Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: d...@gcc.gnu.org
/tmp/20130325/gcc/xgcc -B/tmp/20130325/gcc/
/nasfarm/dje/src/src/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/torture/vshuf-v2di.c
-fno-diagnostics-show-caret -O1 -S -o vshuf-v2di.s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56729
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc*-*-*
Status
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56730
Bug #: 56730
Summary: [Fortran 4.6, 4.7] ICE on (wrongly) referencing
polymorphic array in allocate
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56699
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56731
Bug #: 56731
Summary: [Fortran 4.7] ICE on (wrongly) referencing polymorphic
array in select type
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56726
--- Comment #2 from Chip Salzenberg 2013-03-25 21:35:19
UTC ---
I'm a bit skeptical of that. Glibc malloc alignment is 2 * sizeof(void*), and
void* in X32 is 32 bits. Unless X32 code uses the x86_64 libc, I am confused.
PS: Hi, HJ
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54659
roland at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roland at gnu dot org
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56726
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu 2013-03-25 22:07:18
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I'm a bit skeptical of that. Glibc malloc alignment is 2 * sizeof(void*), and
> void* in X32 is 32 bits. Unless X32 code uses the x86_64 libc, I am confus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50243
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54659
Diego Novillo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56726
--- Comment #4 from Chip Salzenberg 2013-03-25 22:35:57
UTC ---
If I'm reading that correctly, it seems to agree with my patch.
It looks like MALLOC_ABI_ALIGNMENT of POINTER_SIZE*2 is always either correct
or smaller than necessary, but
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56732
Bug #: 56732
Summary: ICE
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
As
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56725
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49880
--- Comment #5 from Oleg Endo 2013-03-25 23:02:04
UTC ---
Although it doesn't show up here, I've also backported the fix to the 4.7
branch and committed it as rev. 197071.
OK to close this PR?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56725
--- Comment #3 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2013-03-25
23:07:00 UTC ---
BTW, in this case, I find the output of g++ much better than that of clang++
test.cc:7:10: error: no matching function for call to 'callf'
return callf (23, 72,
^~~~
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56725
--- Comment #2 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2013-03-25
23:03:42 UTC ---
Note that there are a fair amount of calls like these in the C++ FE, and the
use is inconsistent. I guess the indentation predates the use of inform, and
this is why there are s
sion 4.9.0 20130325 (experimental) [trunk revision 197072] (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49880
--- Comment #6 from Kazumoto Kojima 2013-03-26
01:32:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> OK to close this PR?
OK with me.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56733
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 |hppa*-*-*
Host
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56733
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56712
--- Comment #4 from Bernd Edlinger
2013-03-26 06:13:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Works for me with 4.7/4.8/4.9, and 4.5 and older, but fails with 4.6.
> The bug was fixed for 4.7.0 by r180700; that change has no BZ PR entry, but
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56712
--- Comment #5 from Bernd Edlinger
2013-03-26 06:15:52 UTC ---
Created attachment 29724
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29724
backport of the above mentioned fix
101 - 122 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
