http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54402
--- Comment #26 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-01-03
08:52:17 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 3 08:52:10 2013
New Revision: 194834
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194834
Log:
PR debug/54402
* params.def (P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43961
--- Comment #9 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-01-03
08:54:35 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Mikael, ping on this patch from June 2010 ... what happened in testing?
I've included this patch in my local 4.6-based branch since June 2010, a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55832
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse 2013-01-03 08:56:47
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> I've slightly adjusted the testcase, so that it at least doesn't violate
> strict
> aliasing, unfortunately without the uninitialized c it doesn't trig
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55832
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-01-03
09:02:51 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 3 09:02:41 2013
New Revision: 194836
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194836
Log:
PR tree-optimization/55832
* fo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55838
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-01-03
09:05:49 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 3 09:05:43 2013
New Revision: 194837
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194837
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/55838
* lo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55832
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55838
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.0
Summary|[4.6/4.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55855
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55855
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[OOP] incorrect warning |[OOP] incorrect warning
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55852
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55854
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55852
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|internal compiler error: in |[4.6/4.7/4.8 regression]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55848
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener 2013-01-03
09:45:26 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 3 09:45:18 2013
New Revision: 194839
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194839
Log:
2013-01-03 Richard Biener
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55848
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55856
Bug #: 55856
Summary: ICE on tuple with rvalue ref member
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55857
Bug #: 55857
Summary: [4.8 Regression] ICE: verify_ssa failed
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55857
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55857
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener 2013-01-03
10:50:26 UTC ---
One that reproduces the checking failure:
void foo (int *data, unsigned len, const int qlp_coeff[],
unsigned order, int lp, int residual[])
{
int i;
int sum
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55852
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2013-01-03
11:01:18 UTC ---
Revision 162456 (2010-07-23) is OK, revision 1635293 (2010-08-24) gives a
segmentation fault.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55855
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55852
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55852
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres 2013-01-03
11:13:19 UTC ---
gfc_build_intrinsic_call has been introduced at revision 162648.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55851
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |c
--- Comment #6 from Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55707
--- Comment #3 from Rainer Emrich 2013-01-03
12:15:35 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Please post patch to ML. That is a trivial one.
> Btw do you have made already paper-work with FSF?
Patch posted to the ML http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55858
Bug #: 55858
Summary: When scalarizing contiguous whole-arrays, consider
folding into a single loop
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55859
Bug #: 55859
Summary: Mention -Og/-Ofast in "error: argument to '-O' should
be a non-negative integer"
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55857
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener 2013-01-03
12:34:39 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 3 12:34:34 2013
New Revision: 194850
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194850
Log:
2013-01-03 Richard Biener
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55857
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55859
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55763
--- Comment #12 from Tobias Burnus 2013-01-03
12:55:23 UTC ---
For another failure, see PR 55854.
(In reply to comment #10)
> I have a simple case where CLASS(*) leads to an ICE.
> If it doesn't fit here, please feel free to move it els
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55763
--- Comment #13 from Tobias Burnus 2013-01-03
13:03:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> Proposed patch:
Which fails with
gfc_typename(): Undefined type
for
contains
subroutine foo
type t
end type t
class(*), allocatable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55854
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2013-01-03
13:03:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I think it's the same as PR55763 comment 10.
Seemingly not - at least with the patch from PR55763 comment 12, this example
crashes in:
#0 build
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52123
--- Comment #7 from Rainer Emrich 2013-01-03
13:28:51 UTC ---
Patch posted to the ML http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-01/msg00114.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55860
Bug #: 55860
Summary: Turn segmented iteration into nested loops
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimiz
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55861
Bug #: 55861
Summary: [C++11] `std::shared_future::get' is not
const-qualified
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: antoine.balest...@gmail.com
Hi ! The following testcase makes GCC 4.8.0 as of 20130103 crash at -O2.
It may be related to PR55348 (which was probably a dup anyway).
$ cat antic.c
int g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55861
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55863
Bug #: 55863
Summary: Fails to fold (i + 2) - (i + 1) to 1
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55863
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55854
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2013-01-03
14:46:54 UTC ---
The problem seems to be the "gfc_class_null_initializer", where "ts" is
unlimited polymorphic and "init_expr" is of type "__class__$tar_a" (and
EXPR_NULL). The latter leads to t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55851
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55864
Bug #: 55864
Summary: Optimization cause asm code to wrong behaviour
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55864
--- Comment #1 from beldmit at nm dot ru 2013-01-03 15:10:07 UTC ---
Created attachment 29077
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29077
The bug representation code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55864
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55851
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55855
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assig
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55865
Bug #: 55865
Summary: [4.8 Regression] vect-outer-fir-big-array.c vectorizer
failure
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55865
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc*-*-*
Status
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55763
--- Comment #14 from Tobias Burnus 2013-01-03
15:44:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> + c->ts.type = ts->type = BT_VOID;
Ups. The "ts->type =" has to be deleted to fix the failure of comment 13.
* * *
The followin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55857
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener 2013-01-03
15:57:25 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 3 15:57:15 2013
New Revision: 194856
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194856
Log:
2013-01-03 Richard Biener
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55865
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55855
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55855
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-03 16:15:07 UTC ---
Author: janus
Date: Thu Jan 3 16:14:54 2013
New Revision: 194857
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194857
Log:
2013-01-03 Janus Weil
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55860
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43961
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[ARM thumb] "branch out of |[4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55862
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55853
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53137
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kyle.t.konrad at gmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55348
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55823
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55856
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55823
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka 2013-01-03
16:26:16 UTC ---
The following patch to devirtualize before updating jump functions solves the
testcase but I am not at all sure it is correct.
Index: ipa-prop.c
=
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55728
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55264
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka 2013-01-03
16:29:49 UTC ---
Martin, I guess this is "yours". I have no idea here ;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55851
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener 2013-01-03
16:32:04 UTC ---
Ehm. (In reply to comment #8)
> Created attachment 29078 [details]
> gcc48-pr55851.patch
>
> Untested patch (which I don't like very much, but we can't even use something
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55864
--- Comment #3 from beldmit at nm dot ru 2013-01-03 16:33:02 UTC ---
If this case is better to reproduce the problem or I completely do not
understand the asm usage?
The mmx registers and operations are used to speedup the 64-bit xor.
v
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48065
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka 2013-01-03
16:33:29 UTC ---
Hmm, rejecting inlines late at ltrans stage really is problem as discussed
earlier - we make assumptions on the optimizations of constant parameters and
we won't export offline fu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55728
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2013-01-03
16:35:46 UTC ---
Yes, I would have done it already but was taking a break from writing any code
over xmas!
This one needs a new export from the lib, but that's OK, I bumped the version
to 6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48065
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka 2013-01-03
16:37:00 UTC ---
Hmm, rejecting inlines late at ltrans stage really is problem as discussed
earlier - we make assumptions on the optimizations of constant parameters and
we won't export offline co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55866
Bug #: 55866
Summary: [4.8 Regression] #include in C++11 mode
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48065
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener 2013-01-03
16:40:48 UTC ---
We definitely should be able to make it work. We can simply inline
abort () ;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55707
--- Comment #4 from Kai Tietz 2013-01-03 16:47:48
UTC ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Thu Jan 3 16:47:37 2013
New Revision: 194859
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194859
Log:
2013-01-02 Rainer Emrich
PR b
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55707
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53650
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill 2013-01-03
16:51:51 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jan 3 16:51:41 2013
New Revision: 194860
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194860
Log:
PR c++/53650
* call.c (type_has
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53650
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.7/4.8 Regression] large |[4.7 Regression] large
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55763
--- Comment #15 from Tobias Burnus 2013-01-03
16:54:03 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> type(t), target :: x
> class(*), pointer :: ptr2 => x
TODO: Check whether that would be also valid if "x" is not SAVE (here it is as
"x"
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55466
--- Comment #13 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-03
16:54:07 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Jan 3 16:53:54 2013
New Revision: 194861
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194861
Log:
Fix ChangeLog entry for PR lto/5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55866
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2013-01-03
16:55:04 UTC ---
It's an error in the package and only worked "by accident" because
$PREFIX/include/c++/4.x.y/backward is in the include path, to allow
to be found.
The only supported way
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55728
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2013-01-03
16:59:38 UTC ---
Eh, eh, indeed. Are you willing to take care of it over the next couple of
weeks? Otherwise let me know, I can, but not now, I'm trying to catch up about
too many things at once
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55856
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55866
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2013-01-03
17:01:12 UTC ---
The header even says so, and has done so for years:
/** @file backward/auto_ptr.h
* This is an internal header file, included by other library headers.
* Do not attempt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55867
Bug #: 55867
Summary: Segmentation fault on DEALLOCATION of type with
ALLOCATABLE components
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55866
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55712
--- Comment #8 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-03 17:16:30 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Jan 3 17:16:08 2013
New Revision: 194862
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194862
Log:
PR target/55712
* config
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55868
Bug #: 55868
Summary: gfortran generates for CLASS(*) __m_MOD___vtab__$tar
on NO_DOLLAR_IN_LABEL systems
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55867
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55854
--- Comment #4 from Damian Rouson 2013-01-03
18:11:56 UTC ---
Apparently an ICE also occurs if the argument intent is removed but "type" is
replaced by "class." See below. Is this fixed by the patch in comment 3?
Damian
$ cat ice_on
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55856
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill 2013-01-03
18:31:07 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jan 3 18:30:58 2013
New Revision: 194864
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194864
Log:
PR c++/55856
* semantics.c (bui
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55856
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill 2013-01-03
18:31:29 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jan 3 18:31:23 2013
New Revision: 194865
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194865
Log:
PR c++/55856
* semantics.c (bui
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55856
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill 2013-01-03
18:34:55 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jan 3 18:34:48 2013
New Revision: 194866
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194866
Log:
PR c++/55856
* g++.dg/init/arra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55856
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55728
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|un
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55847
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55854
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu 2013-01-03 19:03:25
UTC ---
I got
==23584== ERROR: AddressSanitizer: heap-buffer-overflow on address
0x7f03d1089238 at pc 0xb9284a bp 0x7fffbd507b60 sp 0x7fffbd507b58
READ of size 1 at 0x7f03d1089238 thread T
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55728
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|paolo.carlini at oracle dot |
|com, redi at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55854
--- Comment #6 from Damian Rouson 2013-01-03
19:12:09 UTC ---
Awesome -- thanks! Please let me know once this hits the trunk so I can
request an update of the macports build and try it out.
Damian
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In repl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55059
--- Comment #3 from Tom Tromey 2013-01-03 19:29:28
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> So, where do we stand with this? Can GDB be changed to cope with this, or do
> you think it isn't valid DWARF?
It seems strange at least.
I don't ha
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54694
--- Comment #6 from Toralf Förster 2013-01-03
19:35:16 UTC ---
As long as no fixed gcc version is released - in Gentoo land we do have this
work around for now :
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=434908#c11
(Workaround: Append -mno-avx t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55842
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
1 - 100 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
