http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60718
--- Comment #2 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Hmm...
adding the option -fno-strict-aliasing generates correct code at -O2 and -O3.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60725
Bug ID: 60725
Summary: [-Wreturn-type] false positive in trivial switch
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60721
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
IMHO we need a flag on each gimple call whether that call instance is supposed
to be 'leaf' or not, similar to how we have noreturn and nothrow flags here.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60724
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60714
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
std::basic_stringbuf is not a type, it's a template.
std::basic_stringbuf is a type, so std::basic_stringbuf::int_type
would be a type
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60711
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan W
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38757
Mark Wielaard changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60726
Bug ID: 60726
Summary: [AArch64] pr40074.c regression after intrinsics a53
tuning
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38757
--- Comment #5 from Mark Wielaard ---
Patch has been discussed on the patches list a couple of times in the past, but
not yet applied:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-03/msg00858.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-04/msg00991.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60727
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
eventually this is already fixed (cannot reproduce in my development tree - but
that has a load of patches, including LTO ones).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60727
Bug ID: 60727
Summary: ICE in ipcp_verify_propagated_values, at ipa-cp.c:892
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60723
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60363
--- Comment #12 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Apr 1 09:56:29 2014
New Revision: 208980
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208980&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/60363
* gcc.target/tree-ssa/ssa-dom-thread-4.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60726
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
--- Comment #16 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Tue Apr 1 10:19:06 2014
New Revision: 208983
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208983&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-04-01 Dominique d'Humieres
Rainer Orth
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60726
--- Comment #2 from Yvan Roux ---
I don't observe the regression in aarch64-none-elf on my side too. I'm looking
for the configuration...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60604
--- Comment #13 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Tue Apr 1 10:38:19 2014
New Revision: 208984
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208984&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR rtl-optimization/60604
* recog.c (general
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60604
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60726
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Passes for me on a native aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu test run with r208953,
which contains the tuning patches.
Are you sure this is not an environment issue with a model or something?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60727
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Can be reproduced with http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-03/msg01237.html
ontop of r208807 and the following reduced testcase:
typedef long unsigned int size_t;
class JSCell;
class JSObject;
class X;
cl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60726
--- Comment #4 from Yvan Roux ---
I just find the logs from the build farm, and it is indeed a qemu uncaught
signal. Sorry for the false alert !
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60726
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60721
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60721
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60728
Bug ID: 60728
Summary: recover() should not work in recursive deferred
fucntions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60728
Dominik Vogt changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60721
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60721
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60449
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60449
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> *** Bug 60721 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
See there for another proposed fix to retain per-call 'leaf' (well,
no-abnormal-goto) status.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60640
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 32513
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32513&action=edit
Miscompiled run time testcase
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
>
> I still see the old testcase only
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60449
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #9)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> > *** Bug 60721 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
>
> See there for another proposed fix to retain
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60363
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||xfail
Priority|P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60640
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
This one has them all, in addition to fixing a real problem:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg00016.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60729
Bug ID: 60729
Summary: Compiler failure for combination of -ftrapv and -O3:
compiler error: in prepare_cmp_insn
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60729
--- Comment #1 from rppawlo at sandia dot gov ---
Created attachment 32515
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32515&action=edit
output file generated with -save-temps
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60729
--- Comment #2 from rppawlo at sandia dot gov ---
Created attachment 32516
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32516&action=edit
error file generated from compiler failure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.8/4.9 Regression] Wrong |[4.8 Regression] Wrong
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60725
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60729
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60704
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson ---
Author: rth
Date: Tue Apr 1 14:40:27 2014
New Revision: 208989
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208989&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/60704
* config/i386/i386.md (*float2_sse): Leave the se
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60650
Vladimir Makarov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32562
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60716
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60650
--- Comment #11 from Yvan Roux ---
Thanks for the analysis Vladimir, let me know if I can help you for the
validation.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60723
Nicholas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicholas.ormrod at hotmail dot
com
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60730
Bug ID: 60730
Summary: 'Round of a fixed point type incorrectly truncates its
operand instead of rounding it
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60730
Georg changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||georggcc at googlemail dot com
--- Comment #1 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=378
Doug Dawson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Doug at CSFi dot com
--- Comment #10 from Dou
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=378
--- Comment #11 from David Edelsohn ---
Recent releases of GCC are built with linker options to allow larger data
section. Are the user process limits (ulimit) set large enough? One could
rebuild GCC cc1 and cc1plus with even larger -bmaxdata value
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60704
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60727
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
What happens is that we do not remove an unreachable cgraph_node. We
don't do it because the node has used_from_other_partition set which I
assume is always bogus at the beginning of WPA (moreover, the node i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60704
--- Comment #5 from Richard Henderson ---
Author: rth
Date: Tue Apr 1 16:39:18 2014
New Revision: 208990
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208990&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/60704
* gcc.dg/pr60704.c: New file.
Added:
trunk/g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60731
Bug ID: 60731
Summary: dynamic library not getting reinitialized on multiple
calls to dlopen()
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55794
--- Comment #4 from Cary Coutant ---
> On hppa64-hp-hpux11.11, I don't see any debug information at all unless
> I add "-g" to compile options.
The dg-options line adds -g2 -dA to the compile options.
In the assembly output you posted, the two t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55794
--- Comment #5 from Cary Coutant ---
(In reply to Janis Johnson from comment #1)
> For arm-none-eabi the line that is recorded is 33 rather than 30.
>
> I see from gcc-testresults that the test also fails for moxie-elf,
> bfin-rtems, and m32r-rte
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41174
--- Comment #18 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Apr 1 17:28:29 2014
New Revision: 208991
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208991&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Core DR 475
PR c++/41174
PR c++/59224
* libsupc++/eh_throw.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59224
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Apr 1 17:28:29 2014
New Revision: 208991
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208991&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Core DR 475
PR c++/41174
PR c++/59224
* libsupc++/eh_throw.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59224
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.8.3 |4.7.4
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60727
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
OK, the bit is actually calculated when streaming the node out (ugh)
in the following way:
bp_pack_value (&bp, tag == LTO_symtab_analyzed_node
&& symtab_get_symbol_partitioning_class (node) == SYMB
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60642
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Apr 1 17:49:38 2014
New Revision: 208992
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208992&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60642
* decl2.c (is_late_template_attribute): Don't defer abi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60713
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55794
--- Comment #6 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 4/1/2014 1:04 PM, ccoutant at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> The patch that this test case was part of was supposed to fix that problem by
> adding a call to debug_hooks->source_line from assemble_th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60708
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55794
--- Comment #7 from ccoutant at google dot com ---
> but the change is no longer in the current 4.9 code.
Ah, right. See PR 54499 and this thread:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-11/msg00706.html
-cary
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60732
Bug ID: 60732
Summary: FAIL: g++.dg/ext/altivec-7.C -std=* scan-assembler
_Z3fooDv*
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=378
--- Comment #12 from Doug Dawson ---
(In reply to David Edelsohn from comment #11)
> Recent releases of GCC are built with linker options to allow larger data
> section. Are the user process limits (ulimit) set large enough? One could
> rebuild GCC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55794
--- Comment #8 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 4/1/2014 2:17 PM, ccoutant at google dot com wrote:
> Ah, right. See PR 54499 and this thread:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-11/msg00706.html
I think I see what's needed in arm.c.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60708
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Apr 1 19:14:00 2014
New Revision: 208996
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208996&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60708
* call.c (build_array_conv): Call complete_type.
Added
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60713
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Apr 1 19:13:50 2014
New Revision: 208995
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208995&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60713
* typeck2.c (PICFLAG_SIDE_EFFECTS): New.
(picflag_f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60713
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.9.0
Summary|[4.8/4.9 regress
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60708
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.9.0
Summary|[4.8/4.9 Regress
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60642
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60495
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60374
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60657
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #6 fro
--enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.9.0 20140401 (experimental) [trunk revision 208971] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -O3 small.c; a.out
$ gcc-4.8 -flto -O3 small.c; a.out
$
$ gcc-trunk -flto -O3 small.c
small.c: In function ‘main’:
small.c:12:1: error: definition in block 10 follows the
-wrapper
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-trunk/configure --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk
--enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.9.0 20140401 (experimental) [trunk revision 208971] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-4.8 -O3 small2.c; a.out
$
$ gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60734
Bug ID: 60734
Summary: Undefined behavior in g++-v4/bits/stl_tree.h
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libst
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60374
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60374
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Apr 1 21:25:20 2014
New Revision: 208999
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208999&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60374
* pt.c (coerce_template_parms): Check that the pack exp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59361
--- Comment #1 from Eric Niebler ---
Anybody?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60735
Bug ID: 60735
Summary: GCC targeting E500 with SPE has errors with the
_Decimal64 type
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60735
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc-linuxspe
Status|UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60735
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 32520
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32520&action=edit
Proposed patch to fix the problem
The issue is there was no insn to support movdd if -mspe. I fixed the code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60736
Bug ID: 60736
Summary: Crash in preprocessor including stdc-predef.h when it
does not exist on glibc-based systems
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60736
Paul Pluzhnikov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppluzhnikov at google dot com
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60732
mrs at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mrs at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60737
Bug ID: 60737
Summary: rs6000 expand_block_clear uses word stores on double
word pointer
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60737
--- Comment #1 from Anton Blanchard ---
It looks like by the time we get to expand_block_clear we don't have any
alignment info (align_rtx == 1).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60738
Bug ID: 60738
Summary: A missing opportunity about
process_single_reg_class_operands
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57887
Jaak Ristioja changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jaak at ristioja dot ee
--- Comment #8 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60264
--- Comment #3 from zqchen at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: zqchen
Date: Wed Apr 2 06:45:59 2014
New Revision: 209009
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209009&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
2014-04-02 Zhenqiang Chen
Backport from trunk r2085
93 matches
Mail list logo
