http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45954
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu 2010-10-10 07:05:54
UTC ---
--with-build-config=bootstrap-lto requires --enable-stage1-languages=c,lto.
Why isn't lto added to stage1?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45954
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu 2010-10-10 07:05:54
UTC ---
--with-build-config=bootstrap-lto requires --enable-stage1-languages=c,lto.
Why isn't lto added to stage1?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45958
Summary: --with-build-config=bootstrap-lto doesn't work
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45958
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45959
Summary: [4.6 Regression] ICE: tree code 'template_type_parm'
is not supported in gimple streams with -flto/-fwhopr
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45960
Summary: [4.6 Regression] ICE: tree code 'template_parm_index'
is not supported in gimple streams with -flto/-fwhopr
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45902
--- Comment #7 from Ira Rosen 2010-10-10 08:58:32 UTC
---
I think I made a mistake. It doesn't make sense. I'll take another look.
Thanks,
Ira
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41977
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45961
Summary: [4.6 Regression] [OOP] Problem with polymorphic
type-bound operators
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45958
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2010-10-10
10:34:51 UTC ---
I've never seen --with-demangler-in-ld - who uses that?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45954
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2010-10-10
10:37:24 UTC ---
The build-config stuff doesn't look like it could handle that, or can it
simply add lto to STAGE1_LANGUAGES?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45958
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu 2010-10-10 10:55:59
UTC ---
[...@gnu-6 gcc]$ ld --help | grep deman
--demangle [=STYLE] Demangle symbol names [using STYLE]
You can pass --demangle to ld and ld will demangle symbols
when reporting error. --
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45954
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu 2010-10-10 10:59:30
UTC ---
If LTO is enabled, I think lto should be added
to STAGE1_LANGUAGES. Otherwise, stage1 cc1
can't be used for LTO. Sometimes it is easier
to debug stage1 cc1.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45961
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Statu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45954
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|--with-build-config=bootstr |LTO isn't enabled in stage1
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45959
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45960
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45959
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2010-10-10
11:30:16 UTC ---
*** Bug 45960 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45902
--- Comment #8 from Ira Rosen 2010-10-10 12:47:47 UTC
---
The problem is in creation of constant operands for SLP, and is caused by my
patch r155882, which takes the type for the constant from the constant itself.
This was needed for pointers, bu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45902
--- Comment #9 from Richard Guenther 2010-10-10
13:26:39 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> The problem is in creation of constant operands for SLP, and is caused by my
> patch r155882, which takes the type for the constant from the constant itse
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44561
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2010-10-10
13:31:30 UTC ---
This btw fails nearly all libstdc++ tests when built with -flto. Jason, is
there no way to avoid lang_type to leak into the middle-end like this?
Why do we need to use lang_type fo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44561
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2010-10-10
13:53:08 UTC ---
Another way to handle it in LTO would be to simply stream LANG_TYPE, assuming
it must be completely opaque to the rest of the compiler anyway. Probably
better than the ptr_type_nod
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45902
--- Comment #10 from Ira Rosen 2010-10-10 15:06:37 UTC
---
It doesn't work for pointers (pr42709):
+int
+main1 (int *a, int *b, int *c, int *d, int dummy)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < N/2; i+=4)
+{
+ res[i] = a + 16;
+ res[i+1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45961
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres 2010-10-10
16:33:53 UTC ---
The patch in comment #1 fixes the pr without regression. Note that the test in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2010-10/msg00104.html gives 'T' at run-time while
the reduced tests
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45961
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-10 18:17:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> The patch in comment #1 fixes the pr without regression. Note that the test in
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2010-10/msg00104.html gives 'T' at ru
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45790
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres 2010-10-10
19:20:19 UTC ---
This pr has vanished between revisions 165163 and 165193 (see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-10/msg00634.html and
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-10/msg00
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45790
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44592
--- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres
2010-10-10 19:36:15 UTC ---
What are the plans with is pr? Will it be back-ported to 4.5?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45585
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2010-10-10
19:38:13 UTC ---
Any agenda for this pr?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44592
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de
2010-10-10 20:03:30 UTC ---
On Sun, 10 Oct 2010, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44592
>
> --- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres
> 2010-10-10 19:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45959
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Assigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44561
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45961
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-10 21:35:13 UTC ---
Author: janus
Date: Sun Oct 10 21:35:10 2010
New Revision: 165263
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=165263
Log:
2010-10-10 Janus Weil
PR fortran/4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45961
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45962
Summary: [4.6 Regression]: many c/c++ failures on cris-elf, in
r165236:165242
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45963
Summary: inconsistent and poor array initialization diagnostic
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45870
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-10-11
06:17:48 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Oct 11 06:17:45 2010
New Revision: 165270
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=165270
Log:
PR target/45870
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_
37 matches
Mail list logo
