http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56961
Bug #: 56961
Summary: cycle between do_spec_1() / process_brace_body() /
handle_braces()
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56961
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE: cycle between |Segfault with volatile
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56961
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56897
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56961
--- Comment #3 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko 2013-04-15
08:01:24 UTC ---
gcc-4.7.2 / Fedora 18 FAIL too
gcc version 4.7.2 20121109 (Red Hat 4.7.2-8) (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56962
Bug #: 56962
Summary: [4.8/4.9 Regression] SLSR caused miscompilation of
fftw
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56962
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56963
Bug #: 56963
Summary: GCC 4.8.0 LTO issue: lto1: internal compiler error: in
add_symbol_to_partition, at lto/lto-partition.c:284
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56890
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou 2013-04-15
08:35:50 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Mon Apr 15 08:28:41 2013
New Revision: 197958
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=197958&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/56890
* config/sp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56890
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou 2013-04-15
08:36:16 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Mon Apr 15 08:31:12 2013
New Revision: 197959
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=197959&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/56890
* config/sp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56890
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou 2013-04-15
08:36:36 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Mon Apr 15 08:33:56 2013
New Revision: 197960
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=197960&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/56890
* config/s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56890
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56963
Václav Zeman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
Target|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56963
--- Comment #2 from Václav Zeman 2013-04-15
08:39:40 UTC ---
None of the tricks (-fno-reorder-blocks, -r, -nostdlib) help here. It still
fails the same way.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50686
--- Comment #41 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2013-04-15 09:27:09 UTC ---
> I'm currently running a bootstrap of gcc 4.7.3 with this patch applied
> and without any special --enable-checking=release. It just entered
> stage2, so
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53478
Aron Ahmadia changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aron at ahmadia dot net
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56957
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56962
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56955
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener 2013-04-15
10:19:22 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > I think it is talking about the memory returned by malloc/calloc will not
> > point
> > to another memory location whi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56952
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i686-pc-cygwin
Ho
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54078
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56947
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56944
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56935
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56933
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56964
Bug #: 56964
Summary: ICE with -fno-sync-libcalls when target lacks atomic
operations
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCON
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53478
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56933
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener 2013-04-15
11:18:43 UTC ---
/* { dg-do run } */
extern void abort (void);
void __attribute__((noinline,noclone))
foo (double *b, double *d, double *f)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 1024; i++)
{
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56965
Bug #: 56965
Summary: nonoverlapping_component_refs_p is bogus
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #40 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2013-04-15 12:51:20 UTC ---
> --- Comment #39 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-04-12
> 16:13:20 UTC ---
> Can this be reproduced with 4.7.3, 4.8.0 or trunk?
At most on the 4.7 branch: the T
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56919
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus 2013-04-15
12:57:51 UTC ---
Author: jb
Date: Mon Apr 15 12:43:15 2013
New Revision: 197968
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=197968&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 56919 Improve SYSTEM_CLOCK intrinsic on
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56816
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56962
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt 2013-04-15
13:19:53 UTC ---
The fix looks correct to me. Thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56966
Bug #: 56966
Summary: [4.7 Regression] wrong warning with -Werror (wrong
code without Werror?)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Stat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56967
Bug #: 56967
Summary: Add build exception
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56967
--- Comment #1 from Yoshinori Sato
2013-04-15 13:39:23 UTC ---
Add exceptions.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56968
Bug #: 56968
Summary: Issue with a procedure defined with a generic name
returning procedure pointer
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56933
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56969
Bug #: 56969
Summary: ISO_C_BINDING regression with current trunk
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56970
Bug #: 56970
Summary: SFINAE does not apply correctly to sizeof.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56935
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #3 from Ri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56969
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56968
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Key
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56921
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener 2013-04-15
14:46:49 UTC ---
Created attachment 29877
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29877
patch papering over the issue with TODO_do_not_ggc_collect
Patch papering over (restoring
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56955
--- Comment #4 from Dan Gohman 2013-04-15 14:53:06
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Well, it _is_ actually about the content. There must be no way to compute
> a valid pointer to another object from the contents of the pointed-to
> mem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56969
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56935
--- Comment #4 from Yuri Rumyantsev 2013-04-15
14:54:50 UTC ---
Richard,
both subq's are accessed the same cash line and it means that after 1st store
tthe 2nd load will stall till finish updating data cash (this is not exact
explanatio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56962
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56968
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres 2013-04-15
15:02:48 UTC ---
For the record, gfortran 4.4.6 compiles the test, but not 4.5.3, 4.6.4, 4.7.3,
4.8.0, and trunk.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56970
Fan Yu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |major
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56921
--- Comment #12 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-15 15:26:10 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Created attachment 29877 [details]
> patch papering over the issue with TODO_do_not_ggc_collect
>
> Patch papering over (restoring no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56890
--- Comment #12 from Rainer Jung 2013-04-15
15:34:42 UTC ---
I tried the sparc.c patch on top of GCC 4.7.3 and it works.
Thanks for fixing :)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56971
Bug #: 56971
Summary: GCC claims a friend function to be overloaded, but it
isn't
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56971
--- Comment #1 from henn...@still-hidden.de 2013-04-15 16:19:21 UTC ---
> gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.8.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56972
Bug #: 56972
Summary: Missing "may be used uninitialized" warning for
"obvious" uninitialized
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Sta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56972
Paul Pluzhnikov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56970
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56968
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[F03] Issue with a |[4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56968
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-15 17:16:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Regtesting now ...
Completed successfully. Will commit to trunk as obvious ...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56966
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2013-04-15
17:34:20 UTC ---
I don't think this is wrong code at all. The warning is correct for the code
as given but wrong for memset in general.
The code looks like:
void set_offset_array(size_t le
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56968
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56605
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56973
Bug #: 56973
Summary: crash when capturing variables in nested lambdas
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56968
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-15 18:35:56 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > Index: gcc/fortran/expr.c
> > ===
> > --- gcc/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56972
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppluzhnikov at google dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56921
--- Comment #13 from Pat Haugen 2013-04-15
19:37:27 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #11)
> > Created attachment 29877 [details]
> > patch papering over the issue with TODO_do_not_ggc_collect
> >
> > Patch paper
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56974
Bug #: 56974
Summary: c++ ref qualifiers not represented in DWARF
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55414
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51432
--- Comment #5 from Tomohiro Kashiwada 2013-04-16
03:33:22 UTC ---
no problem at gcc-4.7.3. it works fine.
$ rx-elf-g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=rx-elf-g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/home/kikairoya/rx/libexec/gcc/rx-elf/4.7.3/lto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56897
--- Comment #4 from Martynas Venckus 2013-04-16
04:11:52 UTC ---
Hi,
(In reply to comment #3)
> Please create a self-sufficient executable testcase, following the
> instructions
> at [1]. I was not able to confirm the problem from the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56897
--- Comment #5 from Martynas Venckus 2013-04-16
04:16:39 UTC ---
Created attachment 29878
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29878
ab-pre.tgz
> gcc a.c; ./a.out
0d0a
0d0a0401
0d0a0401
> gcc -O a.c; ./a.out
0d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56897
--- Comment #6 from Martynas Venckus 2013-04-16
04:18:16 UTC ---
Created attachment 29879
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29879
ab-post.tgz
> gcc a.c; ./a.out
0d0a
0d0a0401
0d0a0401
> gcc -O a.c; ./a.out
0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56934
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51432
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
75 matches
Mail list logo
