http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52018
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52048
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Component|middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52048
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-30
09:02:33 UTC ---
Created attachment 26514
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26514
gcc47-pr52048.patch
Untested fix.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52051
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51450
--- Comment #2 from christophe.lyon at st dot com 2012-01-30 09:23:27 UTC ---
I noticed this about an official release; I am not sure which one it was when I
entered this report, but it is at least true for GCC-4.6.2.
I have just checked
http://gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52050
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #5 from Richar
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52043
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52045
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52041
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52039
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52038
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52037
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52035
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-30
09:34:37 UTC ---
We're writing a function decl:
>
QI
size
unit size
align 8 symtab 0 alias set -1 canonical type 0x75a54000
arg-types
cha
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52034
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-30
09:35:37 UTC ---
It's an RA issue I think - the RA isn't very clever when it comes to
coalescing pseudos with incoming or outgoing fixed regs.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52032
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52028
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52027
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52023
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52009
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30 09:43:04 UTC ---
Value numbering of stores appears to be a bit different than what I expected.
pr51879-9.c:
...
int z;
void
foo (void)
{
z = 5;
z = 5;
}
...
pr51879-9.c.028t.fre:
...
SC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52046
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-30
10:05:46 UTC ---
Created attachment 26515
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26515
gcc47-pr52046.patch
Untested fix.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52043
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51483
--- Comment #7 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-01-30
10:51:11 UTC ---
Any chance this could be resolved before the 4.7.0 release? It would be a
shame if Ada support for m68k would be impossible due to something as lame as
FP format confusion/disagre
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52039
--- Comment #2 from Denis Excoffier 2012-01-30
11:14:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> How did you configure? Dup of PR51974?
.../configure --enable-languages=c,c++ --prefix=... --with-local-prefix=...
--disable-multilib
I don't use --enab
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52027
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52027
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52037
--- Comment #8 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-30
12:12:31 UTC ---
Both TODO_update_ssa and TODO_update_ssa_only_virtuals are set. The assert
happens after IPA inline-transform. Probably happens because
if (!(todo & TODO_update_ssa_any))
/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15846
--- Comment #4 from Arnaud Charlet 2012-01-30
12:15:54 UTC ---
Author: charlet
Date: Mon Jan 30 12:15:42 2012
New Revision: 183713
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183713
Log:
2012-01-30 Javier Miranda
PR ada/15846
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15846
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52045
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-30
12:25:02 UTC ---
This is a case similar to PR22037, see execute_function_todo, passes calling
cleanup_tree_cfg need to expect to update SSA form.
bool cleanup = cleanup_tree_cfg ();
if
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51920
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou 2012-01-30
12:43:56 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Mon Jan 30 12:43:51 2012
New Revision: 183717
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183717
Log:
PR target/51920
* config/sparc/sparc.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51920
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51528
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-30
13:26:48 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jan 30 13:26:45 2012
New Revision: 183720
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183720
Log:
2012-01-30 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52037
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka 2012-01-30 13:28:08 UTC
---
> only virtuals may need updating here.
>
> Less dangerous (considering other callers) might be to simply adjust
> the code in inline-transform.
>
> "Obvious" patch for this:
>
Hmm,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52032
Joseph Garvin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|WONTFIX
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52032
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-30
13:38:07 UTC ---
But that's not how existing GCC attributes work.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52045
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-30
13:39:19 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jan 30 13:39:12 2012
New Revision: 183721
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183721
Log:
2012-01-30 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52045
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-30
13:40:32 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jan 30 13:40:24 2012
New Revision: 183722
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183722
Log:
2012-01-30 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52045
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52037
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52041
--- Comment #5 from Iain Sandoe 2012-01-30 13:47:06
UTC ---
I just bootstrapped r183695 (incl. Ada and Obj-C++) with
--enable-checking=release on i686-darwin9, using gcc4.6 as the bootstrap
compiler. What bootstrap compiler where you using?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52048
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-30
13:47:42 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jan 30 13:47:38 2012
New Revision: 183723
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183723
Log:
PR debug/52048
* tree-ssa-tail-merge.c (loc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52046
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-30
13:48:42 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jan 30 13:48:37 2012
New Revision: 183724
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183724
Log:
PR tree-optimization/52046
* tree-vect-patt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52027
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-30
13:49:53 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jan 30 13:49:44 2012
New Revision: 183725
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183725
Log:
PR debug/52027
* dwarf2out.c (dwarf2out_swi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52028
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-30
13:57:30 UTC ---
loop distribution splits the
for (;;)
{
...
if (K != k)
break;
K += 16;
}
loop into three portions, the first writing to K[0..13], the next
writing t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52013
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52048
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52046
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52027
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52052
Bug #: 52052
Summary: [Coarray] Properly handle coarray components of
derived types
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52028
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-30
14:16:51 UTC ---
Virtual SSA form is corrupt (and we don't detect that - bah).
:
# .MEM_723 = PHI <.MEM_666(3), .MEM_661(D)(2)>
# ivtmp.297_722 = PHI
D.2523_1353 = (void *) ivtmp.297_722;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52041
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-01-30
14:16:37 UTC ---
> I just bootstrapped r183695 (incl. Ada and Obj-C++) with
> --enable-checking=release on i686-darwin9, using gcc4.6 as the bootstrap
> compiler. What bootstrap compiler where
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52053
Bug #: 52053
Summary: SUM intrinsic is wrong for very large arrays
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52037
--- Comment #11 from Markus Trippelsdorf
2012-01-30 14:20:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> > only virtuals may need updating here.
> >
> > Less dangerous (considering other callers) might be to simply adjust
> > the code in inline-transform
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51641
--- Comment #2 from Dodji Seketeli 2012-01-30
14:26:19 UTC ---
Author: dodji
Date: Mon Jan 30 14:26:12 2012
New Revision: 183726
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183726
Log:
PR c++/51641 - Lookup finds enclosing class member
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52053
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-01-30
14:28:13 UTC ---
This is not a bug: 16777216. == 2.0**24, then you can add 1.0 as much as you
like without changing the result.
If one want a bug here, it is a missed optimization as SUM does n
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50313
--- Comment #6 from Ramana Radhakrishnan 2012-01-30
14:35:10 UTC ---
Author: ramana
Date: Mon Jan 30 14:35:05 2012
New Revision: 183727
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183727
Log:
Fix PR target/50313
2012-01-30 Ramana R
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52054
Bug #: 52054
Summary: Value-numbering does not enter translated expressions
into the hash table
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCON
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52054
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46801
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
--- Comment #11 from Richard Gue
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50313
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52053
--- Comment #2 from François Willot
2012-01-30 14:41:58 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> This is not a bug: 16777216. == 2.0**24, then you can add 1.0 as much as you
> like without changing the result.
>
> If one want a bug here, it is a misse
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #22 from Jack Howarth 2012-01-30
14:42:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #21)
> That gdb session in comment 18 makes no sense, owns_lock can't call trylock.
> Your sources don't match your lib.
>
> I thought this was a problem with WAR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52053
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2012-01-30
14:48:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> REAL(KIND=4) :: a(20,1000,1000)
If you want to reduce problems due to the accumulation of rounds, you should
increase the precision. Try kind=8, 10 or 16 (i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51641
--- Comment #3 from Dodji Seketeli 2012-01-30
14:55:50 UTC ---
I have inadvertently committed this in trunk (4.7) even though it wasn't a
regression. I have now reverted it, and queuing it for 4.8 when stage 1 opens
again. Sorry.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51500
--- Comment #11 from gee 2012-01-30 15:10:48 UTC ---
Comment on attachment 26513
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26513
proposed patch for handling thiscall r3
@@ -505,6 +508,23 @@ ffi_prep_incoming_args_SYSV(char *stack, void
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52053
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52041
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
--with-system-zlib
--enable-checking=release --with-cloog=/opt/mp --enable-cloog-backend=isl
--enable-lto
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.7.0 20120130 (experimental) [trunk revision 183725] (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52028
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51795
--- Comment #28 from Paolo Carlini 2012-01-30
15:52:00 UTC ---
As a matter of fact, I'm not able to prove that things can go wrong with the
normal Schrage when x == m - 1, at least given our other conds (eg, a < m). I
guess better not fiddling wi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52028
--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-30
15:51:34 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jan 30 15:51:23 2012
New Revision: 183730
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183730
Log:
2012-01-30 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50176
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #15
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50176
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-30
16:06:03 UTC ---
Created attachment 26517
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26517
patch
I've tried to implement a hack for this in fwprop (debug insn updating for that
not implement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52041
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51649
--- Comment #9 from Tom Tromey 2012-01-30 16:25:25
UTC ---
Author: tromey
Date: Mon Jan 30 16:25:11 2012
New Revision: 183732
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183732
Log:
PR libstdc++/51649:
* testsuite/libstdc++-pre
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51500
--- Comment #12 from Uros Bizjak 2012-01-30 16:39:04
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> + *(unsigned int*) &__tramp[24] = 0x8304244c; /* xchgl 4(%esp),%ecx*/ \
Don't use this insn, it implies lock prefix and costs hundreds of cycles.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51835
--- Comment #3 from jye2 at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30 16:59:21 UTC ---
Author: jye2
Date: Mon Jan 30 16:59:14 2012
New Revision: 183733
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183733
Log:
2012-01-30 Bin Cheng
PR target/51835
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7625
--- Comment #7 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-01-30 17:00:45 UTC ---
On 1/29/2012 5:39 PM, steven at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Perhaps this should be closed as WONTFIX?
This enhancement should be done. It appears both the
32 and 64-bit target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46057
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51835
--- Comment #4 from jye2 at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30 17:22:08 UTC ---
Author: jye2
Date: Mon Jan 30 17:22:04 2012
New Revision: 183734
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183734
Log:
2012-01-30 Bin Cheng
PR target/51835
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51753
--- Comment #1 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-01-30 17:26:47 UTC ---
> I'm uncertain if this is a code generation issue or a problem on the gdb side.
The problem still occurs unchanged with gdb 7.4. Uros, do you have
suggestions ho
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #23 from Jack Howarth 2012-01-30
18:04:44 UTC ---
The 30_threads/recursive_mutex/try_lock/1.cc execution test on darwin11 built
with gcc trunk against Xcode 4.2.1 shows...
(gdb) break main
Breakpoint 1 at 0x10dcc: file
/sw/src/f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52042
--- Comment #1 from Jack Howarth 2012-01-30
18:21:09 UTC ---
Note that darwin11 leverages the PIC default on darwin to create pie
executables by defaulting the linker to -pie when targeting 10.7 or later. The
question is whether, like gcc.dg/darw
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52041
--- Comment #10 from Iain Sandoe 2012-01-30 18:22:12
UTC ---
the stage3 tree-ssa-strlen.o fails with -fcompare-debug "failure (length)".
An incomplete analysis ... run out of time...
The first mismatched tree dump is 18t.ssa -- with differences
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44581
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Component|target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51753
--- Comment #2 from Uros Bizjak 2012-01-30 18:47:21
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> > I'm uncertain if this is a code generation issue or a problem on the gdb
> > side.
>
> The problem still occurs unchanged with gdb 7.4. Uros, do you have
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48501
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52055
Bug #: 52055
Summary: load of 64-bit pointer reads 64 bits even when only 32
are used
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52042
m...@gcc.gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mrs at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51500
--- Comment #13 from Kai Tietz 2012-01-30 19:20:16
UTC ---
Right the following sequence seems to be better IMHO:
pop %eax
push %ecx
push %eax
mov __ctx, %eax
call fun
pop %ecx
mov %ecx, %(esp)
ret
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52056
Bug #: 52056
Summary: Code optimization sensitive to trivial changes
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Prio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52041
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-30
19:26:10 UTC ---
The addition of # DEBUG lines in the dumps as well as some changes in D.
numbers are expected and correct in between the dumps, but the SSA_NAME
versions (_VV parts) as well as th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52036
--- Comment #7 from Daniel Krügler
2012-01-30 19:28:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > However compilation still fails if pi is given internal linkage by
> > declaring it > static, i.e.
> >
> > int main()
> > {
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52041
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-30
19:36:33 UTC ---
Can't reproduce the -fcompare-debug failure with a cross from x86_64-linux to
x86_64-darwin on the provided tree-ssa-strlen.i btw., though of course the
configuration of the compiler
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51500
--- Comment #14 from Uros Bizjak 2012-01-30 19:58:43
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> Right the following sequence seems to be better IMHO:
>
> pop %eax
> push %ecx
> push %eax
> mov __ctx, %eax
> call fun
> pop %ecx
> mov %ecx, %(esp)
> ret
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52057
Bug #: 52057
Summary: dropping "const" in assignment gives only a warning
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52009
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30 20:09:10 UTC ---
Created attachment 26518
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26518
tentative patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51450
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 2012-01-30
20:18:31 UTC ---
Looks like there are two different places in configure which test -fno-rtti and
-fno-exceptions:
One around line 28658 (which does not use lt_simple_compile_test_code
And one around li
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52058
Bug #: 52058
Summary: [4.7 regression] bootstrap fails on HAVE_cc0:
combine.c: 'do_SUBST_LINK' defined but not used
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52039
--- Comment #3 from Denis Excoffier 2012-01-30
20:29:45 UTC ---
Tried again, using:
- gmp-5.0.2, like last week
- make with no -j option
Same result (ie gcc/gimplify.o differs).
Also, Xcpde 4.2.1 uses:
% /usr/bin/gcc --version
i686-apple-darwin1
1 - 100 of 153 matches
Mail list logo
