https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66251
Bug ID: 66251
Summary: [6 Regression] ICE in vect_get_vec_def_for_operand, at
tree-vect-stmts.c:1484
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60943
--- Comment #6 from Anders Sjögren ---
An alternative test case, which also tests that the correct version is
selected, could be:
#include
using expected_lvalue_res_t = int;
using expected_rvalue_res_t = double;
struct A {
auto f() & {retur
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60943
--- Comment #5 from Anders Sjögren ---
A typo snuck in...
"However, as an l-value at the site of the call[...]"
should be
"However, a is an l-value at the site of the call[...]"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60943
--- Comment #4 from Anders Sjögren ---
Thanks for fixing the bug!
It seems that the test file
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc/trunk/gcc/testsuite/g%2B%2B.dg/cpp1y/pr60943.C?view=markup&pathrev=223502
contains an error.
It contains:
void Bar (A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752
--- Comment #31 from Robbert ---
[oops, that was meant to be private, please remove my last comment]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66067
--- Comment #2 from James Almer ---
Created attachment 35594
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35594&action=edit
Preprocessed source as generated by -freport-bug, from the second test case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752
--- Comment #30 from mail at robbertkrebbers dot nl ---
Hi Gil,
Nice example! I am a bit occupied lately, and thus have not read all
comments at the bug report in detail. I will be away for the weekend,
but will read those quickly after.
Robbe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66067
James Almer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|5.1.0 |
Summary|[6 Regression] tree ch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56926
--- Comment #12 from asmwarrior ---
Hi, I just did a test on the cygwin 32bit tool chain.
1, download the cygwin installer.
2, install gcc-g++ 4.9.2 and boost 1.57 package
3, run the steps in comment 6, except that you don't need to add the
"-ID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66226
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752
--- Comment #29 from Chung-Kil Hur ---
Dear Richard,
This time, I think I constructed a real bug.
Please have a look and correct me if I am wrong.
=
#include
int main() {
int x = 0;
uintptr_t xp = (uintptr_t) &x;
uin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43486
--- Comment #10 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Matthew Woehlke from comment #8)
> Can this *please* get fixed? This really hurts the ability to use
> -Wzero-as-null-ptr in particular. See
> https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-45291 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66181
Jose E. Marchesi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jose.marchesi at oracle dot com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66210
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66210
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Thu May 21 22:39:32 2015
New Revision: 223506
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223506&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-05-21 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/66210
* g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66243
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66210
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini ---
Thanks Daniel, I'm adding a testcase and closing the bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65979
--- Comment #26 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #25)
> So, if I understand correctly ...
> - 4.9.something doesn't bootstrap because of something unknown
> - 5.something doesn't bootstrap because of c#19
>
> ... righ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43486
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||darlingm at gmail dot com
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66231
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66232
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66232
--- Comment #4 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Thu May 21 21:58:57 2015
New Revision: 223505
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223505&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Allow indirect branch via GOT slot for x32
X32 doesn't support ind
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66250
Bug ID: 66250
Summary: Can't adjust complex nor decimal floating point modes
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66237
--- Comment #5 from Andreas Schwab ---
This fixes the ICE both on aarch64 and m68k.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65979
--- Comment #25 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #24)
>
> I am partially to be blamed for that. I initially reported the gcc-5 issue
> here, then saw gcc-4.9 failed to build as well and then assumed both wer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66247
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Matthew L. Martin from comment #3)
> The source code in question is downloaded as a prerequisite for building
> gcc-5.1.0 (gmp).
>
> Where should I file a bug against the test?
Assuming you are u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60943
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60943
--- Comment #2 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Thu May 21 20:50:45 2015
New Revision: 223502
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223502&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
cp/
PR c++/60943
* decl2.c (change_return_type):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66223
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Frey ---
I'm using Ubuntu 14.04 in a VM, packages are installed from
http://ppa.launchpad.net/ubuntu-toolchain-r/test/ubuntu trusty main. Package
version is 5.1.0-0ubuntu11~14.04.1
Output from g++-5 -v:
Using built-in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66237
--- Comment #4 from Mikhail Maltsev ---
Created attachment 35593
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35593&action=edit
Proposed patch
Please try this patch. I tested it on the attached profile and it seems to fix
the ICE.
.
||com
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Krügler ---
The problem also occurs in gcc HEAD 6.0.0 20150521 (experimental).
.
||com
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Krügler ---
The problem seems to be fixed in gcc HEAD 6.0.0 20150521 (experimental).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66233
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu May 21 19:17:28 2015
New Revision: 223500
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223500&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/66233
* match.pd (ocvt (icvt@1 @0)):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65954
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37131
Bug 37131 depends on bug 66176, which changed state.
Bug 66176 Summary: Handle conjg() in inline matmul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66176
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66176
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66176
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig ---
Done, closing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66176
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Thu May 21 19:00:45 2015
New Revision: 223499
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223499&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-05-21 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/66176
* frontend
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66241
--- Comment #3 from Vidya Praveen ---
And this change seems to be the cause:
Author: hubicka
Date: Sat May 16 20:51:50 2015
New Revision: 223252
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223252&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
* tree.c (verify_type_va
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66239
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66247
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
I think send a report to gmp-b...@gmplib.org.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65446
--- Comment #4 from Eric Blake ---
Arguably, "%u" with short should warn, while "%hu" with short should not. On
the other hand, if I use "%hu" with int, it is unclear to me whether I should
get a warning (the fact that I'm using %h to intentiona
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66247
--- Comment #3 from Matthew L. Martin ---
The source code in question is downloaded as a prerequisite for building
gcc-5.1.0 (gmp).
Where should I file a bug against the test?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66224
--- Comment #2 from David Edelsohn ---
Author: dje
Date: Thu May 21 17:18:25 2015
New Revision: 223496
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223496&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/66224
* config/cpu/powerpc/atomic_word.h (_GLIBCX
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66249
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65446
--- Comment #3 from Eric Blake ---
see also bug 66249 where the implementation-defined signedness of enums comes
into play, and where I argue that neither %d nor %u should warn when an enum
type is passed through varargs where the range of the en
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66249
Bug ID: 66249
Summary: -Wformat-signedness should not warn on enums
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66239
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66248
Bug ID: 66248
Summary: subreg truncation not hoisted from loop
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66247
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66247
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60194
Eric Blake changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eblake at redhat dot com
--- Comment #5 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66247
Bug ID: 66247
Summary: make check-gmp fails for gcc-5.1.0
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59093
Matt Thompson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.9.1 |5.1.0
--- Comment #9 from Matt Thompson
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65446
Eric Blake changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eblake at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66230
--- Comment #11 from gpnuma at centaurean dot com ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #10)
> (In reply to gpnuma from comment #8)
> > Thanks Markus I didn't think these alignment issues were actually the
> > problem, it goes a long w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61683
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini ---
Patch here: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg01948.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66241
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm-none-linux-gnueabi,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66089
--- Comment #8 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to vehre from comment #7)
> Ah, ok, which opens the question why that isn't done?
Performance, for (very) big arrays.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66232
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #2)
> Created attachment 35585 [details]
> A patch
>
> I am testing this.
It failed this:
[hjl@gnu-6 pr66232]$ cat x.c
extern void (*bar) (void);
void
foo (int n)
{
int i;
f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66246
--- Comment #1 from kai-bugs at cats dot ms ---
Created attachment 35591
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35591&action=edit
Source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66246
Bug ID: 66246
Summary: PCH breaks preprocessor
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: preprocessor
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66239
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66089
--- Comment #7 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Ah, ok, which opens the question why that isn't done?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66089
--- Comment #6 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to vehre from comment #5)
For the interpretation of (intrinsic) assignment, you have to look at
7.2.1.3:
> The execution of the assignment shall have the same effect as if the
> evaluation of expr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66212
Andri Yngvason changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65979
--- Comment #24 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #23)
> Ouch. The peephole in problem was added at gcc-5 not at 4.9. The above
> patch should fix the original conftest.c issue, but debien 4.9-16 probl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51726
Jacek Caban changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jacek at codeweavers dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66245
Bug ID: 66245
Summary: ICE on select type with empty type spec
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66243
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66244
Bug ID: 66244
Summary: ICE in lhd_set_decl_assembler_name
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66237
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Schwab ---
The profile files differ in a few bytes.
9 17 ^O 265 M-5
10 217 M-^O 44 $
11 323 M-S 301 M-A
12 166 v165 u
21 146 f376 M-~
22 213 M-^K 233 M-^[
23 166 v 32 ^Z
24 14 ^L 107 G
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66089
--- Comment #5 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Let's have a look at the standard (F2008, 12.8.2, last sentence):
In the array case, the values of the elements, if any, of the result are
the same as would have been obtained if the scalar functio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66237
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab ---
Created attachment 35589
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35589&action=edit
pr34999.gcda
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66237
Mikhail Maltsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65283
--- Comment #5 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
ah I see, I was on the 4.8 where toggle_pr was indeed a single pattern.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65283
--- Comment #4 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
yes it's only for the SH4A fpchg case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65283
--- Comment #3 from Oleg Endo ---
Thanks for the pointer.
Still, if this
(define_attr "in_delay_slot" "yes,no"
(eq_attr "type" "fpscr_toggle") (const_string "no")
is changed to "yes", the delay-branch will not consider multiple-set insns.
The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65979
--- Comment #23 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Ouch. The peephole in problem was added at gcc-5 not at 4.9. The above
patch should fix the original conftest.c issue, but debien 4.9-16 problem
would be an another issue. Sorry for my confusion.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65283
chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66238
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66243
Bug ID: 66243
Summary: enum class value is allowed to be initialized by value
from other enum class
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66219
--- Comment #2 from Cao Da Shi ---
This issue poped up when cross compiling systemd-219. It is confirmed that the
missed section has the __attribute__((used)) declared. But still the link will
only pass without "-flto", with all other options exa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66211
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.0
Summary|[5/6 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65283
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66211
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.0
Summary|[5/6 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66242
--- Comment #1 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Created attachment 35588
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35588&action=edit
Suggested patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66242
Bug ID: 66242
Summary: Front-end error if exception propagation disabled
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66241
--- Comment #1 from Vidya Praveen ---
Created attachment 35586
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35586&action=edit
preprocessed file to reproduce ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66241
Bug ID: 66241
Summary: ICE: verify_type failed while building libstdc++
(dwarfout.c: gen_type_die_with_usage())
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54236
--- Comment #14 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Thu May 21 12:36:35 2015
New Revision: 223479
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223479&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/54236
* config/sh/sh.md (*round_int_even):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29358
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66232
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 35585
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35585&action=edit
A patch
I am testing this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65979
Kazumoto Kojima changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Multiple issues in |[4.9/5/6 Regression] [SH]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65892
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |SUSPENDED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66240
Bug ID: 66240
Summary: RFE: extend -falign-xyz syntax
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66239
--- Comment #1 from Maciej Andrzejewski ---
It is getting even more interesting.
I have disassabled 4 binaries compiled with options:
1) -mfloat-abi=softfp
2) -mfloat-abi=softfp -O
3) -mfloat-abi=hard
4) -mfloat-abi=hard -O
and from what I unde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66236
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Thomas Preud'homme from comment #3)
> Alternatively, you can try the patch proposed at [1] and see if it fixes the
> issue you're facing since it seems to be the same one.
>
> [1] https://gcc.gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66230
--- Comment #10 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to gpnuma from comment #8)
> Thanks Markus I didn't think these alignment issues were actually the
> problem, it goes a long way.
>
> By doing memmoves instead of pointer cast allocations I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66236
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
Alternatively, you can try the patch proposed at [1] and see if it fixes the
issue you're facing since it seems to be the same one.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-05/msg01901.html
Best reg
1 - 100 of 158 matches
Mail list logo
