[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688 --- Comment #15 from Uros Bizjak 2011-07-15 07:08:46 UTC --- Results with a patched compiler [1], no regressions. [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-07/msg01678.html

[Bug ada/48711] [4.6/4.7 regression] failure to bootstrap or build ada for mingw (value not in range of type "Interfaces.C.unsigned" in g-socthi.adb)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48711 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #4 from H.Merijn Brand 2011-07-15 07:39:01 UTC --- On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 20:34:46 +, "sje at cup dot hp.com" wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 > > Steve Ellcey changed: > > --- Comment #2 from Steve Ell

[Bug fortran/49755] New: ALLOCATE with STAT= produces invalid code for already allocated vars

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49755 Summary: ALLOCATE with STAT= produces invalid code for already allocated vars Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization, wrong-code

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #5 from H.Merijn Brand 2011-07-15 08:34:49 UTC --- On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 22:07:10 +, "dave.anglin at bell dot net" wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 > > --- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 201

[Bug c/49754] Let gcc warn about all uninitialized variables

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49754 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-07-15 08:36:30 UTC --- (In reply to comment #0) > == Expected Results == > foo.c: In function ‘foo’: > foo.c:2:?: warning: ‘x’ is used uninitialized in this function It should really warn if 'x.i' is us

[Bug testsuite/49643] FAIL: g++.dg/rtti/anon-ns1.C scan-assembler "*N[^"]+1AE"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49643 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se --- Comment #8

[Bug target/49541] [4.6/4.7 regression] TLS support partially broken in 64-bit mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49541 --- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-15 09:31:05 UTC --- > Here's the libgomp testsuite part of the patch. It should apply to both > mainline and 4.6 branch. I've lightly tested the approach by checking one of > the testcases on sparc-sun

[Bug target/49541] [4.6/4.7 regression] TLS support partially broken in 64-bit mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49541 --- Comment #11 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-15 09:30:09 UTC --- > Here's the 4.6 backport of the sol2.h patch. Could you please give it a try > on > Solaris 8 on bare metal? I've bootstrapped it without regressions on > sparc-sun-solaris2.8 and

[Bug c/49754] Let gcc warn about all uninitialized variables

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49754 --- Comment #2 from Christopher Yeleighton 2011-07-15 09:35:42 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > (In reply to comment #0) > > == Expected Results == > > foo.c: In function ‘foo’: > > foo.c:2:?: warning: ‘x’ is used uninitialized in this functi

[Bug target/49541] [4.6/4.7 regression] TLS support partially broken in 64-bit mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49541 --- Comment #13 from Rainer Orth 2011-07-15 09:39:43 UTC --- Author: ro Date: Fri Jul 15 09:39:41 2011 New Revision: 176309 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176309 Log: Backport from mainline: 2011-07-13 Rainer Orth

[Bug c/49754] Let gcc warn about all uninitialized variables

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49754 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-07-15 09:56:49 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > Since (x) is uninitialized, so is (x.i). But what if x.i gets initialized, is x still uninitialized? struct X { int i; }; struct Y { int i; int j; }; i

[Bug ada/48835] Porting GNAT to GNU/Linux/m68k

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48835 --- Comment #24 from Mikael Pettersson 2011-07-15 10:11:45 UTC --- I've uploaded gcc-4.5.3 bootstrap binaries and my gcc-4.5.3 m68k patches to . A gcc-4.6.1 bootstrap is in progress.

[Bug c/49754] Let gcc warn about all uninitialized variables

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49754 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-07-15 10:16:12 UTC --- Just to be clear - I completely agree that uninit'd warnings need improving, I'm not objecting to that. But in my experience (mostly C++) I'd prefer to have it tracked at the more f

[Bug libstdc++/49745] error: ‘int truncate’ redeclared as different kind of symbol

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49745 --- Comment #15 from Paolo Carlini 2011-07-15 10:24:15 UTC --- By the way, Jakub, correct me if I'm wrong and/or remember incorrectly what we decided here at the time, but as far as I can see there is no risk with __gthread_mutex_timedlock, becau

[Bug tree-optimization/49756] New: g++ ICE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49756 Summary: g++ ICE Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/49745] error: ‘int truncate’ redeclared as different kind of symbol

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49745 --- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-15 10:47:46 UTC --- Then you probably could use _GLIBCXX_HAS_GTHREADS as the macro to avoid including unistd.h and assuming that _POSIX_TIMEOUT is defined. Though perhaps better would be to call it _GTHR

[Bug libstdc++/49745] error: ‘int truncate’ redeclared as different kind of symbol

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49745 --- Comment #17 from Paolo Carlini 2011-07-15 10:53:11 UTC --- Indeed, I was having the same thought... _GLIBCXX_HAS_GTHREADS is a bit stricter though (doesn't allow 0), but would do. And I agree that in that case we should use another name. Esse

[Bug testsuite/49741] make -k check-c++0x not multilib aware

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49741 --- Comment #6 from Jack Howarth 2011-07-15 10:55:21 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > Created attachment 24772 [details] > > Patch to use --zadditional_options instead of --tool_opts > > > > Does this work better?

[Bug c/49754] Let gcc warn about all uninitialized variables

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49754 --- Comment #5 from Christopher Yeleighton 2011-07-15 11:00:28 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > Since (x) is uninitialized, so is (x.i). > > But what if x.i gets initialized, is x still uninitialized? If (x.i) den

[Bug libstdc++/49745] error: ‘int truncate’ redeclared as different kind of symbol

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49745 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|paolo.carlini

[Bug target/49541] [4.6/4.7 regression] TLS support partially broken in 64-bit mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49541 --- Comment #14 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-07-15 12:01:02 UTC --- > The problem is that the testsuite (lib/libgomp.exp) unconditionally > links with -lgomp even for the -fno-openmp testcases. I'd argue that > this is a testsuite

[Bug target/49541] [4.6/4.7 regression] TLS support partially broken in 64-bit mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49541 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #15 fr

[Bug testsuite/49757] New: FAIL: gcc.target/tic6x/*.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49757 Summary: FAIL: gcc.target/tic6x/*.c Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: testsuite AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.

[Bug libstdc++/49745] error: ‘int truncate’ redeclared as different kind of symbol

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49745 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||igodard at pacbell dot net --- Comment #1

[Bug libstdc++/36231] ostream includes unistd.h outside namespace std, polluting

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36231 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug testsuite/49757] FAIL: gcc.target/tic6x/*.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49757 --- Comment #1 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-07-15 12:11:05 UTC --- Author: bernds Date: Fri Jul 15 12:11:00 2011 New Revision: 176313 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176313 Log: PR testsuite/49757 * gcc/testsuite/gcc.tar

[Bug middle-end/49545] [4.7 Regression] New C++ test failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49545 Ulrich Weigand changed: What|Removed |Added CC||uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug testsuite/49753] [4.6/4.7 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr49309.C

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49753 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milesto

[Bug rtl-optimization/11320] [3.3 regression] Scheduler bug

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11320 --- Comment #11 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-07-15 13:20:17 UTC --- Author: bernds Date: Fri Jul 15 13:20:10 2011 New Revision: 176315 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176315 Log: Revert 2003-07-10 Eric Botcazou PR

[Bug testsuite/49643] FAIL: g++.dg/rtti/anon-ns1.C scan-assembler "*N[^"]+1AE"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49643 --- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill 2011-07-15 13:40:15 UTC --- Author: jason Date: Fri Jul 15 13:40:09 2011 New Revision: 176316 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176316 Log: PR testsuite/49643 * g++.dg/rtti/anon-ns1.C

[Bug fortran/45170] [F2003] allocatable character lengths

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45170 --- Comment #18 from Tobias Burnus 2011-07-15 14:02:45 UTC --- (In reply to comment #16) > Error: Variable 'length' cannot appear in the expression at (1) > That comes from the specification expression check. If one removes the check, it works

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #6 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-07-15 14:41:19 UTC --- On 7/15/2011 4:37 AM, h.m.brand at xs4all dot nl wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 > > --- Comment #5 from H.Merijn Brand 2011-07-15 > 08:34:49 U

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #7 from H.Merijn Brand 2011-07-15 15:17:38 UTC --- On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 14:41:23 +, "dave.anglin at bell dot net" wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 > > --- Comment #6 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 201

[Bug fortran/49624] ICE with pointer-bound remapping

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49624 --- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus 2011-07-15 15:31:05 UTC --- (In reply to comment #0) > p(10,1:) => A The problem is that "10" is parsed as DIMEN_ELEMENT such that ar.start is set and ar.end is not. Thus, for the resolver, it is regarded as (

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #8 from H.Merijn Brand 2011-07-15 15:50:12 UTC --- On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 20:34:46 +, "sje at cup dot hp.com" wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 > > Steve Ellcey changed: > >What|Removed

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #9 from Steve Ellcey 2011-07-15 16:03:16 UTC --- (In reply to comment #8) > Using the 4.2.4 I had available, I got gcc-4.6.1 installed. > > Still doesn't pass perl build: > > CCCMD = gcc64 -DPERL_CORE -c -mpa-risc-2-0 -D

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #11 from H.Merijn Brand 2011-07-15 16:09:42 UTC --- On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 14:41:23 +, "dave.anglin at bell dot net" wrote: > If you get a working compiler going, it would be great if you could post > it on the net as you have don

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #10 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-07-15 16:09:28 UTC --- On 7/15/2011 11:18 AM, h.m.brand at xs4all dot nl wrote: > I will make it available when it is done, but I'll still advice against > using it when it doesn't pass the perl

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #13 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-07-15 16:18:11 UTC --- On 7/15/2011 11:51 AM, h.m.brand at xs4all dot nl wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 > > --- Comment #8 from H.Merijn Brand 2011-07-15 > 15:50:12

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #12 from H.Merijn Brand 2011-07-15 16:17:40 UTC --- On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 16:10:35 +, "dave.anglin at bell dot net" wrote: > One issue may be thread support. I always configure with > --enable-threads=posix. I don't run with th

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #14 from H.Merijn Brand 2011-07-15 16:26:49 UTC --- On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 16:04:04 +, "sje at cup dot hp.com" wrote: > > Would it help to re-build binutils with gcc-4.6.1? > > I don't know if rebuilding binutils would help or n

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #15 from H.Merijn Brand 2011-07-15 16:29:50 UTC --- On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 16:18:57 +, "dave.anglin at bell dot net" wrote: > > Would it help to re-build binutils with gcc-4.6.1? > > There is always a possibility it has been miscom

[Bug testsuite/49753] [4.6/4.7 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr49309.C

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49753 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug debug/48220] DW_OP_GNU_entry_value/DW_TAG_GNU_call_site_parameter vs register window

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48220 --- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-15 17:10:00 UTC --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Fri Jul 15 17:09:56 2011 New Revision: 176318 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176318 Log: PR target/48220 * doc/md.texi (Standar

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #16 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-07-15 17:15:17 UTC --- On 7/15/2011 12:27 PM, h.m.brand at xs4all dot nl wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 > > --- Comment #14 from H.Merijn Brand 2011-07-15 > 16:26:4

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #17 from H.Merijn Brand 2011-07-15 17:36:59 UTC --- On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 17:16:14 +, "dave.anglin at bell dot net" wrote: > > http://www.xs4all.nl/~prosup/pp.s > Would you please preprocessed source? It looks like a code gener

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #18 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-07-15 17:42:45 UTC --- > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 > > --- Comment #17 from H.Merijn Brand 2011-07-15 > 17:36:59 UTC --- > On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 17:16:14 +, "dave.ang

[Bug target/49723] gcc.c-torture/compile/pr46934.c: ICE in do_SUBST, at combine.c:707 at -O1 and above

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49723 --- Comment #7 from John David Anglin 2011-07-15 18:11:23 UTC --- Author: danglin Date: Fri Jul 15 18:11:18 2011 New Revision: 176319 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176319 Log: PR target/49723 * config/pa/pa.md (ca

[Bug target/49723] gcc.c-torture/compile/pr46934.c: ICE in do_SUBST, at combine.c:707 at -O1 and above

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49723 --- Comment #8 from John David Anglin 2011-07-15 18:13:16 UTC --- Author: danglin Date: Fri Jul 15 18:13:13 2011 New Revision: 176320 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176320 Log: PR target/49723 * config/pa/pa.md (ca

[Bug target/49723] gcc.c-torture/compile/pr46934.c: ICE in do_SUBST, at combine.c:707 at -O1 and above

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49723 --- Comment #9 from John David Anglin 2011-07-15 18:15:19 UTC --- Author: danglin Date: Fri Jul 15 18:15:16 2011 New Revision: 176321 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176321 Log: PR target/49723 * config/pa/pa.md (ca

[Bug c/35634] [4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] operand of pre-/postin-/decrement not promoted

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35634 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work|| Known to fail|

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #19 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-07-15 19:15:06 UTC --- I think the attached change will fix the bug. Dave

[Bug tree-optimization/49309] [4.6 Regression] ICE with -fmudflap: verify_stmts failed: type mismatch in pointer plus expression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49309 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-15 19:48:50 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Jul 15 19:48:46 2011 New Revision: 176327 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176327 Log: PR testsuite/49753 PR tree-optimization/493

[Bug testsuite/49753] [4.6/4.7 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr49309.C

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49753 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-15 19:48:51 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Jul 15 19:48:46 2011 New Revision: 176327 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176327 Log: PR testsuite/49753 PR tree-optimization/493

[Bug testsuite/49753] [4.6/4.7 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr49309.C

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49753 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-15 19:54:01 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Jul 15 19:53:58 2011 New Revision: 176328 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176328 Log: PR testsuite/49753 PR tree-optimization/493

[Bug tree-optimization/49309] [4.6 Regression] ICE with -fmudflap: verify_stmts failed: type mismatch in pointer plus expression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49309 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-15 19:54:01 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Jul 15 19:53:58 2011 New Revision: 176328 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176328 Log: PR testsuite/49753 PR tree-optimization/493

[Bug tree-optimization/49749] Reassociation rank algorithm does not include all non-NULL operands

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49749 --- Comment #6 from William J. Schmidt 2011-07-15 20:15:09 UTC --- We ran some experiments attempting to restore the r161839 behavior, either by lowering the rank of memory references or raising the rank of phi references. Although both experime

[Bug tree-optimization/49749] Reassociation rank algorithm does not include all non-NULL operands

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49749 --- Comment #7 from William J. Schmidt 2011-07-15 20:19:21 UTC --- Our experiments didn't distinguish between loop-carried PHIs and other join points, so that might be another avenue of attack.

[Bug testsuite/49741] make -k check-c++0x not multilib aware

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49741 --- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill 2011-07-15 21:30:00 UTC --- Author: jason Date: Fri Jul 15 21:29:57 2011 New Revision: 176332 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176332 Log: PR testsuite/49741 gcc/ * Makefile.in ($(la

[Bug testsuite/49753] [4.6/4.7 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr49309.C

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49753 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug libstdc++/49745] error: ‘int truncate’ redeclared as different kind of symbol

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49745 --- Comment #19 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-15 21:52:14 UTC --- Author: paolo Date: Fri Jul 15 21:52:06 2011 New Revision: 176335 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176335 Log: /gcc 2011-07-15 Paolo Carlini

[Bug libstdc++/49745] error: ‘int truncate’ redeclared as different kind of symbol

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49745 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug target/49743] -g enables var_tracking on -O0 - causes long compilations

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49743 --- Comment #2 from nenadv at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-16 01:06:53 UTC --- Author: nenadv Date: Sat Jul 16 01:06:51 2011 New Revision: 176348 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176348 Log: 2011-07-15 Nenad Vukicevic *

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #20 from H.Merijn Brand 2011-07-16 03:59:31 UTC --- On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 19:15:28 +, "dave.anglin at bell dot net" wrote: > I think the attached change will fix the bug. Apparently it did! Dave++ I guess this will be in 4.6.2

[Bug target/49746] Generated PA-RISC2.0w code cannot be assembled by GNU as-2.21.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 --- Comment #21 from H.Merijn Brand 2011-07-16 04:05:53 UTC --- On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 04:00:16 +, "h.m.brand at xs4all dot nl" wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746 > > --- Comment #20 from H.Merijn Brand 2011-07-16 >

[Bug target/49758] New: -O2 incorrectly swaps overlapping memory accesses

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49758 Summary: -O2 incorrectly swaps overlapping memory accesses Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target AssignedTo:

[Bug target/49758] -O2 incorrectly swaps overlapping memory accesses

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49758 --- Comment #1 from Arthur O'Dwyer 2011-07-16 06:46:24 UTC --- Created attachment 24777 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24777 Output of "ajo-gcc -w -O2 test.c -v"