http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58570
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot
de
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58398
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58570
--- Comment #2 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Created attachment 30962
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30962&action=edit
for a possible fix
comments?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #14 from Oleg Endo ---
Hm, maybe it would make sense to add a target specific option to allow setting
set the minimum atomic variable alignment (MINIMUM_ATOMIC_ALIGNMENT macro). If
set to 32 bit, movco.l and movli.l insns can be used
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58641
Bug ID: 58641
Summary: [4.9 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr49002-2.c
scan-assembler vmovapd[\t ]*%ymm[0-9]+,[^,]*
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58640
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58642
Bug ID: 58642
Summary: gomp regression: not "honoring" anymore task set and
numactl
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
--- Comment #13 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Sun Oct 6 13:44:47 2013
New Revision: 203228
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203228&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-06 Oleg Endo
Paolo Carlini
PR libstdc+
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58642
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Weird, can't reproduce.
/tmp/ttt
8
taskset -c 0-3 /tmp/ttt
4
ldd /tmp/ttt | grep libgomp
libgomp.so.1 =>
/usr/src/gomp-4.0/obj/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/libgomp/.libs/libgomp.so.1
(0x7fda5e2e8000)
strac
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58642
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
What exact glibc do you use? I think the earliest that supports affinity in
libgomp should be 2.3, then between that and 2.7 there were multiple header
changes that the code just attempts to deal with using #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58642
--- Comment #3 from vincenzo Innocente ---
strange indeed
rhel6: so is 2.12
or my own version
GNU C Library stable release version 2.13,
I build gcc by myself
c++ -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=c++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/afs/cern.ch/user/i/i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56060
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Sun Oct 6 14:43:07 2013
New Revision: 203229
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203229&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2013-10-06 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/56060
* pt.c (typ
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56060
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58621
Brian Grayson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58570
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58642
--- Comment #4 from vincenzo Innocente ---
24 thread machine ok
innocent@vocms19 parallel]$ c++ -Ofast -std=c++11 -fopenmp simpleOMP.cpp
[innocent@vocms19 parallel]$ ./a.out
max thread 24
[innocent@vocms19 parallel]$ taskset -c 0-3 ./a.out
max th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58226
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58643
Bug ID: 58643
Summary: Running program $SHLIB_DIR/EFSE.RecordsEngine get
error 0509-150
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58126
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Status|UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58643
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58639
vlukas at gmx dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vlukas at gmx dot de
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58226
--- Comment #4 from Vittorio Zecca ---
I could not reproduce the issue with version 4.8.2 20130920, probably
it has silently been
fixed sometime in the past.
Maybe this issue should be closed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57465
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Sun Oct 6 17:38:10 2013
New Revision: 203230
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203230&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/57465
* include/std/functional
(_Function_base::_B
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57465
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58126
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58642
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, looking at kernel sources, it seems it returns EINVAL:
if ((len * BITS_PER_BYTE) < nr_cpu_ids)
return -EINVAL;
so the question is how to find what your nr_cpu_ids is and how to (che
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58644
Bug ID: 58644
Summary: [OOP] Missing .data ref in passing a CLASS array as
actual argument to a TYPE.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58645
Bug ID: 58645
Summary: FAIL: gnat.dg/specs/linker_alias.ads (test for
errors, line 6)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58642
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Also, can you dmesg | grep 'Allowing.*CPUs'
(or grep /var/log/messages* for the same)?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57945
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
I have another test case that generates this ICE.
Source code available on request.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58646
Bug ID: 58646
Summary: ICEs initializing VLAs
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58646
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58647
Bug ID: 58647
Summary: [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE with function pointer
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58648
Bug ID: 58648
Summary: [c++11] ICE with variadic template
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
A
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58649
Bug ID: 58649
Summary: [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE with use of enum before
declaration
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58647
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58650
Bug ID: 58650
Summary: [c++11] ICE with invalid friend declaration
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58651
Bug ID: 58651
Summary: [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE with invalid initializer
list
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58126
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Sun Oct 6 21:41:19 2013
New Revision: 203232
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203232&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2013-10-06 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58126
* class.c (
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58126
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58621
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58652
Bug ID: 58652
Summary: ICE with move_alloc and unlimited polymorphic
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fort
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58652
--- Comment #1 from Vladimir Fuka ---
maybe connected:
module gen_lists
type list_node
class(*),allocatable :: item
contains
procedure :: move_alloc => list_move_alloc
end type
contains
subroutine list_move_alloc(self,i
++,fortran,lto --disable-werror
--enable-checking=release --with-gmp=/usr/local/gcc-trunk
--with-mpfr=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --with-mpc=/usr/local/gcc-trunk
--with-cloog=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.9.0 20131006 (experimental) [trunk revision 203227
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58654
Bug ID: 58654
Summary: [4.9 Regression] ICE: abort compiling
libstdc++-v3/src/c ++98/sstream-inst.cc
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58654
--- Comment #1 from John David Anglin ---
Starting program: /home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir/gcc/cc1plus -fpreprocessed
sstream-inst.ii -quiet -dumpbase sstream-inst.cc -auxbase-strip sstream-inst.o
-g -O2 -Wall -Wextra -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wabi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58638
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Richard G. ---
A workaround for this issue is to build with CFLAGS="-fPIC" CXXFLAGS="-fPIC"
(presuming that one is building with GCC), in addition to --with-pic. This
results in a compiler build that does not fail as rep
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58642
--- Comment #7 from vincenzo Innocente ---
getconf -a | grep _NPROCESSORS
_NPROCESSORS_CONF 32
_NPROCESSORS_ONLN 32
ls -l /sys/devices/system/cpu/
total 0
drwxr-xr-x 8 root root0 Sep 2 17:44 cpu0
drwxr-xr-x
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58642
--- Comment #8 from vincenzo Innocente ---
do you have access to a >32 cpu machine?
btw on XEON-PHI one can have >200 "cpus"
51 matches
Mail list logo
