http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54198
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54200
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54200
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54202
Bug #: 54202
Summary: Overeager warning about freeing non-heap objects
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54157
--- Comment #5 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-08
13:39:41 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Aug 8 13:39:33 2012
New Revision: 190228
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=190228
Log:
Don't return identity for CONST or symbolic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54157
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54202
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54202
--- Comment #2 from Thiago Macieira 2012-08-08 14:21:59
UTC ---
To be honest, I don't want false-positive warnings. The code and data are
constructed so that it never frees the non-heap object (it has a reference
count of -1). If the driver to th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54202
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2012-08-08
14:36:03 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> To be honest, I don't want false-positive warnings. The code and data are
> constructed so that it never frees the non-heap object (it has a reference
> c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54202
--- Comment #4 from Thiago Macieira 2012-08-08 14:53:13
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Note that even for the uninitialized use case we warn for functions
> that may be never executed at runtime. So - are you happy with the
> definitive warn
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54005
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Macleod 2012-08-08
15:04:21 UTC ---
I don't think that is right.
A type may not be always lock free from the compiler's perspective, so
__atomic_always_lock_free() will return false.
The compiler will issue a call
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54198
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2012-08-08
15:26:43 UTC ---
I actually think GCC is correct, A causes all member functions to be
instantiated.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54200
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski 2012-08-08
15:31:09 UTC ---
The other thing which copyrename helps is register allocation as it allows out
of ssa to coalesce some ssa names which could not do before.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54203
Bug #: 54203
Summary: ctime on INT_MAX returns wrong date
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.6
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146
--- Comment #36 from Steven Bosscher 2012-08-08
17:39:49 UTC ---
Author: steven
Date: Wed Aug 8 17:39:46 2012
New Revision: 190235
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=190235
Log:
PR middle-end/54146
* gimpify.c (gimpli
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54155
--- Comment #7 from damz 2012-08-08 17:40:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> > --- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou 2012-08-02
> > 15:17:25 UTC ---
>
> >> If I replace only the ld from GNU Binutils 2.21.x with the ld from 2.20.x
> >> then
> >>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54203
Amin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53792
--- Comment #7 from Paolo Carlini 2012-08-08
18:18:51 UTC ---
Thanks Giulio!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54204
Bug #: 54204
Summary: Wrong baseline_symbols.txt picked for x32
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54204
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52449
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52449
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64-*-linux |powerpc64-*-linux,x86_64-*l
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54202
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski 2012-08-08
19:00:58 UTC ---
Even the printf format warnings are this way too
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54205
Bug #: 54205
Summary: recursive .debug_macro inclusions
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54199
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52122
tim.vanholder at anubex dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tim.vanholder at anubex d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54188
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54188
--- Comment #6 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2012-08-08 21:43:18 UTC ---
On Wed, 8 Aug 2012, rth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> > N1370 (C11 draft) 6.5.3.4 paragraph 3 says:
> >
> > The _Alignof operator yields the alignment requirement o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54201
--- Comment #3 from Cesar Eduardo Barros 2012-08-08
23:28:52 UTC ---
Created attachment 27964
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27964
Another testcase
Another testcase. This one also shows it using two registers instead of one.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28896
--- Comment #9 from Larry Baker 2012-08-09 02:06:27 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Fixed in 4.8.
Andreas,
My application uses a 4.6.1+ compiler from Code Sourcery for ColdFire uClinux
(no longer being sponsored by Freescale). So, I have be
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28896
--- Comment #10 from Larry Baker 2012-08-09 02:16:27
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
"I traced the second ICE to the -fPIC flag, ..."
should be
"I traced the first ICE to the -fPIC flag, ..."
Larry Baker
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54206
Bug #: 54206
Summary: build in source dir breaks lto plugin detection
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54197
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146
--- Comment #33 from Richard Guenther 2012-08-08
08:09:25 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #29)
> Created attachment 27957 [details]
> Do not traverse sibling loops
>
> The idea here is to note that for a nested loop we know for sure that the loop
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50909
Roman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roman at qubyx dot com
--- Comment #2 from Roman
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52026
--- Comment #2 from TbR 2012-08-08
08:57:49 UTC ---
Created attachment 27958
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27958
Code example to trigger the supposed bug.
only the "bug" function triggers the bug, while "nobug1" and "nobug2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52026
TbR changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||slipstreamdrive at hotmail
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146
--- Comment #34 from Steven Bosscher 2012-08-08
10:10:46 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #33)
> I think you should simply move compute_global_livein to its single use
> and make it static.
Yes, and I need to add the same smarts there as in find_use
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54198
Bug #: 54198
Summary: [4.8 Regression] "error: invalid use of incomplete
type" when building Chromium
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54199
Bug #: 54199
Summary: Superfluous diagnostic "is also the name of an
intrinsic" for internal procedures
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Statu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54200
Bug #: 54200
Summary: copyrename generates wrong debuginfo
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-debug
Severity
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53792
Giulio Eulisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||giulio.eulisse at cern dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53701
--- Comment #7 from Andrey Belevantsev 2012-08-08
11:26:01 UTC ---
Created attachment 27959
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27959
proposed patch
The problem is that when checking expressions that are blocked for movement
beca
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54201
Bug #: 54201
Summary: XMM constant duplicated
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54201
--- Comment #1 from Cesar Eduardo Barros 2012-08-08
11:32:37 UTC ---
Created attachment 27961
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27961
Assembly output
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54200
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54198
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146
--- Comment #35 from Richard Guenther 2012-08-08
11:49:21 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #34)
> (In reply to comment #33)
> > I think you should simply move compute_global_livein to its single use
> > and make it static.
>
> Yes, and I need to add
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54201
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
49 matches
Mail list logo