https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67756
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20151002 (experimental) [trunk revision 228389] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -O0 small.c; ./a.out
$ gcc-5.2 -O1 small.c; ./a.out
$
$ gcc-trunk -O1 small.c
$ ./a.out
Aborted (core dumped)
$
int a, b, *g, h;
unsigned char c, d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67829
Bug ID: 67829
Summary: Bogus "ambiguous template instantiation" error with
partial specializations involving a template template
parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67821
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||su at cs dot ucdavis.edu
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67827
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20151002 (experimental) [trunk revision 228389] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -O2 small.c; ./a.out
0
$ gcc-5.2 -O3 small.c; ./a.out
0
$
$ gcc-trunk -O3 small.c
$ ./a.out
1
$
---
int printf (const char *, ...);
int a, b;
short c;
int
main
Configured with: ../gcc-trunk/configure --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk
--enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20151002 (experimental) [trunk revision 228389] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -Os -c small.c
$ gcc-5.2 -O2 -c small.c
$
$ gcc-trunk -O2 -c small.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66461
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67807
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.4, 4.9.3
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67754
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66495
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66969
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66979
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67616
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67802
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67802
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Fri Oct 2 21:27:02 2015
New Revision: 228430
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228430&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-10-02 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/67802
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67819
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #1)
> Sorry if this has been discussed before, but can't you use
> linemap_location_from_macro_expansion_p to check whether the conditional
> contains a macro expansion
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67616
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Fri Oct 2 21:11:47 2015
New Revision: 228427
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228427&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-10-01 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/67616
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65569
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65142
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65142
--- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Oct 2 20:51:34 2015
New Revision: 228424
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228424&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport PR libstdc++/65142 fix from mainline
PR libstdc++/6514
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67308
--- Comment #3 from Jerome Robert ---
It looks like PIE is no longer needed (at least with gcc 5.2).
echo 'void main(void){}' | gcc -fsanitize=thread -xc - -ltsan && ./a.out
just work fine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67819
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67756
--- Comment #20 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #19)
> ok, but now we have because of the warnings:
>
> FAIL: gcc.target/arm/pr67756.c (test for excess errors)
>
> I think something like this could fix it:
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67826
Bug ID: 67826
Summary: gcc/fortran/openmp.c:1808: bad test ?
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67756
--- Comment #19 from Bernd Edlinger ---
ok, but now we have because of the warnings:
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/pr67756.c (test for excess errors)
I think something like this could fix it:
Index: pr67756.c
===
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67825
Bug ID: 67825
Summary: [concepts] expression constraint bug when taking
address of a member function
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66979
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Fri Oct 2 20:19:32 2015
New Revision: 228423
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228423&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-10-01 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/66979
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65142
--- Comment #15 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #14)
> Do we want this on gcc-4_9-branch too?
Yes, I think so. It's non-invasive, and it's not in templates/inline
functions, so those who use dynamic linking wou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67707
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65142
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Do we want this on gcc-4_9-branch too?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65049
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65049
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Oct 2 20:08:17 2015
New Revision: 228421
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228421&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport PR libstdc++/65049 fix from mainline
PR libstdc++/65049
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67707
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Oct 2 20:08:11 2015
New Revision: 228420
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228420&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport PR libstdc++/67707 fix from mainline
PR libstdc++/67707
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65142
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Oct 2 20:08:04 2015
New Revision: 228419
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228419&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport PR libstdc++/65142 fix from mainline
PR libstdc++/6514
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67308
--- Comment #2 from Jerome Robert ---
ThreadSanitizer moved to github so the bug is now:
https://github.com/google/sanitizers/issues/503
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67824
Bug ID: 67824
Summary: constexpr char* compare operations not constexpr, but
char[] operations ARE
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67822
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Fri Oct 2 19:27:30 2015
New Revision: 228414
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228414&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR target/67822] OpenMP offloading to nvptx fails
gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67823
Bug ID: 67823
Summary: ICE in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:13635
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65569
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67822
Bug ID: 67822
Summary: OpenMP offloading to nvptx fails
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openmp
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67201
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Fri Oct 2 18:21:10 2015
New Revision: 228411
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228411&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Pr 67201 fix
Modified:
branches/ibm/ieee/gcc/ChangeLog.meissner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67730
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri Oct 2 18:01:50 2015
New Revision: 228408
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228408&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/67730
* c-typeck.c (convert_for_assignment): Use t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67821
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67821
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67818
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
Program received signal SIGSEGV: Segmentation fault - invalid memory reference.
Backtrace for this error:
#0 0xF769EB7E
#1 0xF769DC7E
#2 0xF7798BDF
#3 0x8053299 in foo.3532._omp_fn.2 at alloc-comp-2.f90:?
#4
LECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/local/gcc/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/5.2.1/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: /home/sss/gcc/gcc/configure --prefix=/usr/local/gcc
--enable-threads=posix --enable-long-long --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran
Thread model: posix
gcc version 5.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67747
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67747
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Oct 2 16:34:34 2015
New Revision: 228404
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228404&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/67747 use readdir instead of readdir_r
PR libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67818
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67816
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
I can't get it to fail either. I've also tried running cc1 under valgrind to
see if anything shows up. Sadly nothing relevant.
Richi, if this is still failing, can you get me a little context? A
gimple_d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67820
Bug ID: 67820
Summary: Move obscure warning about null pointers into prime
time
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67819
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67819
Bug ID: 67819
Summary: -Wduplicated-cond should take macros into account
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67786
--- Comment #6 from Zhendong Su ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #5)
> Fixed on trunk.
> Thanks for the good testcase
Thanks for looking into the PR and for the quick fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67815
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Note that this should only be applied when the multiplication of the two
constants can be folded to a single constant (thus, not for
-frounding-math - HONOR_SIGN_DEPENDENT_ROUNDING - if the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67818
Bug ID: 67818
Summary: [5 Regression] FAIL:
libgomp.fortran/alloc-comp-[23].f90
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67721
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67756
--- Comment #18 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Fri Oct 2 15:04:59 2015
New Revision: 228396
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228396&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-10-02 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/67756
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67474
--- Comment #5 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #4)
> I suspect this is the same as PR 67756
I guess so too. I am going to commit a patch today.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67756
--- Comment #17 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #16)
> (In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #13)
> > (In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #11)
> > > I must admit, that I don't know what I am doing here
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67817
--- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
More examples analogous to z1.f90 :
$ cat z4.f90
program p
type t
complex :: a
end type
type(t) :: x6, x8
data x6 /t(.true.)/
data x8 /t('1')/
end
$ cat z5.f90
program p
type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67817
Bug ID: 67817
Summary: Missing compilation error for some wrong conversions
in data
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67718
Than McIntosh changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59218
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Oct 2 13:44:41 2015
New Revision: 228392
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228392&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/59218
* trans-mem.c (volatile_lvalue_p): Rename from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67474
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=67474
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65142
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
Can you please backport if the solution is the final one?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64249
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64249
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri Oct 2 12:56:17 2015
New Revision: 228388
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228388&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/64249
* c-common.c (warn_duplicated_cond_add_or_wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67781
--- Comment #1 from Jean-Denis Boyer ---
I have the same problem on a MPC8248 processor (--target powerpc-linux).
However, it works well on an ARMv5 (--target arm-linux-gnueabi).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67816
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 2 Oct 2015, mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67816
>
> Marek Polacek changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66776
--- Comment #1 from renlin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: renlin
Date: Fri Oct 2 11:55:04 2015
New Revision: 228384
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228384&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PATCH][AARCH64][PR66776]Add cmovdi_insn_uxtw pattern.
gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67816
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67816
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Seen with r228349 btw. Delta-reduced testcase:
typedef struct {
int path[65];
} CHESS_PATH;
extern int early_exit;
extern int number_of_solutions;
extern int solutions[10];
extern int solution_type;
ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67816
Bug ID: 67816
Summary: [6 Regression] ICE in duplicate_thread_path,
186.crafty fails to build
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67816
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67815
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67756
--- Comment #16 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #13)
> (In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #11)
> > I must admit, that I don't know what I am doing here,
> > ... but this (completely untested) patch seems t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67815
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67815
Bug ID: 67815
Summary: Optimize const1 * copysign (const2, y) into copysign
(const1 * const2, y) if const1 > 0 or -copysign
(const1 * const2, y) if const1 < 0
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67809
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> There isn't any "infinite loop is undefined behavior" thing
> so clang removing the loop is an invalid transform.
In C++ [intro.multithread]
27 The implementatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67800
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67809
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
We indeed do not have a flag to tell GCC it's ok to remove infinite loops with
no side-effects. We assume the dereferences will not trap (unless
-fexceptions -fnon-call-exceptions) and GCC happily removes p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52332
--- Comment #10 from louis.krupp at zoho dot com ---
Paul,
Fixed in revision 228376.
svn must have noticed that the two test files were executable. I'm not 100%
sure how they got that way; in at least one bug report, pr 52332, the
downloaded t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67787
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67786
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67786
--- Comment #4 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Fri Oct 2 08:36:45 2015
New Revision: 228375
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228375&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[RTL ifcvt] PR 67786, 67787: Check that intermediate instr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67787
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Fri Oct 2 08:36:45 2015
New Revision: 228375
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228375&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[RTL ifcvt] PR 67786, 67787: Check that intermediate instr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52332
--- Comment #9 from Paul Thomas ---
Louis,
Joost is correct about this - we do not set the testcases as executable. Could
you revert that, please?
Thanks
Paul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52332
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62242
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51726
--- Comment #10 from Kai Tietz ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Fri Oct 2 08:08:38 2015
New Revision: 228371
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228371&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/51726
* g++.dg/ext/selectany2.C: Allow uninitializ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51726
--- Comment #9 from Kai Tietz ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Fri Oct 2 08:06:52 2015
New Revision: 228370
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228370&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/51726
* config/i386/winnt.c (ix86_handle_selectany_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67780
Peter Cordes changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Excess instructions for |Excess instructions for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67747
--- Comment #7 from Christophe Lyon ---
I've just tried the patch in comment #6, but it does not fix the problem I'm
seeing on armv5t:
*** Error in `./directory_iterator.exe': malloc(): memory corruption:
0x40b787f7 ***^M
Maybe I should file ano
96 matches
Mail list logo
