[Bug target/52129] wrong code to pass parameters to tail call function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52129 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 f

[Bug c++/52131] dynamic allocation?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52131 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug debug/52132] New: [4.7 Regression] ICE in loc_descriptor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52132 Bug #: 52132 Summary: [4.7 Regression] ICE in loc_descriptor Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code

[Bug rtl-optimization/48374] ICE: in single_succ_edge, at basic-block.h:562 with -fselective-scheduling2 and __builtin_unreachable()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48374 --- Comment #5 from Andrey Belevantsev 2012-02-06 08:32:30 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > Seems you forgot to actually add the test case. Thanks, I forgot to svn add, fixed in 183928.

[Bug debug/52132] [4.7 Regression] ICE in loc_descriptor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52132 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug debug/52132] [4.7 Regression] ICE in loc_descriptor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52132 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-06 08:34:22 UTC --- int l; void bar (void); void foo (int *x, float y) { float b; union { float f; int i; } u = { .f = y }; u.i += 127 << 23; u.f = ((-1.0f / 3) * u.f + 2) * u.f - 2.0f / 3; b =

[Bug libstdc++/52133] New: Undefined Symbol to _Bind_simple_helper

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52133 Bug #: 52133 Summary: Undefined Symbol to _Bind_simple_helper Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority:

[Bug c++/52088] [4.7 Regression] ICE in "delete" with template convertion operator

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52088 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|unassigned at

[Bug tree-optimization/52091] [4.7 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52091 Ira Rosen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug libstdc++/52128] [4.7 regression] r183788 caused massive libstdc++ testsuite regression on i686-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52128 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mario-baumann at web dot de --- Comment

[Bug libstdc++/52133] Undefined Symbol to _Bind_simple_helper

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52133 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug libstdc++/52128] [4.7 regression] r183788 caused massive libstdc++ testsuite regression on i686-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52128 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-06 09:32:28 UTC --- Created attachment 26579 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26579 does this patch fix it? I can't reproduce this on i686-pc-linux-gnu x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu x86

[Bug libstdc++/52128] [4.7 regression] r183788 caused massive libstdc++ testsuite regression on i686-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52128 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0

[Bug target/52129] wrong code to pass parameters to tail call function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52129 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug debug/52132] [4.7 Regression] ICE in loc_descriptor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52132 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-06 10:23:31 UTC --- Created attachment 26581 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26581 gcc47-pr52132.patch Untested fix. What get_true_reg does might be reasonable for code where we have

[Bug c/52118] The explanation of Wunused-local-typedefs is truncated

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52118 --- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-06 10:31:23 UTC --- Author: paolo Date: Mon Feb 6 10:31:18 2012 New Revision: 183932 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183932 Log: 2012-02-06 Paolo Carlini PR c/52

[Bug c/52118] The explanation of Wunused-local-typedefs is truncated

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52118 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/52134] New: Does not fold (x * 4) & -4

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52134 Bug #: 52134 Summary: Does not fold (x * 4) & -4 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity:

[Bug fortran/51514] [OOP] Wrong code when passing a scalar CLASS to a TYPE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51514 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[OOP] Wrong code when |[OOP] Wrong code when |

[Bug target/51106] [4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE in move_insn, at haifa-sched.c:2314

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51106 --- Comment #7 from Andrey Belevantsev 2012-02-06 12:10:17 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > Can this be applied to 4.5/4.6 please? Well, the patch was approved for trunk only, but it is committed for two weeks now and looks safe -- Jakub?

[Bug target/51106] [4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE in move_insn, at haifa-sched.c:2314

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51106 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-06 12:26:48 UTC --- Yes, it is ok for the affected branches if bootstrap/regtest passes.

[Bug middle-end/51994] [4.6/4.7 Regression] git-1.7.8.3 miscompiled due to negative bitpos from get_inner_reference

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51994 --- Comment #35 from Eric Botcazou 2012-02-06 12:29:06 UTC --- > So your patch is probably ok (can you try verifying we don't get > (too much) codegen differences on a bootstrap?) There are no differences for a compiler build on Alpha and i586 (

[Bug middle-end/51929] [4.7 Regression] ICE: verify_cgraph_node failed with -O2 -fno-guess-branch-probability -fipa-cp-clone

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51929 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org Target Mi

[Bug libstdc++/52128] [4.7 regression] r183788 caused massive libstdc++ testsuite regression on i686-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52128 --- Comment #4 from Mario Baumann 2012-02-06 12:41:11 UTC --- Hi Jonathan, the attached fix works for bug 52133. Thanks! Mario.

[Bug libstdc++/52128] [4.7 regression] r183788 caused massive libstdc++ testsuite regression on i686-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52128 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-06 12:46:27 UTC --- Great, thanks for testing it, I'll check it in this evening.

[Bug other/52115] ICE: verify_ssa failed (missing definition for SSA_NAME)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52115 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/52115] [4.7 Regression] ICE: verify_ssa failed (missing definition for SSA_NAME)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52115 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Target|avr | Component|other

[Bug c++/52136] New: g++ is wrongly propagating "friend class" to the parent class

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52136 Bug #: 52136 Summary: g++ is wrongly propagating "friend class" to the parent class Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/52129] wrong code to pass parameters to tail call function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52129 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-06 13:33:09 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Mon Feb 6 13:33:05 2012 New Revision: 183933 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183933 Log: PR target/52129 * calls.c (mem_overlaps_alr

[Bug target/52129] wrong code to pass parameters to tail call function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52129 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-06 13:35:18 UTC --- Fixed on the trunk so far.

[Bug c++/52136] g++ is wrongly propagating "friend class" to the parent class

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52136 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-06 13:40:08 UTC --- EDG and Solaris CC also accept it, clang doesn't The code looks similar to this example from [class.protected] in the standard: class B { protected: int i; static int j; };

[Bug tree-optimization/50955] [4.7 Regression] IVopts incorrectly rewrite the address of a global memory access into a local form.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50955 --- Comment #12 from Richard Guenther 2012-02-06 13:43:06 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Mon Feb 6 13:43:03 2012 New Revision: 183934 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183934 Log: 2012-02-06 Richard Guenther PR tree-o

[Bug tree-optimization/50955] [4.7 Regression] IVopts incorrectly rewrite the address of a global memory access into a local form.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50955 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c++/52136] g++ is wrongly propagating "friend class" to the parent class

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52136 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-06 13:50:40 UTC --- I think G++ is correct here. [class.protected]p1 An additional access check beyond those described earlier in Clause 11 is applied when a non-static data member or non-static member

[Bug target/38342] [4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] __attribute__((__progmem__)) not propagated from typedef to data

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38342 --- Comment #13 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-02-06 13:55:09 UTC --- For avr-libc users, please f'up to http://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/?33716

[Bug c++/52136] g++ is wrongly propagating "friend class" to the parent class

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52136 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/51514] [OOP] Wrong code when passing a scalar CLASS to a TYPE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51514 --- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-06 14:04:29 UTC --- Created attachment 26583 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26583 Completely untested/not compiled draft patch The attached patch is completely untested. It additiona

[Bug middle-end/52134] Does not fold (x * 4) & -4

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52134 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/52136] g++ is wrongly propagating "friend class" to the parent class

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52136 --- Comment #4 from Sylvestre Ledru 2012-02-06 14:08:21 UTC --- I found this bug (or behavior) while playing with clang. I am not really sure to understand why friend class should impact his parent but if g++ respects the standard, why not...

[Bug tree-optimization/51528] [4.6 Regression] SRA should not create BOOLEAN_TYPE replacements

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51528 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||52115 --- Comment #8 from Richard Guen

[Bug fortran/41587] [OOP] ICE with ALLOCATABLE CLASS components

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41587 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7 fro

[Bug c++/52136] g++ is wrongly propagating "friend class" to the parent class

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52136 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-06 14:24:39 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > I am not really sure to understand why friend class should impact his parent > but if g++ respects the standard, why not... It doesn't "impact his parent"

[Bug rtl-optimization/52060] Incorrect mask/and (ARM "bic") instruction generated for shifted expression parameter, triggered by -O2 -finline-functions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52060 Richard Earnshaw changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2012-02-03 00:00:00 |2012-02-06 0:00 Component|tar

[Bug middle-end/52047] [trans-mem] ICE: SIGSEGV in execute_tm_mark (trans-mem.c:2270) with -O -fgnu-tm -fprefetch-loop-arrays

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52047 Patrick Marlier changed: What|Removed |Added CC||patrick.marlier at gmail

[Bug middle-end/52047] [trans-mem] ICE: SIGSEGV in execute_tm_mark (trans-mem.c:2270) with -O -fgnu-tm -fprefetch-loop-arrays

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52047 --- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez 2012-02-06 14:42:11 UTC --- Author: aldyh Date: Mon Feb 6 14:42:07 2012 New Revision: 183936 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183936 Log: PR middle-end/52047 * trans-mem.c

[Bug middle-end/52047] [trans-mem] ICE: SIGSEGV in execute_tm_mark (trans-mem.c:2270) with -O -fgnu-tm -fprefetch-loop-arrays

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52047 Aldy Hernandez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/52115] [4.7 Regression] ICE: verify_ssa failed (missing definition for SSA_NAME)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52115 --- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2012-02-06 14:54:54 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Mon Feb 6 14:54:47 2012 New Revision: 183937 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183937 Log: 2012-02-06 Richard Guenther PR tree-op

[Bug bootstrap/7125] libz is built even if configured with --with-system-zlib

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7125 Richard Purdie changed: What|Removed |Added CC||richard.purdie at |

[Bug tree-optimization/52115] [4.7 Regression] ICE: verify_ssa failed (missing definition for SSA_NAME)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52115 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/52117] allocated arrays give incorrect results when used with RESHAPE in gcc v4.6.2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52117 --- Comment #2 from steven hirshman 2012-02-06 15:37:35 UTC --- Thank you for the information. THe work-around works with the newer (4.6.2) compiler, but is unrecognized by older versions of gcc that are in use on - for example - NERSC computers.

[Bug libstdc++/52128] [4.7 regression] r183788 caused massive libstdc++ testsuite regression on i686-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52128 --- Comment #6 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-02-06 16:03:09 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > Created attachment 26579 [details] > does this patch fix it? It does, thanks. > What configure command are you running? /tmp/gcc-4.7-20120204/configur

[Bug libgcj/51500] [4.7 regression] 106 unexpected libjava testsuite failures with mingw32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51500 gee changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #26574|0 |1 is obsolete||

[Bug bootstrap/7125] libz is built even if configured with --with-system-zlib

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7125 --- Comment #11 from Richard Purdie 2012-02-06 16:23:16 UTC --- Sorry, my previous report should be disregarded as it was user error. The option does appear to work for me, removing the zlib compile where it was previously present.

[Bug target/52137] New: bdver2 scheduler needs to be added to bdver1 insn reservations

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52137 Bug #: 52137 Summary: bdver2 scheduler needs to be added to bdver1 insn reservations Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/52137] bdver2 scheduler needs to be added to bdver1 insn reservations

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52137 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Severity|bl

[Bug rtl-optimization/52060] [4.7 regression] Invalid constant simplification in combine with parallel result

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52060 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-02-06 17:44:36 UTC --- Created attachment 26586 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26586 gcc47-pr52060.patch I think the important question is if it is ok that combine_simplify_rtx may modi

[Bug fortran/52117] allocated arrays give incorrect results when used with RESHAPE in gcc v4.6.2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52117 --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-06 17:45:36 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > Thank you for the information. THe work-around works with the newer (4.6.2) > compiler, but is unrecognized by older versions of gcc that are in use on > - f

[Bug c/52138] New: Operations on complex values are not inlined, even with -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52138 Bug #: 52138 Summary: Operations on complex values are not inlined, even with -O3 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.5.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/52138] Operations on complex values are not inlined, even with -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52138 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 f

[Bug c/52138] Operations on complex values are not inlined, even with -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52138 --- Comment #2 from Pedro 2012-02-06 18:33:11 UTC --- I'm a bit confused... In the gfortran output the multiplication only about 40 bytes. Does that mean that gfortran is using a reduced range by default?

[Bug c/52138] Operations on complex values are not inlined, even with -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52138 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Co

[Bug c/52138] Operations on complex values are not inlined, even with -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52138 --- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-02-06 18:58:00 UTC --- >From the manual: -fcx-limited-range When enabled, this option states that a range reduction step is not needed when performing complex division. Also, there is no checking whe

[Bug c/52138] Operations on complex values are not inlined, even with -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52138 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/52134] Does not fold (x * 4) & -4

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52134 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||TREE --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2

[Bug fortran/52117] allocated arrays give incorrect results when used with RESHAPE in gcc v4.6.2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52117 --- Comment #4 from steven hirshman 2012-02-06 19:45:53 UTC --- Thanks. I tried the -std=f95 flag and it gave the same (wrong) answer as without it, in the test code I sent you. What is not Fortran95 compatible with the code snippet I sent you?

[Bug tree-optimization/52139] New: ICE: in remove_insn, at emit-rtl.c:3960 with -O -fPIC -fno-tree-dominator-opts -fno-tree-fre --param case-values-threshold=1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52139 Bug #: 52139 Summary: ICE: in remove_insn, at emit-rtl.c:3960 with -O -fPIC -fno-tree-dominator-opts -fno-tree-fre --param case-values-threshold=1 Classification: Unclassified

[Bug c++/52088] [4.7 Regression] ICE in "delete" with template convertion operator

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52088 --- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill 2012-02-06 19:52:47 UTC --- Author: jason Date: Mon Feb 6 19:52:43 2012 New Revision: 183940 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183940 Log: PR c++/52088 * cvt.c (build_expr_type_conve

[Bug c++/52088] [4.7 Regression] ICE in "delete" with template convertion operator

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52088 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug rtl-optimization/52139] ICE: in remove_insn, at emit-rtl.c:3960 with -O -fPIC -fno-tree-dominator-opts -fno-tree-fre --param case-values-threshold=1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52139 Zdenek Sojka changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #26587|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug c++/48490] "delete" with template convertion operator does overload resolution for class operands, but shouldn't.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48490 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug fortran/52117] allocated arrays give incorrect results when used with RESHAPE in gcc v4.6.2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52117 --- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-06 20:01:15 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > Thanks. I tried the -std=f95 flag and it gave the same (wrong) answer as > without it, in the test code I sent you. What is not Fortran95 compatible with > t

[Bug rtl-optimization/52139] [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE: in remove_insn, at emit-rtl.c:3960 with -O -fPIC -fno-tree-dominator-opts -fno-tree-fre

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52139 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/48491] ICE in "delete" with template convertion operator

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48491 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c/52140] New: ICE in Libdfp testcase when compiled with soft-dfp (no -mcpu).

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52140 Bug #: 52140 Summary: ICE in Libdfp testcase when compiled with soft-dfp (no -mcpu). Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.5.4 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/52140] ICE in Libdfp testcase when compiled with soft-dfp (no -mcpu).

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52140 --- Comment #1 from Ryan S. Arnold 2012-02-06 20:46:00 UTC --- Created attachment 26589 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26589 preprocessed .i file

[Bug c/52140] ICE in Libdfp testcase when compiled with soft-dfp (no -mcpu).

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52140 --- Comment #2 from Ryan S. Arnold 2012-02-06 20:46:34 UTC --- Created attachment 26590 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26590 Preprocessed .s file

[Bug c/52140] ICE in Libdfp testcase when compiled with soft-dfp (no -mcpu).

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52140 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|major |normal --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug middle-end/52141] New: [trans-mem] ICE due to asm statement in trans-mem.c:expand_block_tm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52141 Bug #: 52141 Summary: [trans-mem] ICE due to asm statement in trans-mem.c:expand_block_tm Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/52140] Libdfp testcase encounters ICE when compiled with soft-dfp (no -mcpu).

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52140 --- Comment #4 from Ryan S. Arnold 2012-02-06 20:51:01 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > Have you tried an FSF released 4.6.2? This also fails in the same way with: gcc version 4.6.3 20111209 (Advance-Toolchain-5.0-2) [ibm/gcc-4_6-branch revis

[Bug libstdc++/52128] [4.7 regression] r183788 caused massive libstdc++ testsuite regression on i686-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52128 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-06 20:51:57 UTC --- Author: redi Date: Mon Feb 6 20:51:52 2012 New Revision: 183942 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183942 Log: PR libstdc++/52128 * src/c++11/future.cc:

[Bug middle-end/52142] New: [trans-mem] inlined transaction_pure functions are instrumented

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52142 Bug #: 52142 Summary: [trans-mem] inlined transaction_pure functions are instrumented Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/52044] [OOP] Invalid memory access with ALLOCATE, default initializer and polymorphic array components

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52044 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug fortran/32373] not vectorized: can't determine dependence (equivalence)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32373 --- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig 2012-02-06 21:25:00 UTC --- Author: tkoenig Date: Mon Feb 6 21:24:54 2012 New Revision: 183943 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183943 Log: 2012-02-06 Thomas König PR fortran/32373

[Bug libstdc++/52128] [4.7 regression] r183788 caused massive libstdc++ testsuite regression on i686-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52128 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c++/52035] [4.7 regression] internal compiler error: tree code ‘template_type_parm’ is not supported in LTO streams

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52035 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5 f

[Bug c++/52126] [4.7 Regression] compilation error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52126 --- Comment #3 from fabien at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-06 21:31:30 UTC --- I'll be assigning myself to this bug when I come back from vacation next monday.

[Bug fortran/52143] New: [OOP] ICE with polymorphic function result in gfc_class_vptr_get

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52143 Bug #: 52143 Summary: [OOP] ICE with polymorphic function result in gfc_class_vptr_get Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/52142] [trans-mem] inlined transaction_pure functions are instrumented

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52142 --- Comment #1 from Patrick Marlier 2012-02-06 21:35:09 UTC --- Created attachment 26593 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26593 another testcase but with an asm statement the asm statement is in a transaction_pure function but

[Bug middle-end/28685] Multiple comparisons are not simplified

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28685 --- Comment #19 from Uros Bizjak 2012-02-06 21:36:01 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > Another similar, but yet different case: Yet another similar test: int test (int a, int b) { int lt = a + b < 0; int eq = a + b == 0; if (lt) retu

[Bug libstdc++/52104] go1 fails to link on Solaris 8/9 x86 with native TLS

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52104 --- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-02-06 21:37:09 UTC --- please let me know what issues remain on Solaris after r183920

[Bug tree-optimization/50969] 17% degradation in 168.wupwise for interleave via permutation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50969 --- Comment #3 from William J. Schmidt 2012-02-06 21:39:38 UTC --- Author: wschmidt Date: Mon Feb 6 21:39:34 2012 New Revision: 183944 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183944 Log: 2012-02-06 Bill Schmidt PR tree-opt

[Bug middle-end/30442] Expanded array initialization can use memset builtin function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30442 Uros Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2007-01-14 05:01:04 |2012-02-06 --- Comment #6 from Uros Bizjak

[Bug tree-optimization/50969] 17% degradation in 168.wupwise for interleave via permutation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50969 William J. Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/51825] Fortran runtime error: Cannot match namelist object name

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51825 --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-06 21:55:33 UTC --- Seems to be related to PR 49791, though the patch in PR 49791 comment 19 does not help.

[Bug target/52107] IBM 128bit long double constant loaded inefficiently

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52107 --- Comment #4 from Alan Modra 2012-02-06 22:09:17 UTC --- Author: amodra Date: Mon Feb 6 22:09:13 2012 New Revision: 183945 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183945 Log: PR target/52107 * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6

[Bug libfortran/49791] [4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] Formatted namelist reads fails with: Cannot match namelist object

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49791 --- Comment #20 from Tobias Burnus 2012-02-06 22:18:39 UTC --- (In reply to comment #19) > --- ../../libgfortran/io/list_read.c(Revision 183913) > @@ -2206,3 +2211,4 @@ nml_parse_qualifier (st_parameter_dt *dt > @@ -2517,2 +2518,19 @@ nml_rea

[Bug debug/52132] [4.7 Regression] ICE in loc_descriptor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52132 Piero Finizio changed: What|Removed |Added CC||p.finizio at gmail dot com --- Comment #3

[Bug target/52144] New: ARM should support arm/thumb function attribute to permit different instruction sets in the same source

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52144 Bug #: 52144 Summary: ARM should support arm/thumb function attribute to permit different instruction sets in the same source Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4

[Bug debug/52132] [4.7 Regression] ICE in loc_descriptor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52132 --- Comment #4 from Piero Finizio 2012-02-06 23:01:56 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > Created attachment 26581 [details] > gcc47-pr52132.patch > > Untested fix. What get_true_reg does might be reasonable for code where we > have quite strict

[Bug target/52144] ARM should support arm/thumb function attribute to permit different instruction sets in the same source

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52144 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target||arm*-*-* Status|UNCONFIRMED

  1   2   >