http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59554
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59545
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=52794
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I confirm that this PR is fixed by r206070, see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2013-12/msg01811.html and
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2013-12/msg01813.html.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536
--- Comment #10 from bin.cheng ---
The offending loop before IVOPT is like:
:
# var_index_1889 = PHI <1(924), var_index_983(923)>
# var_index.250_1269 = PHI <1(924), var_index.250_1959(923)>
if (var_index.250_1269 < _1237)
goto ;
el
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46991
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536
bin.cheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at codesourcery dot com,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536
--- Comment #12 from Andreas Schwab ---
-fno-auto-inc-dec avoids the crash. Dup of #52306?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536
--- Comment #13 from bin.cheng ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #12)
> -fno-auto-inc-dec avoids the crash. Dup of #52306?
It looks like, AFAICT. Only this time it's blocking bootstrap :(
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52306
--- Comment #23 from Andreas Schwab ---
*** Bug 59536 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59536
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59203
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #1)
> Thanks for catching, yep, s/t1/t2/ there.
You are welcome.
> Not sure why you mean by code rework, looks otherwise clear to me.
I am not familiar with th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59555
Bug ID: 59555
Summary: bogus error: template with C linkage with preprocessed
c++ file
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59535
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59009
--- Comment #32 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> > > Would it be possible to post the fix? TIA.
> > Committed upstream as
> > http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=196779&view=rev
> > Feel free to commit the exact same change to gcc
> > or wait
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59009
--- Comment #33 from Kostya Serebryany ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #32)
> > > > Would it be possible to post the fix? TIA.
> > > Committed upstream as
> > > http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=196779&view=rev
> > > Feel
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59009
--- Comment #34 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Feel free to commit the exact fix as in ...
Sorry, no write access.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59009
--- Comment #35 from Kostya Serebryany ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #34)
> > Feel free to commit the exact fix as in ...
>
> Sorry, no write access.
Give me 1-2 hours.
Just in case, please verify that the patch still works
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59535
--- Comment #12 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #11)
> (In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #9)
> > (In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #5)
>
> > I think major problem is in wrong alternat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50955
--- Comment #20 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to bin.cheng from comment #19)
> >
> > >not about an iv use appearing in memory reference while not marked as
> > >address_p, and can be fixed by revise the existing check condition, is
> > >it tr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40635
philipp at marek dot priv.at changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philipp at marek dot priv.at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59545
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59436
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I've looked at dozens of the failures, except for one they were all about an
expected TREE_VEC being written as 0s (i.e. ERROR_MARK) in the PCH file, the
one exception was TREE_LIST instead of TREE_VEC. But
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59009
--- Comment #36 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Give me 1-2 hours.
> Just in case, please verify that the patch still works on Mac 10.6
> (I don't have access to 10.6)
Already done: see comment 27. Anyway, I guarantee a quick feedback!-)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59556
Bug ID: 59556
Summary: Floating-point __sec_reduce_add tests not robust in
face of contraction
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40635
--- Comment #5 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to philipp from comment #4)
> I have this or a very similar problem with debian amd64 4:4.8.2-1:
>
> main.c: In function ‘main’:
> main.c:1231:23: error: ‘rv’ may be used uninitialized in this
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52306
--- Comment #24 from Mikael Pettersson ---
So where does that leave us? Disable -fauto-inc-dec by default, or try to make
m68k work with LRA (which hopefully should avoid this reload bug)?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59557
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59557
Bug ID: 59557
Summary: [4.8/4.9 Regression]
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40635
--- Comment #6 from philipp at marek dot priv.at ---
I'm trying to get a minimized file via creduce.
In case you have an experienced guess please look at src/main.c from
github.com:ClusterLabs/booth.git
44b06e6d3c9c81d287020fe017a05f1386ae5e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59557
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||chris at bubblescope dot net,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40635
--- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to philipp from comment #6)
> I'm trying to get a minimized file via creduce.
>
> In case you have an experienced guess please look at src/main.c from
>github.com:ClusterLabs/booth.git
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40635
--- Comment #9 from philipp at marek dot priv.at ---
Created attachment 31480
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31480&action=edit
main.c
not much use because of includes.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40635
--- Comment #8 from philipp at marek dot priv.at ---
I forgot to say that the uninitialized "rv" is in query_get_string_answer().
I've got a reduced main.c - but sadly there are still includes to other files,
so it won't help that much.
I'll atta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59558
Bug ID: 59558
Summary: [MSP430-gcc] CPU setup, pre start program
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40635
--- Comment #10 from philipp at marek dot priv.at ---
Well, I've found the culprit, so it's not that important to me anymore.
Getting a completely wrong code location is the problem - you don't know what
to fix, and have to do some kind of search.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59387
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Summa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52306
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52306
--- Comment #26 from Andreas Schwab ---
What does that mean, it's too late?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59387
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Seems it is SCCP that breaks this.
We have a loop like:
:
c.2_10 = (unsigned char) c_lsm.11_20;
_11 = c.2_10 + 255;
c.3_12 = (char) _11;
_14 = b_f1_lsm.12_7 + 1;
:
# c_lsm.11_20 = PHI
# b_f1_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52306
bin.cheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker.cheng at gmail dot com
--- Comment #27
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59387
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note already the chrec is {c_lsm.11_15, +, -1}_2 with char type everywhere (but
the 2 which is int, but that is irrelevant), so the information that the
decrement was performed carefully in non-wrapping type i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59104
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38183
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47016
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Any reason to keep this PR open?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18135
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Posted more than three years ago:
> Andrew,
> Do you still see this issue with current gcc trunk since...
Any reason to keep this PR open?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
bin.cheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker.cheng at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59413
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=59557
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59543
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
Priority|P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38183
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
Works on Linux/x86-64 with GCC 4.8.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59542
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59009
--- Comment #37 from Kostya Serebryany ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #36)
> > Give me 1-2 hours.
> > Just in case, please verify that the patch still works on Mac 10.6
> > (I don't have access to 10.6)
>
> Already done: see
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59541
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59559
Bug ID: 59559
Summary: ICE: invalid RTX sharing in expmed.c:expand_divmod
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59535
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization, ra
Priori
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59528
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59471
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
The reason I added this verification is that code does not expect those to
appear at non-outermost handled-component. a V_C_E around a vector type
B_F_R should have been split into two different stmts with a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59471
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59471
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59527
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59521
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59516
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mile
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59493
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59515
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58344
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milesto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59512
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59469
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59511
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59510
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59560
Bug ID: 59560
Summary: Resolution generic procedure of derived types fail
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59501
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59496
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59494
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59560
--- Comment #1 from klaas_giesbertz at hotmail dot com ---
Sorry, the 2nd argument of Init of UseBase in the 1st test should have been
target instead of pointer. In that case 'program Test' becomes the same as in
the 2nd test.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59561
Bug ID: 59561
Summary: [4.9 Regression] warning: iteration 4 invokes
undefined behavior
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59561
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59285
Yufeng Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||yufeng at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59557
--- Comment #2 from Chris Jefferson ---
Investigating
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
--- Comment #4 from bin.cheng ---
First clue.
b_lsm.11_13 is recognized as chrec {1, +, 1}_2 with the patch, thus the loop
can be vectorized now.
:
:
# b.4_30 = PHI
# prephitmp_28 = PHI
# b_lsm.11_13 = PHI
# ivtmp_46 = PHI
c.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59557
--- Comment #3 from Chris Jefferson ---
Can I just confirm I am testing this code correctly?
caj@caj-laptop ~/Downloads> g++ BVH_Example.cpp -O0
caj@caj-laptop ~/Downloads> ./a.out
Brute force distance = 0.00428018, calls = 1
BVH distance
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59562
Bug ID: 59562
Summary: __builtin_assume_aligned loses constness when used as
initializer element
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59557
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Chris Jefferson from comment #3)
> Can I just confirm I am testing this code correctly?
>
> caj@caj-laptop ~/Downloads> g++ BVH_Example.cpp -O0
> caj@caj-laptop ~/Downloads> ./a.out
> Brute forc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52306
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54694
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52370
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58746
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59115
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58007
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59198
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59414
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59224
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59561
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58007
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59559
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58410
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58344
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59115
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58746
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
1 - 100 of 199 matches
Mail list logo