https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65882
Mikhail Maltsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||maltsevm at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> With the attached patch your small test case and the test suite runs
> w/o segfault now. Furthermore does gcc6 bootstrap and regtest ok
> with the patch.
Confirmed. The bigger test in comment 2 runs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65818
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65818
--- Comment #14 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Apr 28 06:05:14 2015
New Revision: 222509
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222509&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Evaluate side-effects in expand_ifn_va_arg_1
2015-04-28 Tom d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65910
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42033
Manoj changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mannu7410 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #12 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65910
--- Comment #1 from Jack Howarth ---
This is from a bootstrap on darwin14 with the command...
% ../gcc-6-20150427/configure --prefix=/Users/howarth/dist
-enable-languages=c,c++ --with-gmp=/sw --with-libiconv-prefix=/sw
--with-isl=/sw --with-mpc
-pedantic -Wno-long-long
-Wno-variadic-macros -Wno-overlength-strings -fno-common -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I.
-I. -I../../gcc-6-20150427/gcc -I../../gcc-6-20150427/gcc/.
-I../../gcc-6-20150427/gcc/../include
-I../../gcc-6-20150427/gcc/../libcpp/include -I/sw/include -I/sw/include
-I../../gcc-6-20150427
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65217
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Tue Apr 28 04:01:28 2015
New Revision: 222499
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222499&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/65217
* tree-ssa-dom.c (record_equalit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65810
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65810
--- Comment #7 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Apr 28 03:47:19 2015
New Revision: 222498
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222498&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/65810
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (POWERPC64_TOC_POIN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65909
--- Comment #3 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: sandra
Date: Tue Apr 28 02:40:56 2015
New Revision: 222497
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222497&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-04-27 Sandra Loosemore
PR libstdc++/65909
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65908
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65909
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |UNCONFIRMED
Last reconfirme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65909
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65839
--- Comment #3 from Doug Evans ---
[fyi]
Here's the tentative patch for gdb.
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2015-04/msg00947.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65908
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39813
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65909
Bug ID: 65909
Summary: check_v3_target_namedlocale blows up on targets that
don't support command-line arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65362
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65447
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62258
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely ---
doko, I'm still curious if you can verify if you see a regression here or not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62258
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Fixed on trunk so far
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #17 from Frédéric Buclin ---
Patch applied. Mikael, the next time you upload a f90 script, Bugzilla will
correctly detect it as text/plain. Note that it won't convert the MIME type of
already uploaded attachments (which you can manual
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #35353|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53184
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62258
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Apr 27 19:44:30 2015
New Revision: 222480
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222480&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-04-27 Dmitry Prokoptsev
Michael Hanselmann
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65886
--- Comment #20 from Thiago Macieira ---
I've just been informed that Clang 3.6 with -fPIE -flto has the same problem,
but I have not been able to reproduce. I find it unexpected that it would do
that in LTO mode but not otherwise.
As it stands,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65903
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #15 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to Frédéric Buclin from comment #14)
> That's unrelated to the upgrade. Your web browser is unable to display files
> of type text/x-fortran, that's why.
>
> What you want is https://bugzilla.mozil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #14 from Frédéric Buclin ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #12)
> Hello, not sure this is due to the upgrade, but the attachment
> appears empty in the page:
That's unrelated to the upgrade. Your web browser is unable to dis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48852
--- Comment #14 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I have decided that to do this right I need to revamp how write_float.def and
associated functions are organized. We have discussed doing this quite a while
ago, so now is the time.
I see it like this:
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65908
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61240
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49171
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ktietz at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57335
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ktietz at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56868
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65908
--- Comment #1 from Mark M. ---
g++ version info
% g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/local/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/5.1.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ./configure -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60322
--- Comment #9 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vehre
Date: Mon Apr 27 17:41:01 2015
New Revision: 222478
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222478&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-04-27 Andre Vehreschild
PR fortran/60322
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #13 from Frank Ch. Eigler ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #12)
> Hello, not sure this is due to the upgrade, but the attachment
> appears empty in the page:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35405&action=edit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65908
Bug ID: 65908
Summary: internal compiler error: in expand_thunk
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65841
--- Comment #5 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vehre
Date: Mon Apr 27 17:34:11 2015
New Revision: 222477
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222477&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/fortran
2015-04-27 Andre Vehreschild
PR fortran/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59678
--- Comment #17 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vehre
Date: Mon Apr 27 17:34:11 2015
New Revision: 222477
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222477&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/fortran
2015-04-27 Andre Vehreschild
PR fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65906
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65891
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65862
--- Comment #4 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #3)
But I can not just revert the patch making ALL_REGS available
> to make
coloring heuristic more fotunate for your particular case, as it
> reopens the old PR for which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894
--- Comment #8 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35407
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35407&action=edit
A first patch.
With the attached patch your small test case and the testsuite runs w/o
segfault now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64610
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65862
Vladimir Makarov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65891
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|mpolacek at gcc d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65901
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Untested patch:
--- a/gcc/c/c-typeck.c
+++ b/gcc/c/c-typeck.c
@@ -12648,6 +12648,11 @@ c_build_va_arg (location_t loc, tree expr, tree type)
if (warn_cxx_compat && TREE_CODE (type) == ENUMERAL_TYPE)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65901
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63540
Daniel Adamski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danregister at poczta dot fm
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65858
--- Comment #2 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi,
Sorry for late response, I applied your patch and got the following ICE:
-std=gnu++11 -flto --param lto-partitions=1
Full command line options: http://pastebin.com/6JSWH9YM
../../third
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65887
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> (In reply to vries from comment #2)
> Rather than marking the va_list arg addressable in all the cases above
> you should probably simply ensure the fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65851
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65907
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65907
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
Is this a dup of PR 65851?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65907
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65892
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor ---
If one of you can explain the problem with it I'm willing to write up a paper
and submit it to WG14 and request to have the standard changed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64579
--- Comment #2 from Peter Bergner ---
Author: bergner
Date: Mon Apr 27 14:52:50 2015
New Revision: 222467
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222467&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/64579
* config/rs6000/htm.md: Remove all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65907
Bug ID: 65907
Summary: [6 Regression] ICE: in set_lattice_value, at
tree-ssa-ccp.c:535
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65906
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Adamski ---
Just to clarify, it is "Base()" that's being called, not "Base(int, int)" (I
should have used something else than "__func__").
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65906
Bug ID: 65906
Summary: using-declaration allowed for non-direct base class
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65905
Bug ID: 65905
Summary: Building eCos fails with clist.hxx:304:1: error:
template with C linkage
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65904
Bug ID: 65904
Summary: Memory corruption with acc_shutdown, nvptx offloading,
libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/asyncwait-1.c
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65903
Bug ID: 65903
Summary: Line continuation followed by comment character in
string fails to compile
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65902
--- Comment #1 from Bernd Edlinger ---
this would fix the regression:
--- libgcc/unwind-arm-common.inc.jj 2015-01-05 13:33:28.0 +0100
+++ libgcc/unwind-arm-common.inc2015-04-27 15:54:04.378469179 +0200
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
/*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65902
Bug ID: 65902
Summary: GCC-5.1 fails to bootstrap for eCos/arm-eabi
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65886
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I know it isn't the same. But, IMHO this isn't worth adding another knob which
will be a maintainance nightmare.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51617
torvald at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||torvald at gcc dot gnu.org
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65886
--- Comment #18 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #17)
> Since -Bsymbolic is allowed with PIE, we should take advantage of it.
> -fsymbolic -fPIE is the same as -fPIC and -fsymbolic -fPIC generates
> much better codes for shared
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65901
Bug ID: 65901
Summary: no warning or error for va_arg (ap, void)
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65900
Bug ID: 65900
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/pr65345-2.c (test for excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65886
--- Comment #17 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #15)
> > Unless we state -Bsymbolic should never be used with GCC, we should
> > provide a way to make PIE to compatible with -Bsymb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65886
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #15)
> Unless we state -Bsymbolic should never be used with GCC, we should
> provide a way to make PIE to compatible with -Bsymbolic.
Well, there is a way, build with -fPIC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65875
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64921
--- Comment #14 from Mat Cross ---
For the record, perhaps it is of interest for me to note that we are running
into this (cf. PR64230 comment 9) on code like
Program test
Implicit None
Type :: t1
Integer, Allocatable :: i
End Type
T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65886
--- Comment #15 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14)
> As it doesn't work with normal executables, I'm not convinced we need such
> an option or that it is right to assume it should work.
People are using -Bsymbolic for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65875
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Apr 27 12:21:17 2015
New Revision: 222461
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222461&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/65875
* tree-vrp.c (update_value_rang
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65899
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Ugh, -fno-access-control doesn't prevent the error.
Then I suggest using -include sstream, so that stringstream is included before
some idiot comes along and redefines a keyword.
But I'm not interested in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65899
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65886
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #13)
> It is true that the testcase doesn't work with normal executable. I
> don't believe GCC is wrong to generate copy relocation in PIE. It
> is only a GCC bug that PIE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65855
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65886
--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #12)
> First of all, why is this filed as a GCC bug? And what is PIE specific on
> the issue? I mean, if -Bsymbolic doesn't cope well with like copy
> relocations, then
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65899
Bug ID: 65899
Summary: std::basic_stringbuf member __xfer_bufptrs should be
explicitly declared private
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65296
Bug 65296 depends on bug 65895, which changed state.
Bug 65895 Summary: Segfault building cross GCC 5.1.0 for Target AVR on Mac OSX
10.10.3 (using Apple LLVM version 6.1.0 (clang-602.0.49))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65895
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65895
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65895
--- Comment #2 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Author: gjl
Date: Mon Apr 27 11:49:42 2015
New Revision: 222460
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222460&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from 2015-04-27 trunk r222459.
PR target/65296
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65296
--- Comment #13 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Author: gjl
Date: Mon Apr 27 11:49:42 2015
New Revision: 222460
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222460&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from 2015-04-27 trunk r222459.
PR target/65296
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65895
--- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Author: gjl
Date: Mon Apr 27 11:43:20 2015
New Revision: 222459
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222459&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/65296
PR target/65895
* config/avr/gen-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65296
--- Comment #12 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Author: gjl
Date: Mon Apr 27 11:43:20 2015
New Revision: 222459
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222459&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/65296
PR target/65895
* config/avr/gen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65875
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Apr 27 11:26:12 2015
New Revision: 222458
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222458&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/65875
* tree-vrp.c (update_value_rang
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65217
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization, xfail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65864
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64919
John Buddery changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvb at cyberscience dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65836
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65886
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894
--- Comment #7 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Created attachment 35404
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35404&action=edit
Code that triggers the segmentation fault.
1 - 100 of 119 matches
Mail list logo
