http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56935
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de
2013-04-16 07:48:47 UTC ---
On Mon, 15 Apr 2013, ysrumyan at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56935
>
> --- Comment #4 from Yuri Rumyantsev 2013-04-15
-Wstrict-prototypes
-Wmissing-prototypes -Wold-style-definition -version -finhibit-size-directive
-fno-inline -fno-exceptions -fno-zero-initialized-in-bss -fno-toplevel-reorder
-fno-tree-vectorize -fno-stack-protector -fno-omit-frame-pointer -o foo.s
GNU C (GCC) version 4.9.0 20130416 (experimental)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50410
Vittorio Zecca changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.7.0 |4.8.0
--- Comment #14 from Vit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50406
Vittorio Zecca changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.7.0 |4.8.0
--- Comment #1 from Vitt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44348
Vittorio Zecca changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.5.0 |4.8.0
--- Comment #5 from Vitt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44350
Vittorio Zecca changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.5.0 |4.8.0
--- Comment #2 from Vitt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56968
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-16 08:50:35 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> > I think you should directly use
> >
> > if (rvalue->value.function.esym)
> > s2 = rvalue->value.function.esym->result;
>
> yes, I a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50069
Vittorio Zecca changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.6.1 |4.8.0
--- Comment #4 from Vitt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50392
Vittorio Zecca changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.7.0 |4.8.0
--- Comment #6 from Vitt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50402
Vittorio Zecca changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.7.0 |4.8.0
--- Comment #1 from Vitt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50539
Vittorio Zecca changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.7.0 |4.8.0
--- Comment #1 from Vitt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50541
Vittorio Zecca changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.7.0 |4.8.0
--- Comment #4 from Vitt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56968
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus 2013-04-16
08:54:19 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Ok, I have verified that this also regtests cleanly and fixes the test case
> (as
> expected). Will commit the following patch later today (unless fu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56975
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55144
Mans Rullgard changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mans at mansr dot com
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56976
Bug #: 56976
Summary: using braces to initialize a reference forces copy
construction
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCON
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56977
Bug #: 56977
Summary: gcc -Og incorrectly warns about 'constant zero length
parameter'
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56978
Bug #: 56978
Summary: memset-chk.c failure since r197671
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56969
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2013-04-16
11:13:34 UTC ---
Draft patch:
--- a/gcc/fortran/intrinsic.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/intrinsic.c
@@ -4238,3 +4238,4 @@ got_specific:
expr->value.function.isym = specific;
- gfc_intrinsic_symbo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56978
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener 2013-04-16
11:13:46 UTC ---
Related to PR56921? Can you try the attached patch?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56756
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener 2013-04-16
11:56:26 UTC ---
The issue is that
static void
execute_sm (struct loop *loop, vec exits, mem_ref_p ref)
{
...
/* Emit the load code into the latch, so that we are sure it will
be
th-fpu=vfpv3-d16 --with-float=softfp --with-thumb
target_alias=arm-none-linux-gnueabi CC=gcc --enable-languages=c,c++,lto
--no-create --no-recursion
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.9.0 20130416 (experimental) (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56979
--- Comment #1 from mgretton at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-16 12:45:38 UTC ---
Command line can be further reduced to
$ arm-none-linux-gnueabi-g++ -march=armv7-a -mfloat-abi=hard -mfpu=neon
reduced-testcase.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56979
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfir
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56857
--- Comment #3 from Ryan Mansfield 2013-04-16
13:35:47 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> ICE started happening at rev196747
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=196747
ICE no longer happens after rev197811
htt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40986
--- Comment #13 from Markus Schöpflin
2013-04-16 13:38:21 UTC ---
I get a different result for the 4.7 branch (built from gcc.git with configure
--disable-bootstrap --disable-nls --enable-languages=ada):
-> PATH="/var/tmp/build/gcc:$PATH" ADA_I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56978
Andreas Krebbel changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56921
Andreas Krebbel changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40986
--- Comment #14 from Markus Schöpflin
2013-04-16 13:45:13 UTC ---
Note that the error only shows up when language.ads contains the two pragmas as
given in the first note. They are removed when the test case is processed by
gnatchop, so you have
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56980
Bug #: 56980
Summary: Misleading note
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56981
Bug #: 56981
Summary: Slow I/O: Unformatted 5x slower, large sys component;
formatted slow as well
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56969
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2013-04-16
14:18:12 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Tue Apr 16 14:17:15 2013
New Revision: 198000
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=198000&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-04-16 Tobias Burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56969
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56982
Bug #: 56982
Summary: Bad optimization with setjmp()
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56982
--- Comment #1 from Jeroen Demeyer 2013-04-16
14:31:54 UTC ---
Created attachment 29884
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29884
Bug program (preprocessed)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56897
--- Comment #7 from Uros Bizjak 2013-04-16 15:15:14
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Hi,
>
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > Please create a self-sufficient executable testcase, following the
> > instructions
> > at [1]. I was not able
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56981
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56980
--- Comment #1 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2013-04-16
15:24:46 UTC ---
Confirmed, but I seriously doubt it has anything to do with my patch. At the
moment of warning we get:
(gdb) p debug_tree(type)
unit size
align 32 symtab 0 a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56980
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56980
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
--- Comment #3 from Man
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56980
--- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2013-04-16
15:34:56 UTC ---
while the C++ pretty-printer can:
pr56980.c:4:16: error: invalid operands of types ‘B* {aka A*}’ and ‘B* {aka
A*}’ to binary ‘operator>>’
int y = x >> x;
^
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56756
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48778
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52825
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56980
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||guest at mailinator dot com
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53822
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56982
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56982
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-04-16
16:04:10 UTC ---
At RTL time (besides it being a pessimization), the thing is that _3 is
assigned a pseudo (compared to before the change, where it had only a single
use and thus has been TERed)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56386
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56386
--- Comment #3 from Vladimir Fuka 2013-04-16
17:40:04 UTC ---
Thanks, I didn't realize they might be connected. I even forgotten I have
this bug opened when I asked.
Vladimir
Dne 16.4.2013 19:17 "burnus at gcc dot gnu.org"
napsal(a)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56983
Bug #: 56983
Summary: Label in asm deleted after call to non-returning
function
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56983
--- Comment #1 from silvioricardoc at gmail dot com 2013-04-16 18:39:50 UTC ---
Created attachment 29885
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29885
Sample bug-causing code.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56983
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56968
--- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-16 19:14:33 UTC ---
Fixed on trunk with:
Author: janus
Date: Tue Apr 16 19:07:34 2013
New Revision: 198008
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=198008&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-04
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56729
--- Comment #6 from Steven Bosscher 2013-04-16
19:48:53 UTC ---
r197942 should have fixed this properly.
I'm testing powerpc64 unix/-m32 to confirm.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52139
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|st
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56957
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56388
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56957
--- Comment #1 from Steven Bosscher 2013-04-16
20:35:02 UTC ---
Bug in the selective scheduler, merely exposed by my patch:
Breakpoint 1, fancy_abort (file=0x11017130 "../../trunk/gcc/emit-rtl.c",
line=3840, function=0x110174f8 "add_ins
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56957
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15272
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56189
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Stat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52748
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56957
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steven at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39505
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56857
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56901
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rmansfield at qnx dot com
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39505
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WONTFIX |FIXED
--- Comment #6 from Tobia
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56981
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle 2013-04-17
00:58:02 UTC ---
There is a seek inside next_record_w_unf. That function is used for DIRECT I/O.
Looks conceptually wrong to me for sequential unformatted. I won't have time
for a few days to l
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56975
Alexey Pavlov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alexpux at gmail dot com
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56984
Bug #: 56984
Summary: GCC-4.8.0 ICE in tree_vrp.c
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56957
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Belevantsev 2013-04-17
05:14:44 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Breakpoint 5, sel_remove_insn (insn=0x3fffb5da4e78, only_disconnect=false,
> full_tidying=false) at ../../trunk/gcc/sel-sched-ir.c:3938
> 3938
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56984
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56957
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo
75 matches
Mail list logo
