https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61654
--- Comment #4 from Manuel Lauss ---
The patch shifted the ICE to the following, same source file:
In file included from ./engines/tony/input.h:32:0,
from engines/tony/font.cpp:32:
./common/events.h:239:7: internal compiler erro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61713
--- Comment #1 from wangzheyu ---
This ICE also happened on the trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61693
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Just declare it yourself? If libasan always contains the aligned_alloc symbol,
then the testcase will link even when system glibc does not contain it...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61693
--- Comment #3 from Kostya Serebryany ---
yep, that's the plan...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61382
--- Comment #13 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #12)
> I'm seeing:
> FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/initlist86.C -std=c++11 execution test
> FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/initlist86.C -std=c++1y execution test
> on 4.9 branch (but not on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61668
--- Comment #8 from Peter Ketel ---
So what is the use of a math library that is only capable of binary
computations?
In the real world we use the decimal system for all computations.
Do we need binary computations? In most cases NO.
What is th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61693
Kostya Serebryany changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eugeni.stepanov at gmail dot
com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61713
--- Comment #2 from zhenqiang.chen at linaro dot org ---
Root cause:
When expand_call_stmt, if gimple_call_lhs (stmt) is NULL, it will set target to
const0_rtx.
Then when expand_atomic_test_and_set, it tries to emit_move_insn (subtarget,
mem). M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61712
--- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 61703 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61703
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61704
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61712
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 61704 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61705
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61712
--- Comment #4 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 61705 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61702
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61712
--- Comment #5 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 61702 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61706
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61712
--- Comment #6 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 61706 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61704
--- Comment #2 from linzj ---
I am so sorry. I click submit multiple times for not being patient.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61705
--- Comment #2 from linzj ---
I am so sorry. I click submit multiple times for not being patient.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61712
--- Comment #7 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 61707 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61707
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61710
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61712
--- Comment #8 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 61708 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61712
--- Comment #9 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 61710 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61708
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61709
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61711
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61712
--- Comment #10 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 61709 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61712
--- Comment #11 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 61711 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61712
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61712
--- Comment #13 from linzj ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #12)
> I can't reproduce this with current trunk, on what compiler version does
> this trigger?
>
> *gcc -v should tell this
arm-linux-androideabi-gcc (GC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61712
--- Comment #14 from linzj ---
I have already submited a patch too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61691
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61382
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jul 4 08:23:28 2014
New Revision: 212289
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212289&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/61382
Backport from mainline
2014-06-05 Andreas Schwa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61690
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52595
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||siim.schults at gmail dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61684
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jul 4 08:32:56 2014
New Revision: 212290
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212290&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/61684
* tree-ssa-ifcombine.c (recognize_singl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61684
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jul 4 08:35:20 2014
New Revision: 212291
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212291&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/61684
* tree-ssa-ifcombine.c (recognize_singl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61668
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Please go and complain somewhere else, it's not GCC's problem that you are
surprised by the behaviour of binary floating point logic.
There are several ways to work with exact decimal numbers. See
https://
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61684
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jul 4 08:37:39 2014
New Revision: 212292
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212292&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/61684
* tree-ssa-ifcombine.c (recognize_singl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61654
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jul 4 08:39:31 2014
New Revision: 212294
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212294&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/61654
* cgraphunit.c (expand_thunk): Call free_domin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61654
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jul 4 08:38:45 2014
New Revision: 212293
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212293&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/61654
* cgraphunit.c (expand_thunk): Call free_domin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61684
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61654
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61712
--- Comment #15 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I think this is fixed on trunk by:
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commitdiff;h=3df31d76aa8c14ff871fc15b931d277b8d68626a
2014-06-18 Terry Guo
PR target/61544
* config/arm/arm.c (thumb1_re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61618
--- Comment #3 from Stupachenko Evgeny ---
The patch fix the fail:
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
index 8046c67..2cffcef 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
@@ -43211,12 +43211,10 @@ exp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61712
--- Comment #16 from linzj ---
Thanks amker.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
--- Comment #13 from Maksymilian Arciemowicz ---
@Tim: do you need help?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61714
Bug ID: 61714
Summary: configure --with-arch and --with-cpu are ignored on
aarch64
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61714
--- Comment #1 from Richard Earnshaw ---
Author: rearnsha
Date: Fri Jul 4 10:51:56 2014
New Revision: 212295
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212295&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/61714
* aarch64.h (OPTION_DEFAULT_SPECS): Define.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57233
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61715
Bug ID: 61715
Summary: [4.9/4.10 Regression] binutils trunk ld/LTO 11 test
fails when built using GCC 4.9
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61656
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #0)
> /usr/src/gcc/obj052/gcc/xgcc -B/usr/src/gcc/obj052/gcc/
> -fno-diagnostics-show-caret -fdiagnostics-color=never -O0 -w -c -o pr4
> 2025-2.o /usr/src/gcc/gcc/testsui
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61203
--- Comment #3 from Michael Matz ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> same spot. No idea what to do against this though, treating a CLOBBER as a
> barrier for propagation of addresses to other local variables would penalize
> stuff
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61544
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61666
Ed Swierk changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61499
--- Comment #9 from Keith Refson ---
This fix checks out for the full code in context as well as the boiled-down
example. Happy for this to be closed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
--- Comment #14 from Tim Shen ---
(In reply to Maksymilian Arciemowicz from comment #13)
> @Tim: do you need help?
This is what I'm going to do:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2014-07/msg8.html
Please send to libstdc++ ml if you have any
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61716
Bug ID: 61716
Summary: internal compiler error: Seg Fault
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61717
Bug ID: 61717
Summary: seg fault on using variadic templates to initialize
array
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61717
--- Comment #1 from programmerjake at gmail dot com ---
gcc version string:
gcc (Debian 4.9.0-6) 4.9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61718
Bug ID: 61718
Summary: Visibility issue with template class
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61715
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
64 matches
Mail list logo