http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51684
Ira Rosen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51685
Bug #: 51685
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/tm/pr51472.c (internal compiler error) on
ppc*-*-*, s390*-*-*, spu-*-*
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Sta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51683
Bug #: 51683
Summary: [4.7 Regression] __builtin_memcpy etc. with constant
first argument optimized away by ccp
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32770
--- Comment #35 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-12-27 11:04:09 UTC ---
Created attachment 26186
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26186
Failures with -fdefault-integer-8 at revision 182676
New summaries of failures with -fdefaul
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32957
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-12-27
11:14:24 UTC ---
Created attachment 26187
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26187
patch to fix some failures with -fdefault-integer-8
I have this patch in my tree for a quite
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51673
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51680
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini 2011-12-27
14:15:06 UTC ---
To be honest, this kind of expectation is completely new to me. I may be wrong,
but I don't think we have anything dealing specially with templates from the
inlining point of view.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51683
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-12-27
11:33:01 UTC ---
Created attachment 26188
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26188
gcc47-pr51683.patch
Untested fix.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48641
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka 2011-12-27
10:42:01 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Tue Dec 27 10:41:58 2011
New Revision: 182693
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182693
Log:
PR middle-end/48641
* tree-ssa-threadupda
sociated with only one kind of extension.
(find_removable_extensions): Create and destroy the definition map.
(find_and_remove_re): Return void. Change 'long' variables to 'int'.
Do not deal with is_insn_merge_attempted.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51667
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51673
--- Comment #4 from Pawel Sikora 2011-12-27 09:32:11
UTC ---
i'm using the mt allocator for large std containers with small fixed-size
objects. the mt's flexible pool configuration and alloc/free speed are
an advantage over the simple new (malloc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48641
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51684
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milesto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51667
--- Comment #16 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-12-27 11:56:06 UTC ---
I confirm that the patch in comment #15 fixes the PR without visible side
effect so far. Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51682
Bug #: 51682
Summary: Coarray ICEs when compiling with -fdefault-integer-8
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51681
--- Comment #1 from Uros Bizjak 2011-12-27 11:39:00
UTC ---
Maybe related:
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/vshuf-v8qi.c -O2 execution test
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51680
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
Privet, gentleman!
If only I could have come up with the right words to express the depth of
the beautiful feeling that I have in my heart www.simpleitislove.in/
The best thing I can do is to show you my deepest dreams and hopes about
love, about our happy relationship and sweetest memories that we
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51681
Bug #: 51681
Summary: [4.7 Regression]: ICE in gcc.dg/torture/vshuf-v2si.c
on ia64
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51684
Bug #: 51684
Summary: [4.7 Regression]: ICE in gfortran.dg/maxloc_bounds_5
on ia64
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51680
--- Comment #2 from miles at gnu dot org 2011-12-27 13:54:38 UTC ---
Hmm, I dunno, my impression is that people expect that template'd code is, in
general "more inlined" -- templates are often used kind of as macro replacement
in C++ -- especially
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49193
--- Comment #3 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-12-27 09:40:27 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Tue Dec 27 09:40:23 2011
New Revision: 182692
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182692
Log:
PR libgcj/49193
* sysdep/alpha/locks
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51683
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51686
Bug #: 51686
Summary: "make install-strip-gcc" didn't install liblto-plugin*
files
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51687
Bug #: 51687
Summary: gcc is killed when compiling med-3.0.4
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51686
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-12-27
18:04:41 UTC ---
Easy fix:
pinskia@server:~/src/local/gcc$ svn diff Makefile.def
Index: Makefile.def
===
--- Makefile.def(revision 1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51069
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka 2011-12-27
18:32:05 UTC ---
note that remove_path may affect presence of irreducible loops and it already
has logic to update the flags. It seems to be case that gets missed. I am
trying to make sense of it now.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51069
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka 2011-12-27
18:50:14 UTC ---
OK,
the problem is that by removing conditional entrance into irreducible region,
the BB becomes part of the region itself.
I am testing the following patch
Index: cfgloopmanip.c
===
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51547
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-12-27 19:04:28 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Dec 27 19:04:24 2011
New Revision: 182695
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182695
Log:
2011-12-27 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51547
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51680
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51669
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini 2011-12-27
20:18:07 UTC ---
Created attachment 26190
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26190
Reduced
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51669
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51688
Bug #: 51688
Summary: libgcc dll is installed in /lib instead of
/bin
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42382
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51244
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo 2011-12-27 21:26:33 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #1)
>
> BTW, OT, (a != b || a != c) ? b : c could be reduced to b, I think.
>
Yes, very much so.
It is reduced to "return b" for -m2, -m2e, -m2a, -m3, -m3e
but not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51689
Bug #: 51689
Summary: GCC apparently is inconsistent with warning about
invalid brace-elision use
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51669
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2011-12-27
22:18:06 UTC ---
This is enough, really simple:
int omp_get_max_threads();
template const _Tp& min(const _Tp&, const _Tp&);
void s451_()
{
int i;
#pragma omp parallel for num_threads(min(4, omp_ge
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51244
--- Comment #3 from Oleg Endo 2011-12-27 22:43:11 UTC
---
Created attachment 26191
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26191
Proposed patch to improve some of the issues.
(In reply to comment #1)
>
> [...]
>
> mov #-1,rn
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51244
--- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo 2011-12-27 23:17:03 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #1)
>
> > return a >= 0 && b >= 0 ? c : d;
>
> x >= 0 is expanded to the sequence like
>
> ra = not x
> rb = -31
> rc = ra >> (neg rb)
> T = (rc == 0)
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51680
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-28
00:42:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> To be honest, this kind of expectation is completely new to me.
Me too. Templates are about genericity, not inlining.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51680
--- Comment #6 from miles at gnu dot org 2011-12-28 01:04:05 UTC ---
Well, it's just an impression ... :]
I think one reason is that unlike normal functions, template functions are
implicitly sort of "local" (by necessity), in that they can have a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51244
--- Comment #5 from Oleg Endo 2011-12-28 02:44:05 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> >
> > BTW, OT, (a != b || a != c) ? b : c could be reduced to b, I think.
> >
>
> Yes, very much so.
> It is reduced to "return b"
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51690
Bug #: 51690
Summary: Ada.Finalization with pointer field without explicit
initialization confuses compiler
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.3
S
45 matches
Mail list logo
