http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51218
--- Comment #6 from Harald Anlauf 2011-11-19 08:12:01
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> The miscompilation is triggered by -ffrontend-optimize, work-around: use
> -fno-frontend-optimize.
> Revision 171653 is dealing with the frontend optimizatio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51218
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51207
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2011-11-19
09:26:38 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Sat Nov 19 09:26:33 2011
New Revision: 181505
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181505
Log:
2011-11-19 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/51
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50640
--- Comment #24 from Tobias Burnus 2011-11-19
09:26:37 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Sat Nov 19 09:26:33 2011
New Revision: 181505
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181505
Log:
2011-11-19 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51207
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50640
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51218
--- Comment #8 from Harald Anlauf 2011-11-19 10:18:46
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Aha. Compiling just main.f90 with -fno-frontend-optimize solves
> the problem.
Comparing -fdump-tree-original for main.f90 at -O0 without
and with -fno-fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51218
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51218
--- Comment #9 from Harald Anlauf 2011-11-19 10:35:11
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> c) The reason why this function call was inlined was that the
>implicit_pure attribute is set on the function. This is
>bogus.
Good point.
Adding:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51218
--- Comment #10 from tkoenig at netcologne dot de 2011-11-19 10:57:23 UTC ---
Am 19.11.2011 11:18, schrieb anlauf at gmx dot de:
> This won't work. The implementation of the management
> of temporaries does not allow that the same instance
> is u
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49519
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50074
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51218
--- Comment #11 from Harald Anlauf 2011-11-19 11:46:28
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
The code does memory management similar to that required by
TR15581 for allocatable DT components and allocatable function
results, but it also has to work f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50074
--- Comment #11 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2011-11-19 12:03:28 UTC ---
Created attachment 25858
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25858
Patch to make mem_overlaps_already_clobbered_arg_p return false if no arguments
were stored
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50306
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2011-11-19
12:11:05 UTC ---
Yes, I confirm the issue doesn't seem fixed neither mainline nor 4_6-branch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51201
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Version|unknown
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50306
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50493
--- Comment #5 from Richard Earnshaw 2011-11-19
13:47:40 UTC ---
Author: rearnsha
Date: Sat Nov 19 13:47:35 2011
New Revision: 181508
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181508
Log:
PR target/50493
* arm.c (neon_disambiguate_co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51210
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marc.glisse at normalesup
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51210
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Krügler
2011-11-19 13:59:18 UTC ---
I agree, this issue seems to be a DUP
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51194
--- Comment #5 from Dodji Seketeli 2011-11-19
14:07:22 UTC ---
A candidate patch has been posted to
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg01979.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50490
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50325
--- Comment #16 from Iain Sandoe 2011-11-19 14:56:09
UTC ---
I had a quick look...
actually, I suspect that the BLKmode constraint you originally had is, in fact,
correct.
we are talking about bit fields - i.e contiguous blocks of bits - so, if
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51220
Bug #: 51220
Summary: gcc/libquadmath/math/nanq.c:9:20: ICE: in int_mode_
for_mode, at stor-layout.c:424
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Stat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51218
--- Comment #12 from Steve Kargl
2011-11-19 16:08:06 UTC ---
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 10:57:23AM +, tkoenig at netcologne dot de wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51218
>
> --- Comment #10 from tkoenig at netcologne dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51218
--- Comment #13 from Steve Kargl
2011-11-19 16:18:18 UTC ---
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 11:46:28AM +, anlauf at gmx dot de wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51218
>
> --- Comment #11 from Harald Anlauf 2011-11-19 11:46:28
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50970
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se
--- Comment #6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50493
--- Comment #6 from Richard Earnshaw 2011-11-19
16:47:06 UTC ---
Author: rearnsha
Date: Sat Nov 19 16:47:02 2011
New Revision: 181510
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181510
Log:
PR target/50493
* arm.c (neon_disambiguate_co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50493
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51218
--- Comment #14 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-19 17:35:20 UTC ---
Tobias,
Why did you mark this PR with the "wrong-code" keyword?
The code is invalid, so gfortran can generated anything
it wants.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50970
--- Comment #7 from Mikael Pettersson 2011-11-19
17:42:53 UTC ---
Created attachment 25859
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25859
reduced test case
Reduced test case. Running this on i686 shows a single call to func3
>/mnt/s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51125
--- Comment #5 from Patrick Marlier
2011-11-19 17:42:20 UTC ---
** NOT RELATED TO BUG **
In http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg00969.html, the patch shows
changes to tree-ssa-reassoc.c but not committed or part of Changelog.
But the pro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51221
Bug #: 51221
Summary: Cross GCC for AIX fails during bootstrap process
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51222
Bug #: 51222
Summary: [C++11][SFINAE] Unevaluated combined delete new
expression completely broken
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50970
--- Comment #8 from Mikael Pettersson 2011-11-19
18:31:32 UTC ---
gcc-4.3.6 also generates the double-call, but gcc-4.2.4 doesn't.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50325
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51223
Bug #: 51223
Summary: [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE with invalid function
parameter
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51211
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson 2011-11-19
19:29:22 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Sat Nov 19 19:29:18 2011
New Revision: 181512
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181512
Log:
PR middle-end/51211
* tracer.c (ignore_bb
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51224
Bug #: 51224
Summary: ICE with local struct and -flto
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51225
Bug #: 51225
Summary: [c++0x] [4.7 Regression] ICE with invalid template
parameter
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51225
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery,
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51226
Bug #: 51226
Summary: [c++0x] ICE with opaque enum and invalid template
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51227
Bug #: 51227
Summary: [c++0x] ICE with invalid parameter in lambda
expression
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51187
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou 2011-11-19
20:36:47 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Sat Nov 19 20:36:43 2011
New Revision: 181513
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181513
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/51187
* reorg.c (re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51187
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou 2011-11-19
20:39:12 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Sat Nov 19 20:39:10 2011
New Revision: 181514
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181514
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/51187
* reorg.c (re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51187
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou 2011-11-19
20:41:53 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Sat Nov 19 20:41:50 2011
New Revision: 181515
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181515
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/51187
* reorg.c (re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51187
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51228
Bug #: 51228
Summary: [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE with transparent union
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51229
Bug #: 51229
Summary: [C++0x] [4.7 Regression] Broken diagnostic:
'integer_cst' not supported by dump_dec
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Sta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51229
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50294
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou 2011-11-19
21:25:17 UTC ---
Created attachment 25861
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25861
Improved testcase
It should fail everywhere.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50294
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou 2011-11-19
21:35:48 UTC ---
> Thus the question - what should stor-layout do with domain types
> that wrap the wrong way around (i.e. are of wrong type because Ada
> turns everything into sizetype instead of [s]s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51230
Bug #: 51230
Summary: [4.7 Regression] Broken diagnostic:
'template_parm_index' not supported by dump_type
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
St
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51230
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51231
Bug #: 51231
Summary: g++ remove placement new with -O1
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51231
--- Comment #1 from Evgeniy Dushistov 2011-11-19
21:49:33 UTC ---
The code works as expected for 4.4.5,
and show buggy behaviour with 4.5.3 and 4.6.2.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51231
--- Comment #2 from Evgeniy Dushistov 2011-11-19
22:03:49 UTC ---
Created attachment 25862
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25862
the preprocessed test case
generate from source with command:
g++ -ggdb -c -save-temps -O1 -Wal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51231
--- Comment #3 from Evgeniy Dushistov 2011-11-19
22:07:40 UTC ---
To build test case you need use command:
g++ -ggdb -O1 -Wall -Wextra boost_interp_alloc.cpp -lboost_thread
I use boost 1.46.1.
Or you can use preprocessed attachment to look at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50747
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51216
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-19 23:17:16 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Sat Nov 19 23:17:12 2011
New Revision: 181517
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181517
Log:
/cp
2011-11-19 Paolo Carlini
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51222
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||51185
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51230
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51232
Bug #: 51232
Summary: building the all-stage1 target requires several
invocations to complete
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51220
--- Comment #2 from John David Anglin 2011-11-20
00:38:54 UTC ---
Created attachment 25863
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25863
Preprocessed source
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51220
--- Comment #1 from John David Anglin 2011-11-20
00:36:14 UTC ---
Breakpoint 1, int_mode_for_mode (mode=VOIDmode) at
../../gcc/gcc/stor-layout.c:424
424 gcc_unreachable ();
(gdb) bt
#0 int_mode_for_mode (mode=VOIDmode) at ../../gcc/gcc/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51220
--- Comment #3 from John David Anglin 2011-11-20
00:45:14 UTC ---
Guessing this was introduced by:
2011-11-16 Andreas Krebbel
PR middle-end/50325
* expmed.c (store_bit_field_1): Use extract_bit_field on big
endian tar
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51233
Bug #: 51233
Summary: [ipa-iterations] running multiple passes of early IPA
on zlib produces more optimal code
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39618
--- Comment #2 from Kurt Miller 2011-11-20
03:29:51 UTC ---
Created attachment 25864
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25864
PCH Supoort for OpenBSD
Attached is a patch against gcc-4.6.2 which uses brk/sbrk for PCH support.
Sin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39618
Kurt Miller changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kurt at intricatesoftware
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51234
Bug #: 51234
Summary: ambiguity in mangling function attribute
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51194
--- Comment #6 from Dodji Seketeli 2011-11-20
07:10:31 UTC ---
Author: dodji
Date: Sun Nov 20 07:10:24 2011
New Revision: 181523
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181523
Log:
PR c++/51194 - ICE with invalid alias template
gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51194
Dodji Seketeli changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43682
--- Comment #4 from Chen Chen 2011-11-20
07:18:28 UTC ---
I've noticed the gc-7.2alpha6.tar.gz have released. The Boehm-GC has been a
major obscure for the gcj port of Mingew64 I think... (embarrassed)
http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Hans_Boehm/gc
73 matches
Mail list logo
