http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50325
Andreas Krebbel changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |critical
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51266
Bug #: 51266
Summary: Pointer initialization in PARAMETER
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51074
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-22
09:38:53 UTC ---
Created attachment 25878
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25878
gcc47-pr51074-be.patch
Big endian fix, untested.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51143
--- Comment #2 from Dodji Seketeli 2011-11-22
09:49:12 UTC ---
A candidate fix has been posted to
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg02194.html.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51179
--- Comment #1 from Uros Bizjak 2011-11-22 10:19:40
UTC ---
What about current 4.7 SVN?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50765
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51196
--- Comment #6 from Greta Yorsh 2011-11-22
10:56:41 UTC ---
Thanks for fixing it, Paolo. Tested as follows.
Successful cross-build of the patch version for arm-none-eabi target,
configured as before. No regression on qemu for check-g++. The test
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50827
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46686
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
AssignedTo|jb at gcc dot gn
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51179
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49054
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|wrong-code |missed-optimization
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
Bug #: 51267
Summary: loop optimization error using LOC function
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51268
Bug #: 51268
Summary: [Regression] A subroutine can not know anymore its own
interface
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: fortran-dev
Status: UNCONFIR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51264
Michael Matz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #10 from Michael Zolotukhin
2011-11-22 13:17:38 UTC ---
Created attachment 25882
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25882
Patch for new memset/memcpy implementation
(In reply to comment #9)
> Regressions caused by th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51264
--- Comment #9 from Michael Matz 2011-11-22 13:32:20
UTC ---
Author: matz
Date: Tue Nov 22 13:32:15 2011
New Revision: 181615
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181615
Log:
PR c++/51264
* tree.c (iterative_hash_expr):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51269
Bug #: 51269
Summary: Vectorization profitability threshold is not actually
used
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51264
--- Comment #10 from Michael Matz 2011-11-22 14:18:35
UTC ---
Fixed. Improving the situation with the clobbers should be tracked somewhere
else.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51264
Michael Matz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50765
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-22
14:23:02 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Nov 22 14:22:56 2011
New Revision: 181617
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181617
Log:
PR tree-optimization/50765
* gcc.dg/pr50765
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47013
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50765
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25973
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51125
--- Comment #8 from Michael Matz 2011-11-22 14:56:03
UTC ---
Author: matz
Date: Tue Nov 22 14:55:58 2011
New Revision: 181619
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181619
Log:
PR other/51125
* trans-mem.c (expand_block_tm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51125
Michael Matz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51258
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-11-22 15:05:13 UTC ---
> --- Comment #1 from Andrew Macleod 2011-11-21
> 19:21:30 UTC ---
> 32 bit targets don't usually support 128 bit atomic operations natively, and
> leave calls to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51196
--- Comment #7 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-22 15:04:33 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Nov 22 15:04:27 2011
New Revision: 181620
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181620
Log:
2011-11-22 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51196
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51261
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50888
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-22
15:19:53 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> I suppose I don't really object to a workaround in libjava, but surely the
> sensible thing to do is fix isspace() not to throw. It can't, anyway: that
> wo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51270
Bug #: 51270
Summary: constness violation is accepted without any warning
but leads to a required function call being eliminated
during optimization
Classification: Unclassified
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51270
--- Comment #1 from Michiel De Wilde
2011-11-22 15:26:42 UTC ---
Created attachment 25885
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25885
preprocessed source code (*.ii)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51265
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51266
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus 2011-11-22
15:44:34 UTC ---
Hmm, I somehow have the feeling that encountered this bug already. See the
thread starting at http://j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/2011-November/004840.html
I think I concur with Malcol
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51265
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51270
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-11-22
15:47:45 UTC ---
If you want warnings then you should request them using -Wall etc.
Although doing so at -O2 gives this, which isn't actually very helpful:
e.cpp:67:60: warning: '' is used uninitia
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51271
Bug #: 51271
Summary: ICE in in maybe_record_trace_start, at
dwarf2cfi.c:2244
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51265
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini 2011-11-22
15:48:12 UTC ---
Even:
struct Funny;
template
void c();
template
void xx()
{
c();
}
int main()
{
xx();
}
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51265
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2011-11-22
15:50:04 UTC ---
oops, scratch the latter ;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51270
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-11-22
15:50:33 UTC ---
If you eliminate the obfuscation you get this:
int*& faulty_compiled_function(char*& val)
{
char const* tmp = val;
return (int*&)tmp;
}
char* input = (char*)0x1234;
int* output
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51270
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51258
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Macleod 2011-11-22
16:07:52 UTC ---
I built a compiler in my linux box with a target of i386-apple-darwin.
during expanding an atomic_exchange it fails the call to
can_compare_and_swap_p(TImode, true).
It returns CODE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51074
--- Comment #8 from Richard Henderson 2011-11-22
16:08:17 UTC ---
No, Jakub, vector elements are in memory order. There is no adjustment
to be made here.
Unfortunately ppc represents its interleave patterns non-standard, but
one can interpret.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51268
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51074
--- Comment #9 from Pat Haugen 2011-11-22
16:15:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Created attachment 25878 [details]
> gcc47-pr51074-be.patch
>
> Big endian fix, untested.
This patch fixes the issue on both my testcase and the cpu2000 bench
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu 2011-11-22 16:34:54
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Created attachment 25882 [details]
> Patch for new memset/memcpy implementation
>
> (In reply to comment #9)
> > Regressions caused by the new memset/memcpy exp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51270
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|constness violation is |missed warning about
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51143
--- Comment #3 from Dodji Seketeli 2011-11-22
16:41:18 UTC ---
Author: dodji
Date: Tue Nov 22 16:41:10 2011
New Revision: 181626
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181626
Log:
PR c++/51143 - Alias template allows class definit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51143
Dodji Seketeli changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51134
--- Comment #12 from Michael Zolotukhin
2011-11-22 16:54:35 UTC ---
> Do you have a patch for those C++ and Java regressions?
What regressions do you mean exactly? I managed to fix the bootstraps
(with sse_loop enabled again), but there are stil
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51074
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-22
16:57:39 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Nov 22 16:57:33 2011
New Revision: 181627
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181627
Log:
PR tree-optimization/51074
* fold-const.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51179
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50237
--- Comment #20 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-11-22 17:21:38 UTC ---
HJ,
with binutils 2.22 now released, could you please work to get this
fixed? IMO binutils releases need to work for bootstrapping gcc out of
the box without any
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50237
--- Comment #21 from H.J. Lu 2011-11-22 17:52:52
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> HJ,
>
> with binutils 2.22 now released, could you please work to get this
> fixed? IMO binutils releases need to work for bootstrapping gcc out of
> the box w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50237
--- Comment #22 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-11-22 17:55:15 UTC ---
But this is the common case: you cannot expect or require the bootstrap
compiler to use the same linker as you configure with. This is a
bootstrap failure which i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50888
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Haley 2011-11-22 17:55:51
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> isspace is actually marked as not throwing, i.e. throw() in C++. In glibc
> 2.15+ it happens to be implemented as throw() inline function which calls
> anot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50237
--- Comment #23 from H.J. Lu 2011-11-22 18:03:09
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> But this is the common case: you cannot expect or require the bootstrap
> compiler to use the same linker as you configure with. This is a
> bootstrap failure w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51270
--- Comment #6 from Michiel De Wilde
2011-11-22 18:20:44 UTC ---
Hi Jonathan, thanks for the quick analysis.
I did not realize that "char * &" and "char const * &" are not
reference-compatible, leading to a temporary being introduced when initia
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51179
--- Comment #4 from Joost VandeVondele
2011-11-22 18:34:03 UTC ---
Created attachment 25887
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25887
general code
the more general code used to find the most efficient matrix multiply for sizes
4,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51179
--- Comment #5 from Joost VandeVondele
2011-11-22 18:34:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> is IMHO just a matter whether graphite can -floop-interchange this or not.
> If you swap manually the l and j for lines, the generated code looks better
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50906
--- Comment #17 from Kyle Moffett 2011-11-22
18:50:20 UTC ---
Ok, a new kernel based on 3.2-rc1 resolved my crashing issues entirely. I
wasn't too worried about my DDR clocks since I have ECC memory and EDAC never
reported any errors.
Using the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51258
--- Comment #5 from Uros Bizjak 2011-11-22 18:52:56
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> so something in the config/i386/sync.md file must be wrong for a 32 bit
> compiler which specifies -m64. It does not set up the optab table for a TI
> mode c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51272
Bug #: 51272
Summary: ld: Unsatisfied symbol "_ITM_registerTMCloneTable" in
file /test/gnu/gcc/objdir/
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51270
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-11-22
18:56:37 UTC ---
I don't think the warning should be restricted to conversions that only involve
different const-ness.
Here's a simpler testcase for the missed warning:
const int& f(long l)
{
con
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50981
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51250
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
Assigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51258
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |testsuite
--- Comment #6 from Uros Bizjak
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51258
--- Comment #7 from Uros Bizjak 2011-11-22 19:29:20
UTC ---
Can somebody please test following change:
--cut here--
Index: atomic-exchange-5.c
===
--- atomic-exchange-5.c (revision
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51258
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Macleod 2011-11-22
19:34:03 UTC ---
yes, presuming that it works, which I think it will, that will have to be
applied to all the gcc.dg/atomic*-5.c files, as well as the
gcc.dg/simulate-thread/atomic-*-int128.c files.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51270
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51273
Bug #: 51273
Summary: ICE: vector VEC(inline_summary_t,base) index domain
error, in inline_summary at ipa-inline.h:193 with -O
-fgnu-tm, transaction_safe and overloaded contructor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
--- Comment #2 from Mathieu 2011-11-22 20:22:15 UTC
---
Sure, and we are especially fans of -fbound-checks but we can not use it on
half of the code because of this usage.
For the story :
{
I reproduced here with this small code a part of the 1.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51265
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-22 20:48:38 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Nov 22 20:48:33 2011
New Revision: 181638
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181638
Log:
/cp
2011-11-22 Paolo Carlini
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50764
--- Comment #12 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-22 20:55:06 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Nov 22 20:55:01 2011
New Revision: 181639
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181639
Log:
2011-11-22 Tom de Vries
PR rtl-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50764
--- Comment #13 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-22 20:55:13 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Nov 22 20:55:10 2011
New Revision: 181640
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181640
Log:
2011-11-22 Tom de Vries
PR rtl-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-11-22
20:56:43 UTC ---
According my archived builds
r165415 (20101013) gives the result you expect
r165758 (20101021) does not.
> Any option to tune the behavior ?
-fno-tree-ds seems to do the trick
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50764
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-11-22
21:03:51 UTC ---
> -fno-tree-ds seems to do the trick:
sorry, it is -fno-tree-dse and
> -ftree-dse
> Perform dead store elimination (DSE) on trees. A dead store is a store into a
> memory loc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51179
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-11-22
21:08:47 UTC ---
> ... I attach the test code, which I use for testing.
Compiling the code with -O3 gives the following ICE
pr51179_1.f90: In function 'tiny_find':
pr51179_1.f90:3594:0: intern
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51181
Cesar Strauss changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cestrauss at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51140
Cesar Strauss changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51265
--- Comment #6 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-22 21:37:27 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Nov 22 21:37:24 2011
New Revision: 181641
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181641
Log:
/cp
2011-11-22 Paolo Carlini
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51265
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49084
--- Comment #9 from Cesar Strauss 2011-11-22
21:49:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Hmm, this is due usage of "%lld" in printf-formatter. Does following patch
> fix your issue?
I did encounter the build failure reported in comment #6 (unk
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51222
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51218
--- Comment #20 from Harald Anlauf 2011-11-22 21:56:32
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> Untested patch:
>
> --- a/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
> +++ b/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
> @@ -3257,6 +3255,7 @@ pure_subroutine (gfc_code *c, gfc_symbol *sym)
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51179
--- Comment #7 from Uros Bizjak 2011-11-22 22:00:36
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Your testcase doesn't ressemble the original, the inner for cycles need
> clearing of the iteration variable.
Ah, indeed... fingers were too fast.
One additi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51244
--- Comment #1 from Kazumoto Kojima 2011-11-22
22:33:43 UTC ---
> return (a != b || a != c) ? b : c;
test_func_0_NG and test_func_1_NG cases are related with the target
implementation of cstoresi4.
The middle end expands a complex conditional j
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51274
Bug #: 51274
Summary: Starting with GCC 4.5, powerpc generated different
code for x != 0.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51274
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner 2011-11-22
23:12:43 UTC ---
Created attachment 25889
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25889
Example test case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51154
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marc.glisse at normalesup
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51275
Bug #: 51275
Summary: CLOBBERS can be optimized if they are right before the
return (or RESX)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51276
Bug #: 51276
Summary: ICE: in force_decl_die, at dwarf2out.c:19261
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50602
--- Comment #10 from Andi Kleen 2011-11-23
00:22:46 UTC ---
FWIW the problem is still there and prevents any 32bit kernel LTO builds
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51154
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51275
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-11-23
00:40:40 UTC ---
I think this patch has a bug in it when dealing with DEBUG_STMT's.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51277
Bug #: 51277
Summary: Feature request: C++ diagnostic for ambiguous
overloads
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46309
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski 2011-11-23
00:58:23 UTC ---
FAIL: gcc.dg/pr46309.c scan-tree-dump-times reassoc1 "Optimizing range tests
a_[0-9]*.D. -.1, 1. and -.2, 2. and -.3, 3. and -.4, 4.[
]* into" 2
FAIL: gcc.dg/pr46309.c scan-tree-dump-t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51271
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-23 01:18:18 UTC ---
minimal compile line:
...
$ mips64el-linux-gnu-gcc -O2 -g res_hconf.c
...
minimal example res_hconf.c:
...
extern __thread int *__libc_tsd_CTYPE_B;
int *
skip_string (int *s
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
