http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60732
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Dominique, what does the generated assembly look like in the (failing) Darwin
> case?
Without -fabi-version=0 (or with -fabi-version=1 to 3), I get the pre r203469
manglings:
.globl __Z3fooU8__
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59617
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #3)
> The test gcc.target/i386/avx512f-gather-5.c fails on darwin
>
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512f-gather-5.c scan-assembler gather[^\\n]*zmm
>
> There is no 'ga
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60719
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Apr 2 07:52:36 2014
New Revision: 209010
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209010&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-04-02 Richard Biener
PR bootstrap/60719
* Makefile.in (i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60729
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Apr 2 08:26:57 2014
New Revision: 209012
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209012&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-04-02 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/60729
* optabs.c (exp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60729
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |middle-end
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60719
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43751
--- Comment #21 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Wed Apr 2 08:34:45 2014
New Revision: 209016
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209016&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-04-02 Dominique d'Humieres
PR target/43751
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60738
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization, ra
Severi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50417
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anton at samba dot org
--- Comment #5 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60737
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60736
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60733
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54407
--- Comment #21 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Wed Apr 2 08:44:40 2014
New Revision: 209017
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209017&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-04-02 Dominique d'Humieres
Jack Howarth
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54083
--- Comment #23 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Wed Apr 2 08:58:03 2014
New Revision: 209018
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209018&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-03-26 Dominique d'Humieres
Iain Sandoe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60731
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60739
Bug ID: 60739
Summary: Maybe uninitialized with deferred length character
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60733
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
As
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60739
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57887
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jaak Ristioja from comment #8)
> also probably fixed by 204818.
It was definitely fixed by r204818.
I don't know what commit fixed the 4.7 ICE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59361
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60731
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60734
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60734
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60734
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Thanks Marek, in that case this is less high priority IMHO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53090
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
I think the main observation is that
use 1
address
in statement _15 = *_14;
at position *_14
type int *
base perm_9(D) + (sizetype) ((long unsigned int) (k_4(D) + -1) * 4)
step 18446744073709551
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60740
Bug ID: 60740
Summary: ICE in extract_affine w/ -O2 -ftree-loop-linear
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60740
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53090
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Sth like
Index: gcc/c-family/c-common.c
===
--- gcc/c-family/c-common.c (revision 209018)
+++ gcc/c-family/c-common.c (working copy)
@@
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53090
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> Sth like
>
> Index: gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> ===
> --- gcc/c-family/c-common.c (revision 20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60733
--- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt ---
Ok, will have a look today.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60736
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #3 from Ian Lance Tayl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60736
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60741
Bug ID: 60741
Summary: [-Wmaybe-uninitialized] false negative and confusing
warning message
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59361
Andrew Sutton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew.n.sutton at gmail dot
com
--- Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60741
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60736
--- Comment #5 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
This is easy enough to recreate--do you really need valgrind output?
In any case, here it is.
> cat foo.c
#include
> valgrind gcc/cc1 foo.c
==25367== Memcheck, a memory error detector
==25367== Copyrigh
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60640
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 32523
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32523&action=edit
Proposed patch for the 4.8 branch
Independent of the trunk fix, I'm going to propose this simple patch
which dis
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60640
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 32524
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32524&action=edit
Proposed patch for the 4.7 branch
Independent of the trunk fix, I'm going to propose this simple patch
which dis
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60736
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Thanks. I get:
==15253==
==15253== Invalid read of size 1
==15253==at 0xD2BEB7: cpp_errno(cpp_reader*, int, char const*)
(errors.c:233)
==15253==by 0xD30DD2: _cpp_find_file (files.c:571)
==15253
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60736
--- Comment #7 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
diff --git a/libcpp/errors.c b/libcpp/errors.c
index d1ca7a12ff42..fa292214d677 100644
--- a/libcpp/errors.c
+++ b/libcpp/errors.c
@@ -230,7 +230,7 @@ cpp_warning_with_line_syshdr (cpp_reader *pfile, int
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #206 from Martin Liška ---
Firefox (and chromium) memory reports with -flto=9 and -O2; archive contains
also memory usage graph:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0pisUJ80pO1bnV5V0RtWXJkaVU/edit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #207 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 32525
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32525&action=edit
Memory usage graphs for -flto=9, -flto=4, -flto=1 with -O2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60449
--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka ---
> OTOH, why do we have to merge the decls/cgraph nodes at all? Can't we simply
> make them aliases if tree merging decides the decls are not equal?
If we do so, we would never merge external declaration from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60736
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.3
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60651
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 32526
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32526&action=edit
preprocessed libjava file
With the latest proposed patch, we get an assertion failure building libjava
d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60691
--- Comment #4 from Fabian Vogt ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> (In reply to Fabian Vogt from comment #2)
> > It crashes and produces weird results if linked to bFLT.
>
> Yes because EABI is an elf only abi, if it does not have
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60735
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Wed Apr 2 17:03:49 2014
New Revision: 209025
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209025&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-04-02 Michael Meissner
PR target/60735
* config/rs600
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60735
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60735
--- Comment #4 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Wed Apr 2 17:16:33 2014
New Revision: 209026
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209026&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-04-02 Michael Meissner
Back port mainline subversion id 2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60736
--- Comment #8 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
I don't think that's the right patch, unless there is a good reason for msgid
to be NULL. Note that two lines down we are printing msgid, so that would need
to be fixed as well. But it would be best if ms
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60732
--- Comment #4 from Brooks Moses ---
Interesting. As noted, with -fabi-version=[1 to 3] on Linux, I was getting
both sets.
Mike, what do you think is the best solution here? We could use Dominique's
patch with a comment to the effect that "New-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60657
--- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Actually, it occurs to me, why don't we fix the predicates. That seems like a
better solution than rejecting problematical constants in the insn's condition.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60731
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60736
--- Comment #9 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #8)
> I don't think that's the right patch, unless there is a good reason for
> msgid to be NULL. Note that two lines down we are printing msgid, so that
> wou
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60733
--- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt ---
The logic for placement of initializers for PHI candidates is a bit wrong.
They should be placed at the end of the feeding block for the PHI. Currently
they can end up being placed too early, as in this case.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60742
Bug ID: 60742
Summary: ill-formed declarator (array) in selection statement
not caught appropriately
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60650
--- Comment #12 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Wed Apr 2 20:55:02 2014
New Revision: 209038
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209038&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-04-02 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/60650
* l
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60733
--- Comment #6 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Wed Apr 2 22:07:30 2014
New Revision: 209040
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209040&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2014-04-02 Bill Schmidt
PR tree-optimization/60733
* gi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60733
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60733
--- Comment #8 from Zhendong Su ---
(In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #7)
> Fixed. Bug was introduced in 4.9 so no backports are needed.
That's very quick; thanks Bill!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60743
Bug ID: 60743
Summary: build/genautomata uses 700 MB memory for ARM
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: boots
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60702
arturomdn at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arturomdn at gmail dot com
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59967
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka ---
> 193246hubicka /* If there is call on a hot path through the loop,
> then
> 193246hubickathere is most probably not much to optimize. */
> 193246hubicka else if (size.num_non_pu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60706
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 31-Mar-14, at 4:53 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Like this. If that works for you it's pre-approved. Only
> implements the
> special-case (the gmp path would probably have a lot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60657
--- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Patch is spinning which introduced new predicates which only allow suitable
constants.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60659
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Apr 3 03:55:59 2014
New Revision: 209048
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209048&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/60659
* ipa-devirt.c (get_polymorphic_call_info): Do not ICE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60659
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59967
--- Comment #3 from Christoph Breitkopf ---
It's this conditional in the inner loop. The expression becomes constant only
if both loops are unrolled (i and j are the loop counters):
if (1<
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60743
--- Comment #1 from Bernd Edlinger ---
current snapshot gcc-4.9-20140330, trunk revision 208948
uses 773 MB peak memory.
last week's snapshot gcc-4.9-20140323, trunk revision 208775
used only 417 MB peak memory, which did not cause problems.
69 matches
Mail list logo
