[Bug pch/53880] [4.8 Regression] compile time regression when generating precompiled headers for boost

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53880 --- Comment #8 from stevenb.gcc at gmail dot com 2012-07-24 08:16:01 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) I don't think it's really called from there. It should be called from gt_pch_save. gt_pch_nx_line_maps only registers the function (for pointer

[Bug middle-end/53616] [4.8 Regression] 416.gamess in SPEC CPU 2006 miscompiled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53616 --- Comment #13 from Richard Guenther 2012-07-24 08:37:50 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Tue Jul 24 08:37:43 2012 New Revision: 189802 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=189802 Log: 2012-07-24 Richard Guenther PR tree-o

[Bug c++/54076] New: wrong/misleading warning with -Wsign-promo and enums with underlying type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54076 Bug #: 54076 Summary: wrong/misleading warning with -Wsign-promo and enums with underlying type Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCON

[Bug target/53735] thumb1 spill failure with -Os

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53735 zhuolin liu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zhuolin.liu at arm dot com --- Comment #3 f

[Bug middle-end/53616] [4.8 Regression] 416.gamess in SPEC CPU 2006 miscompiled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53616 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug pch/53880] [4.8 Regression] compile time regression when generating precompiled headers for boost

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53880 --- Comment #9 from Steven Bosscher 2012-07-24 09:20:14 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > Boost version is 1.49. > (When I use --save-temps and use the resulting .ii file instead, the > regression > is no longer reproducible) That's of course

[Bug target/53975] [ia64] Target register of a speculative load moved to a branch register prior to the chk.s instruction

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53975 --- Comment #14 from Andrey Belevantsev 2012-07-24 09:22:14 UTC --- The problem is that we don't handle this type of speculation well in sel-sched. While moving an insn through speculation check, it is hard to decide for us whether it is safe, w

[Bug tree-optimization/54073] [4.7/4.8 Regression] SciMark Monte Carlo test performance has seriously decreased in recent GCC releases

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54073 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/54070] Wrong code with allocatable deferred-length (array) function results

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54070 --- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2012-07-24 09:27:53 UTC --- (In reply to comment #0) > function f() > character(len=:),allocatable :: f > f ="ABC" > end function That part is solved via the following patch; I not yet sure whether I like th

[Bug middle-end/52544] compilation fails with -finstrument-functions and sse c code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52544 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug pch/53880] [4.8 Regression] compile time regression when generating precompiled headers for boost

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53880 --- Comment #10 from Richard Guenther 2012-07-24 09:34:21 UTC --- Err, isn't the GTY annotation in as y1. x0 is the spelling location for the argument token "1", and x2 is the spelling location for the argument token "2". */ source

[Bug tree-optimization/54077] New: Bytemark FP EMULATION 44% slower than with clang

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54077 Bug #: 54077 Summary: Bytemark FP EMULATION 44% slower than with clang Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal P

[Bug tree-optimization/54077] Bytemark FP EMULATION 44% slower than with clang

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54077 --- Comment #1 from wbrana 2012-07-24 09:39:37 UTC --- Created attachment 27863 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27863 AddSubInternalFPF.clang.txt

[Bug pch/53880] [4.8 Regression] compile time regression when generating precompiled headers for boost

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53880 --- Comment #11 from stevenb.gcc at gmail dot com 2012-07-24 09:41:18 UTC --- > Err, isn't the GTY annotation in > > as y1. x0 is the spelling location for the argument token "1", > and x2 is the spelling location for the argument token

[Bug tree-optimization/54077] Bytemark FP EMULATION 44% slower than with clang

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54077 --- Comment #2 from wbrana 2012-07-24 09:41:21 UTC --- Created attachment 27864 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27864 AddSubInternalFPF.gcc.txt

[Bug tree-optimization/54077] Bytemark FP EMULATION 44% slower than with clang

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54077 --- Comment #3 from wbrana 2012-07-24 09:42:27 UTC --- Created attachment 27865 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27865 DivideInternalFPF.clang.txt

[Bug pch/53880] [4.8 Regression] compile time regression when generating precompiled headers for boost

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53880 --- Comment #12 from Richard Guenther 2012-07-24 09:42:53 UTC --- (In reply to comment #11) > > Err, isn't the GTY annotation in > > > > as y1. x0 is the spelling location for the argument token "1", > > and x2 is the spelling location

[Bug tree-optimization/54077] Bytemark FP EMULATION 44% slower than with clang

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54077 --- Comment #4 from wbrana 2012-07-24 09:43:38 UTC --- Created attachment 27866 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27866 DivideInternalFPF.gcc.txt

[Bug lto/54078] New: Bytemark 46% bigger binary with -flto

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54078 Bug #: 54078 Summary: Bytemark 46% bigger binary with -flto Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug tree-optimization/54000] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Performance breakdown for gcc-4.{6,7} vs. gcc-4.5 using std::vector in matrix vector multiplication

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54000 --- Comment #5 from Benedict Geihe 2012-07-24 09:52:42 UTC --- Thank you all for your quick replies. Please let us know if we can further assist you.

[Bug c++/54076] [C++11] wrong/misleading warning with -Wsign-promo and enums with underlying type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54076 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug pch/53880] [4.8 Regression] compile time regression when generating precompiled headers for boost

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53880 --- Comment #13 from stevenb.gcc at gmail dot com 2012-07-24 10:03:05 UTC --- On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 11:42 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > The pointer to the array, but not the array elements. So it's pointless > to know the length and

[Bug c++/54079] New: __builtin_ia32_palignr128 can't be called

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54079 Bug #: 54079 Summary: __builtin_ia32_palignr128 can't be called Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority

[Bug pch/53880] [4.8 Regression] compile time regression when generating precompiled headers for boost

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53880 --- Comment #14 from Paolo Carlini 2012-07-24 10:13:24 UTC --- Thanks Steven for looking into this!

[Bug c++/51213] [C++11][DR 1170] Access control checking has to be done under SFINAE conditions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51213 --- Comment #10 from Paolo Carlini 2012-07-24 10:34:56 UTC --- So, first we have a typo at pt.c:6142: orig_arg = make_typename_type (TREE_OPERAND (arg, 0), TREE_OPERAND (arg, 1), typename_type,

[Bug libstdc++/54075] [4.7.1] unordered_map 3x slower than 4.6.2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54075 Dennis Lubert changed: What|Removed |Added CC||plasmahh at gmx dot net --- Comment #8 fr

[Bug c++/54079] __builtin_ia32_palignr128 can't be called

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54079 --- Comment #1 from Uros Bizjak 2012-07-24 10:45:32 UTC --- Probably there is a compelling reason you don't use tmmintrin.h. Anyway, the error is a bit unfortunate, you have to pass 8*N to the builtin.

[Bug bootstrap/53832] [4.8 Regression] error: macro "ggc_alloc_cleared_lang_decl" passed 1 arguments, but takes just 0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53832 Uros Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED URL|

[Bug c++/54080] New: g++ crashes when compiling the following file

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54080 Bug #: 54080 Summary: g++ crashes when compiling the following file Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prio

[Bug bootstrap/53832] [4.8 Regression] error: macro "ggc_alloc_cleared_lang_decl" passed 1 arguments, but takes just 0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53832 --- Comment #9 from Nenad Vukicevic 2012-07-24 10:55:47 UTC --- I received your e-mail and will reply when I'm back in the office after July 30, 2012. Thanks, Nenad

[Bug c++/54074] [C++0x] initializer list accepts incorrect nested input

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54074 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.kruegler at |

[Bug c++/54080] g++ crashes when compiling the following file

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54080 Daniel Krügler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||daniel.kruegler at |

[Bug c++/54074] [C++0x] [DR 1270] initializer list accepts incorrect nested input

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54074 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |SUSPENDED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/54073] [4.7/4.8 Regression] SciMark Monte Carlo test performance has seriously decreased in recent GCC releases

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54073 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||markus at trippelsdorf dot

[Bug target/53961] internal compiler error: in memory_address_length, at config/i386/i386.c:23341

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53961 --- Comment #19 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-24 11:37:24 UTC --- Author: uros Date: Tue Jul 24 11:37:20 2012 New Revision: 189806 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=189806 Log: PR target/53961 * config/i386/i386.

[Bug target/54051] [4.7/ 4.8 regression] Invalid alignment specifier generated for vld3_lane_* and vld3_dup_* intrinsics.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54051 --- Comment #2 from Ramana Radhakrishnan 2012-07-24 12:02:37 UTC --- Author: ramana Date: Tue Jul 24 12:02:30 2012 New Revision: 189808 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=189808 Log: Fix PR target/54051 2012-07-24 Ramana R

[Bug tree-optimization/54081] New: Bytemark ASSIGNMENT 10% slower with g++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54081 Bug #: 54081 Summary: Bytemark ASSIGNMENT 10% slower with g++ Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority:

[Bug target/54009] incorrect code generated for DFmode lo_sum mem

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54009 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0 --- Comment #2 from Alan Modra 2012-0

[Bug target/54051] [4.7/ 4.8 regression] Invalid alignment specifier generated for vld3_lane_* and vld3_dup_* intrinsics.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54051 Ramana Radhakrishnan changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.7.2 --- Comment #3 from Ramana R

[Bug fortran/54082] New: Program name shadows other entities with the same name

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54082 Bug #: 54082 Summary: Program name shadows other entities with the same name Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement

[Bug target/54009] incorrect code generated for DFmode lo_sum mem

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54009 --- Comment #3 from Alan Modra 2012-07-24 12:53:35 UTC --- No, I was mistaken. The pr42427 patch isn't at fault here.

[Bug target/54083] New: FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr53922.c on x86_64-apple-darwin10

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54083 Bug #: 54083 Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr53922.c on x86_64-apple-darwin10 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED S

[Bug debug/53135] [4.7/4.8 Regression] internal compiler error: in value_format, at dwarf2out.c:8010

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53135 Ramana Radhakrishnan changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/54073] [4.7/4.8 Regression] SciMark Monte Carlo test performance has seriously decreased in recent GCC releases

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54073 --- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2012-07-24 13:21:25 UTC --- If they are single-file benchmarks a simple -fwhole-program would do, too. (I wonder if we can auto-detect -fwhole-program from within the gcc driver, if one performs non-partial li

[Bug lto/54078] Bytemark 46% bigger binary with -flto

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54078 --- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2012-07-24 13:22:43 UTC --- When using the linker-plugin? That is, with -fwhole-program?

[Bug regression/54084] New: Bunch of fails for x86

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54084 Bug #: 54084 Summary: Bunch of fails for x86 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compo

[Bug lto/54078] Bytemark 46% bigger binary with -flto

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54078 --- Comment #2 from wbrana 2012-07-24 13:38:03 UTC --- 156312 bytes with -s -Wall -O3 -g0 -march=core2 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -ffast-math -mssse3 -fno-PIE -fno-exceptions -fno-stack-protector -flto -fwhole-program?

[Bug regression/54084] Bunch of fails for x86

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54084 Uros Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/54070] Wrong code with allocatable deferred-length (array) function results

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54070 --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2012-07-24 14:39:54 UTC --- Dominique mentions that the failure of the array test case seems to be a regression between Rev. 188654 and 188694. Well, there was only one commit during that time (Rev. 188692, 2012-

[Bug libstdc++/54085] New: free storage leak when fdopen is combined with close of the file descriptor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54085 Bug #: 54085 Summary: free storage leak when fdopen is combined with close of the file descriptor Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 3.4.4 Status: UNC

[Bug libstdc++/54085] free storage leak when fdopen is combined with close of the file descriptor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54085 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug libstdc++/54085] free storage leak when fdopen is combined with close of the file descriptor

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54085 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|INVALID |MOVED --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug regression/54084] Bunch of fails for x86

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54084 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug middle-end/53616] [4.8 Regression] 416.gamess in SPEC CPU 2006 miscompiled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53616 --- Comment #15 from Vladimir Yakovlev 2012-07-24 15:36:16 UTC --- 416.games is passed now.

[Bug fortran/54082] Program name shadows other entities with the same name

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54082 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug c++/54086] New: GCC should allow constexpr and const together

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54086 Bug #: 54086 Summary: GCC should allow constexpr and const together Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prio

[Bug rtl-optimization/44025] Multiple load 0 to register

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44025 --- Comment #6 from Steven Bosscher 2012-07-24 15:51:39 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > The questions are: > 1, why pre does not do such optimization; Because PRE (gcse.c) doesn't run at -Os.

[Bug fortran/54082] Program name shadows other entities with the same name

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54082 --- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2012-07-24 15:53:20 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > (In reply to comment #0) > > program abs > > print *, abs(-1) > > end program > Back to your example, and quoting from the Fortran standard (cf. > http://

[Bug c++/54052] Segmentation Fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54052 Christophe DUVERGER changed: What|Removed |Added Target|i686-pc-cygwin |i686-linux-gnu --- Comment #1 from

[Bug target/53961] internal compiler error: in memory_address_length, at config/i386/i386.c:23341

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53961 Uros Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED Resolution|FIXED

[Bug c++/54052] Segmentation Fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54052 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug regression/54084] Bunch of fails for x86

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54084 --- Comment #3 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-07-24 17:16:11 UTC --- Seems ok now

[Bug rtl-optimization/44025] Multiple load 0 to register

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44025 --- Comment #7 from Steven Bosscher 2012-07-24 18:16:17 UTC --- Prototype patch attached to this email: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-07/msg00189.html It's not a finished patch, but it should be a good starting point for anyone who really wants

[Bug c++/54052] Segmentation Fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54052 --- Comment #3 from Christophe DUVERGER 2012-07-24 18:29:00 UTC --- I have added the source file test08.ii on the link URL (http://dl.free.fr/qK5B6KvjM) because I can not attach the file to the bug report (test08.ii is 1,5Mo)

[Bug c++/54052] Segmentation Fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54052 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-07-24 18:37:18 UTC --- Have you tried compressing it? That URL is an HTML page on some unknown site, not a .ii file, so I can't download it with wget and am not opening it in my browser.

[Bug target/54087] New: __atomic_fetch_add does not use xadd instruction

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54087 Bug #: 54087 Summary: __atomic_fetch_add does not use xadd instruction Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal P

[Bug target/54087] __atomic_fetch_add does not use xadd instruction

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54087 --- Comment #1 from Uros Bizjak 2012-07-24 19:21:02 UTC --- Use __atomic_add_fetch and __atomic_fetch_sub in the testcase, and you will get: : 0: 89 f8 mov%edi,%eax 2: f0 0f c1 05 00 00 00lock

[Bug target/54087] __atomic_fetch_add does not use xadd instruction

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54087 --- Comment #2 from Uros Bizjak 2012-07-24 19:22:00 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > Use __atomic_add_fetch and __atomic_fetch_sub in the testcase, and you will Eh, __atomic_fetch_add.

[Bug libstdc++/54075] [4.7.1] unordered_map 3x slower than 4.6.2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54075 --- Comment #9 from François Dumont 2012-07-24 20:15:10 UTC --- I confirm that the reserve method is broken. I had correctly handle the size hint that can be given through the hashtable constructor, I set _M_rehash_policy._M_prev_resize to 0 just

[Bug libstdc++/54075] [4.7.1] unordered_map 3x slower than 4.6.2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54075 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|unassigned

[Bug c++/54052] Segmentation Fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54052 --- Comment #5 from Christophe DUVERGER 2012-07-24 20:33:47 UTC --- Created attachment 27868 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27868 test08.ii file

[Bug libstdc++/54036] Negating a DFP NAN in C++ produces NAN not -NAN

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54036 --- Comment #1 from Peter Bergner 2012-07-24 21:07:58 UTC --- Author: bergner Date: Tue Jul 24 21:07:53 2012 New Revision: 189824 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=189824 Log: Backport prospective patch from mainline lib

[Bug c/54088] New: ICE at dwarf2out.c:20632 with -O1 and sparc

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54088 Bug #: 54088 Summary: ICE at dwarf2out.c:20632 with -O1 and sparc Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priori

[Bug libstdc++/41975] [C++0x] [DR579] unordered_set::erase performs worse when nearly empty

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41975 Andrew Gallagher changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andrewjcg at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug libstdc++/41975] [C++0x] [DR579] unordered_set::erase performs worse when nearly empty

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41975 --- Comment #36 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-07-24 21:51:23 UTC --- See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54075

[Bug gcov-profile/47618] Collecting multiple profiles and using all for PGO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47618 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski 2012-07-24 22:12:44 UTC --- Created attachment 27869 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27869 Patch for adding merge-gcda here is the patch which adds merge-gcda . I don't add any testcases as

[Bug c++/54086] GCC should allow constexpr and const together

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54086 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 f

[Bug target/54083] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr53922.c on *-apple-darwin*

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54083 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Target|x86_64-apple-darwin10 |*-apple-darwin* Host

[Bug gcov-profile/47618] Collecting multiple profiles and using all for PGO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47618 --- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski 2012-07-24 23:20:14 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) > Created attachment 27869 [details] > Patch for adding merge-gcda I am changing the copyright over to the FSF based on the fact Cavium (Networks) has a blank

[Bug target/54089] New: [SH] Refactor shift patterns

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089 Bug #: 54089 Summary: [SH] Refactor shift patterns Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3

[Bug target/54089] [SH] Refactor shift patterns

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089 Oleg Endo changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug gcov-profile/47618] Collecting multiple profiles and using all for PGO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47618 --- Comment #9 from Roland Schulz 2012-07-24 23:52:41 UTC --- I think a tool to merge would be a good partial solution. As far as I can see what would still be missing for user-friendly usage, is a mechanism to guarantee that all pre-merged file

[Bug gcov-profile/47618] Collecting multiple profiles and using all for PGO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47618 --- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski 2012-07-25 00:05:40 UTC --- > so that different processes don't overwrite each others output files. They don't overwrite each other, rather they are merged together at write out time.

[Bug gcov-profile/47618] Collecting multiple profiles and using all for PGO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47618 --- Comment #11 from Roland Schulz 2012-07-25 00:50:30 UTC --- Steven wrote that they are not merged but that race conditions occur. That is also what I observed. To clarify: Message Passing Interface (MPI) is a parallelization method which execu

[Bug bootstrap/52887] Bootstrap on AIX failure: Undefined symbol: .std::function::function(std::function

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52887 --- Comment #21 from Daniel Richard G. 2012-07-25 03:18:32 UTC --- (In reply to comment #18) > Maybe the code is non-functional, but *something* is referencing the > symbol under certain circumstances. I figure this is a question worth answerin