http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58367
Bug ID: 58367
Summary: [4.9 Regression] lto/pgo bootstrap failure
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53808
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
With Jason's patch I get:
In undef.cpp we devirtualize to _ZN3fooD2Ev:
Type: function
Visibility: external public
References:
Referring:
Function flags:
Called by: _ZN3barD2Ev/8 (1.00 per call)
Ca
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57503
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #7 from Richard Bien
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58367
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58368
Bug ID: 58368
Summary: [4.9 regression] bootstrap comparison failure in
expr.o and i386.o on x86_64-linux
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58359
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58349
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58346
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid,
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58367
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Created attachment 30769
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30769&action=edit
unreduced testcase
markus@x4 gcc % /var/tmp/gcc_build_dir/./prev-gcc/cc1plus -quiet -O2
-fprofile-use -fno-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58346
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
I wonder what
struct U {};
static struct U b[6];
int foo (struct U *p, struct U *q)
{
return q - p;
}
int main()
{
return foo (&b[0], &b[4]);
}
is expected to do. It raises a division by zero exceptio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58346
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
*** Bug 58345 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58345
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58344
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58343
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58342
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Depends o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58368
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Possibly related to PR58340?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58368
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58045
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58252
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58294
--- Comment #12 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 30770
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30770&action=edit
proposed fix
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58342
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58294
--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka ---
The problem here is the abnormal edge of setjmp not being copied around by
gimple_ic. This bug is there since earlytimes of tree-ssa ;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58223
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 9 09:47:24 2013
New Revision: 202385
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202385&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-09-09 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2013-08-30
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58294
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #14
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57685
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 9 09:48:43 2013
New Revision: 202386
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202386&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-09-09 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2013-08-29
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57656
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 9 09:49:54 2013
New Revision: 202387
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202387&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-09-09 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2013-09-03
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57521
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 9 09:51:18 2013
New Revision: 202388
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202388&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-09-09 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2013-08-27
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58368
--- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson ---
Applying r202379 didn't fix the comparison failure, but reverting r202345 did.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57685
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58223
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58364
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58294
--- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka ---
Your fault then. I suppose one can reproduce same problem with non-local gotos
by inlining C++ function into one with nested function...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58294
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
richi has introduced them, not me, but that is just a detail ;).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58325
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.4
Summary|Spurious
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58325
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58362
--- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini ---
I sent the simple patch and apparently people would rather prefer fixing
location_of to not do t = DECL_CONTEXT (t) for PARM_DECLs, likewise the C
front-end of course, in such a way that '+' works and we don't
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58362
--- Comment #10 from Paolo Carlini ---
Nope, sorry, the C front-end is already fine, thus I guess we really want to
change location_of in the C++ front-end.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58361
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58369
Bug ID: 58369
Summary: [4.8/4.9 regression] ICE in subreg_get_info when
compiling boost for m68k-linux
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58362
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|hubicka at uc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58326
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Ok, so for one, fix_bb_placements for the case of moved subloop (headers):
if (from->loop_father->header == from)
{
/* Subloop header, maybe move the loop upward. */
if (!f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58207
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58294
--- Comment #17 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Mon Sep 9 12:09:50 2013
New Revision: 202389
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202389&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/58294
* value-prof.c (gimple_ic): Copy also abnormal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58207
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57748
--- Comment #35 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Well, this bug seems to have a symmetical twin on the read side.
In the above example, if I add this:
if (x->xx[0].b != 3.14F || x->xx[1].a != 0x123456789ABCDEF)
abort ();
this gets compiled:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58342
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58340
--- Comment #17 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
*** Bug 58342 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57735
--- Comment #8 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Mon Sep 9 13:11:45 2013
New Revision: 202397
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202397&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc/]
2013-09-09 Kyrylo Tkachov
PR target/57735
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56535
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I confirm that this PR has been "fixed" by revision 199409 (r199408 gives
ICEs).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57735
--- Comment #9 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Mon Sep 9 13:16:44 2013
New Revision: 202398
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202398&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-09-09 Kyrylo Tkachov
PR target/57735
* g++.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57735
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58326
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 9 13:18:38 2013
New Revision: 202399
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202399&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-09-09 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/58326
* cfgloopmanip.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58326
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Version|unknown
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56892
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58370
Bug ID: 58370
Summary: pre compiled headers failure on NetBSD/sparc64
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: pre
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58363
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini ---
pretty printing issue fixed for 4.9.0 in r202401:
58363.C:6:11: note: cannot convert ‘m.~f’ (type ‘void’) to type ‘int’
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58362
--- Comment #12 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Sep 9 13:39:47 2013
New Revision: 202402
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202402&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2013-09-09 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58362
* error.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58362
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58370
--- Comment #1 from Martin Husemann ---
The fatal error seems to happen because NetBSD uses the default HAVE_MMAP_FILE
implementation of gt_pch_get_address and gt_pch_use_address instead of specific
host hooks.
Looking at the existing host hook i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44107
--- Comment #21 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
*** Bug 55956 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55956
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58370
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Martin Husemann from comment #1)
> The fatal error seems to happen because NetBSD uses the default
> HAVE_MMAP_FILE implementation of gt_pch_get_address and gt_pch_use_address
> instead of specif
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58370
--- Comment #3 from Martin Husemann ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> Probably because nobody submitted and tested a NetBSD implementation.
You mean an evil hack to try to avoid the relocation (like all existing host
hooks seem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43452
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Sep 9 14:31:16 2013
New Revision: 202404
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202404&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-09-09 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/43452
* doc/invoke.te
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43452
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58371
Bug ID: 58371
Summary: internal compiler error: in
ipcp_verify_propagated_values, at ipa-cp.c:892
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57963
Andreas Krebbel changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56535
--- Comment #7 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Current trunk still fails with the same error:
/var/tmp/gcc_build_dir/./prev-gcc/xg++ -B/var/tmp/gcc_build_dir/./prev-gcc/
-B/usr/local/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ -nostdinc++
-B/var/tmp/gcc_build_dir
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58372
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58346
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
I think some of the uses of the zero-size-objects extension are ones for
which making an array of such objects is reasonable, but it makes sense to
give an error for trying to subtract point
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58372
Bug ID: 58372
Summary: internal compiler error: ix86_compute_fra > me_layout
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58106
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43452
--- Comment #7 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Sep 9 14:47:21 2013
New Revision: 202405
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202405&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-09-09 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/43452
* doc/invoke.te
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58325
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Sep 9 17:12:15 2013
New Revision: 202411
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202411&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/58325
* init.c (build_vec_delete): Call mark_rvalue_use on ba
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58358
--- Comment #15 from Mitsuru Kariya ---
Created attachment 30775
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30775&action=edit
Patch
For your convenience, I attached a patch for this problem.
This algorithm is always scanned to reverse o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58325
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Sep 9 17:12:50 2013
New Revision: 202412
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202412&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/58325
* init.c (build_vec_delete): Call mark_rvalue_use on ba
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58364
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58325
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression]|[4.7 Regression] Spurious
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58373
Bug ID: 58373
Summary: [4.9 Regression] g++: internal compiler error:
Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58358
--- Comment #17 from Paolo Carlini ---
Two nits: in the new testcase, remember to declare the test variable. Also, we
are standardizing on -std=gnu++11.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58082
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||avr
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58364
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Sep 9 17:11:05 2013
New Revision: 202410
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202410&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/58364
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (init_range_entry):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58364
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Sep 9 17:09:59 2013
New Revision: 202409
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202409&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/58364
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (init_range_entry):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57931
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58358
--- Comment #16 from Paolo Carlini ---
Thanks Chris, but I almost missed the patch. Please send it to the mailing
list, thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58340
--- Comment #18 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
I'm seeing ia64 fail with an insn does not match constraints failure when the
stage2 compiler builds the stage2 C++ runtime. And that's *with* the fix I
checked in last night. That smells like stage1 mis-c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58374
Bug ID: 58374
Summary: Wrong target check in configure.ac in libvtv
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58327
--- Comment #4 from Ulrich Weber ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #2)
> For what it is worth: It works under x86-64 Linux with GCC 4.9.
>
> I assume that you do not link SDL2 but you just #include the file - is that
> correct?
I use t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58327
--- Comment #3 from Ulrich Weber ---
Thank you for the reply. Changing the include order to
#include "SDL2\SDL.h"
#include
extern "C" {
#include "quadmath.h"
}
gives me the same wrong result.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58366
Jonathan Coe changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jbcoe at me dot com
--- Comment #2 from Jo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58343
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Zhendong,
Thanks for the testcase. What's happening here is the code to allow threading
through a simple forwarder block exposes an opportunity to build a
significantly deeper jump threading path than was p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44107
--- Comment #22 from David Fang ---
Do one of these apple libunwind sources (0.30, 0.35.1) correspond to what's
bundled in libgcc_s in darwin8,9,10?
http://opensource.apple.com/tarballs/libunwind/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58366
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Coe ---
Yes, I've built on OS X 10.8.4 using a macports build of GCC 4.8.1.
I've tried adding -pthread when building - it makes no difference to the
crashing.
19 of 20 runs on my machine crash. I think if you managed 1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58366
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jbcoe at me dot com|jwakely.gcc at gmail
dot com
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58366
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iains at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58366
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
On x86_64-apple-darwin10, if I compile the test with -std=c++11
-fsanitize=address (w/wo -pthread), I get
==60580== ERROR: AddressSanitizer: heap-use-after-free on address
0x60080001bfe8 at pc 0x12
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58366
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini ---
In my opinion, the only hope to make progress about this issue is that somebody
knowledgeable about that target reduces the test to 20/30 lines of code with no
includes. Because, as is, with hundreds of kbytes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58366
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Coe ---
I've pared down the example. The crash is much harder to reproduce now (maybe 1
in 20 runs). Please find code and crash log attached.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58375
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|peter at stegemann dot net |
Severity|blocker
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58366
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Coe ---
Created attachment 30780
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30780&action=edit
OSX 10.8.4 Crash log from smaller program crash
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
