[Bug go/61866] FAIL: ./index0-out.go execution, -O0 -g -fno-var-tracking-assignments

2014-08-04 Thread ian at airs dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61866 Ian Lance Taylor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug go/61308] gccgo: ICE in Expression::check_bounds [GoSmith]

2014-08-04 Thread ian at airs dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61308 Ian Lance Taylor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/61910] undefined computation in trans-expr.c gfc_conv_cst_int_power

2014-08-04 Thread zeccav at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61910 --- Comment #2 from Vittorio Zecca --- It appears not depending on i value, for i=1 or 2. No explicit options used. Of course I used options -fsanizitized=address -fsanitized=undefined to generate gfortran. I think it is either a gfortran or a s

[Bug ipa/62016] New: very slow compilation at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

2014-08-04 Thread su at cs dot ucdavis.edu
: ../gcc-trunk/configure --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib Thread model: posix gcc version 4.10.0 20140804 (experimental) [trunk revision 213529] (GCC) $ $ time gcc-trunk -O2 small.c 0.02user 0.01system 0:00.28elapsed 15%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata

[Bug middle-end/61529] [4.10 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in check_probability, at basic-block.h:953

2014-08-04 Thread su at cs dot ucdavis.edu
-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 4.10.0 20140804 (experimental) [trunk revision 213529] (GCC) $ $ gcc-trunk -O3 small.c small.c: In

[Bug fortran/61910] undefined computation in trans-expr.c gfc_conv_cst_int_power

2014-08-04 Thread zeccav at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61910 --- Comment #3 from Vittorio Zecca --- A fix for the offending instruction at trans-expr.c:2107 "n = (unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT) (m < 0 ? -m : m);" might be "n = (unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT) (m < 0 ? - (unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT) m : m);" So it seems this

[Bug target/62014] [AArch64] Using -mgeneral-regs-only may lead to ICE

2014-08-04 Thread ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62014 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org

<    1   2