sizeof (-i);
int g2 = __builtin_constant_p (i + 1);
int g3 = 0 && i;
int g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65345
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #4)
> Or e.g.
>
> _Atomic int i = 5;
> int j = sizeof (i + 1);
>
> which is valid code not involving _Generic. And, similarly:
>
> _Atomic int i = 5;
> in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65341
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65363
Bug ID: 65363
Summary: trivial redundant code reordering makes code less
optimal
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65345
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Or e.g.
_Atomic int i = 5;
int j = sizeof (i + 1);
which is valid code not involving _Generic. And, similarly:
_Atomic int i = 5;
int j = sizeof (i = 0);
or
_Atomic int i = 5;
int j = s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65361
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Untested fix
Thanks! It looks good for the the original two unreduced files. Also, I have
finally been able again to compile the full code (at least with some op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65242
--- Comment #8 from Michael Meissner ---
I'm going to start looking at this. I suspect the issue is we need more checks
about the offset in TOC references. In particular, the 64-bit GPR load/store
instruction (ld, std), the sign-extended 32-bit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65341
--- Comment #16 from Michael Meissner ---
As I can see there are several issues/whatever.
1) Each of the _ARCH_PWR is cumulative, so if you say -mcpu=power8 for
instance, it defines _ARCH_PWR4, _ARCH_PWR5, _ARCH_PWR5X, _ARCH_PWR6,
_ARCH_PWR7, an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65361
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/pr65361_0.C.jj2015-03-09 16:43:42.720534781
+0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lto/pr65361_0.C2015-03-09 16:47:00.325356410 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+// { dg-lto-do link { xfail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53927
--- Comment #22 from Pierre-Marie de Rodat ---
(In reply to Tom Tromey from comment #20)
>> Yeah. There wasn't much point submitting it when it wouldn't work anyhow :}
>> Also see the README.archer file. It explains some changes that are needed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53927
--- Comment #21 from Pierre-Marie de Rodat ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #18)
> I think this is worth investigating though because it's conceptually
> much simpler than adding yet another indirection. And we should
> concentrate on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44563
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #17)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #16)
> > callgrind shows the cgraph_edge_hasher quite high in the profile (via
> > redirect_all_calls). I suppose as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65361
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44563
--- Comment #17 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #16)
> callgrind shows the cgraph_edge_hasher quite high in the profile (via
> redirect_all_calls). I suppose as the large main is a single BB walking
> all stmts o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65121
--- Comment #5 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Author: ramana
Date: Mon Mar 9 15:19:20 2015
New Revision: 221282
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221282&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR number for 65121 in Changelog.
PR target/65121
The commit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65121
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65362
Bug ID: 65362
Summary: OpenACC compilation on Tegra K1 (ARM)
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgomp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65121
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65045
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65222
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
Target Milestone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65323
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65121
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65355
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65024
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62630
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65349
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65361
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65353
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65269
Andrew Sutton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew.n.sutton at gmail dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65342
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65177
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65292
--- Comment #8 from John Marino ---
As a final follow up, webkit-qt5 built on a March 8 version of gcc5 with no
changes from my previous attempt.
Good news, thanks for the patch!
John
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65270
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65330
Bug 65330 depends on bug 65270, which changed state.
Bug 65270 Summary: [5 regression] issues with merging memory accesses from
different code paths
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65270
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65270
--- Comment #33 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Mar 9 13:54:28 2015
New Revision: 221281
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221281&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-03-09 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/65270
* tree-core.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65361
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
1 - 100 of 148 matches
Mail list logo
