https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63488
--- Comment #2 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
The code in question is at libquadmath/math/j0q.c, function y0q, in the branch
annotated /* 0 <= x <= 2 */
It has to do with the rational function:
/* Y0(x) = 2/pi * log(x) * J0(x) + R(x^2)
Pe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
--- Comment #6 from Venkataramanan ---
git bisect experiment showed this revision after which bug disappears.
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=215707
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55821
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63488
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Note that libquadmath has not been updated from glibc since November 2012.
So, while in the Bessel function case large errors are already known for
all floating-point types in glibc, in ge
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #26 from Jan Hubicka ---
> But is warning/error attribute the only thing on aliases that can hold extra
> semantics info (now or in the future)? I'd say LTO symtab merging should
> merge
> what is mergeable, and should leave leave a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63489
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63489
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
That was pretty easily found with -fsanitize=address
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63459
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
Hi,
does something like this make sense (I also updated the DECL_BY_REFERENCE
check.
We allow to put variable at address NULL with -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks
that IMO can let me to pass it by reference.
W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63459
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63459
>
> --- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
> Hi,
> does something like this make sense (I also updated the DECL_BY_REFERENCE
> check.
> We allow to put variab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63490
Bug ID: 63490
Summary: gcc-4.8 memcpy fails with internal compiler error: in
ix86_copy_addr_to_reg, at config/i386/i386.c:21718
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63490
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60693
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pekkanie at student dot oulu.fi
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63488
--- Comment #4 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #3)
> (Eventually I think we should provide _Float128 functions directly in
> glibc's libm on x86/x86_64, with the TS 18661-3 names, in which case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63485
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Oct 8 20:27:11 2014
New Revision: 216012
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216012&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/63485
* tree.c (build_cplus_array_type): Look for a type wi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61217
François Dumont changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63485
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63405
--- Comment #13 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Oct 8 21:06:00 2014
New Revision: 216014
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216014&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/63405
* pt.c (tsubst_pack_expansion): Limit simple expansi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63405
--- Comment #12 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Oct 8 21:05:50 2014
New Revision: 216013
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216013&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/63405
* pt.c (tsubst_pack_expansion): Limit simple expansi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61107
François Dumont changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63491
Bug ID: 63491
Summary: Ice in LRA with simple vector test case on power
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63491
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc64-linux,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #16 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Wed Oct 8 23:13:02 2014
New Revision: 216018
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216018&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/52941
* config/sh/sync.md (atomic_exchangesi_hard,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #17 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Wed Oct 8 23:15:44 2014
New Revision: 216019
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216019&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
Backport from mainline
2014-10-08 Oleg Endo
PR target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #18 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Wed Oct 8 23:17:42 2014
New Revision: 216020
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216020&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
Backport from mainline
2014-10-08 Oleg Endo
PR target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63492
Bug ID: 63492
Summary: bconfig.h or config.h for gencondmd.c
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
Component: other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63493
Bug ID: 63493
Summary: libgo: write power64 version of reflect.MakeFunc
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: go
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63471
--- Comment #4 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
There are more functions with this problem. The attached patch
enables libgfortran to build on hpux11.11.
Dave
--
John David Anglindave.ang...@bell.net
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63471
--- Comment #5 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Ah, I suspected that other functions might be affected as well. Thanks for
finding them.
That being said, googling this issue I stumbled upon
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00545.html where
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63432
--- Comment #22 from tejohnson at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: tejohnson
Date: Thu Oct 9 04:38:24 2014
New Revision: 216024
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216024&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-10-07 Teresa Johnson
PR bootstrap/63432.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63494
Bug ID: 63494
Summary: internal compiler error: Bus error, and out of memory
allocating ...
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
The attachment is a piece of C code.
When compile it with -O2 option, a segfault occurs:
##
root@qemux86-64:~# gcc -o test test.c
root@qemux86-64:~# ./test
192.168.1.1
root@qemux86-64:~#
root@qemux86-64:~# gcc -O2 -o test test.c
root@qemux86-64:~# ./test
test[893]: segfault at 0 ip
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63495
Bug ID: 63495
Summary: struct __attribute__ ((aligned (8))) broken on x86
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57003
--- Comment #29 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Oct 9 06:36:08 2014
New Revision: 216026
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216026&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/57003
* regcprop.c (copyprop_hardreg_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63480
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #23 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 7 Oct 2014, hubicka at ucw dot cz wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
>
> --- Comment #22 from Jan Hubicka ---
> We can also put warning attribute into gimple ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63352
--- Comment #16 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> Well, I get this, for example:
>
> In file included from opncls.c:26:0:
> opncls.c: In function 'bfd_fopen':
> bfd.h:529:65: error: right-hand operand of comma expression has no effect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63482
Bug ID: 63482
Summary: [5 Regression] ICE: in
gimple_get_virt_method_for_vtable, at
gimple-fold.c:4857
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60406
--- Comment #22 from Dominik Vogt ---
>> Hm, so the patch penalises platforms that cannot deal with the
>> 16 byte window?
> Yes, but, recall that on your system almost all tests pass using the
> code that is in the tree today, before your patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63478
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34191
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dev at cor0 dot com
--- Comment #6 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #24 from Jakub Jelinek ---
But is warning/error attribute the only thing on aliases that can hold extra
semantics info (now or in the future)? I'd say LTO symtab merging should merge
what is mergeable, and should leave leave as separ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63483
Bug ID: 63483
Summary: Scheduler performs Invalid move of aliased memory
reference
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63478
--- Comment #5 from Dennis Clarke ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> Why are you trying to use -mptr64 anyways? Especially without -m64 ?
Reasonable question. I often bootstrap GCC and then try a whole
series of simple tests *aft
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63478
--- Comment #6 from Dennis Clarke ---
>
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 34191 ***
Not really a duplicate but close enough. This is Solaris 10
and I bet we see the same thing on Solaris 11. If anyone
actually uses that.
dc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63483
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ---
$foo..ng:
.prologue 1
lda $1,1($31) # 7*movqi/2[length = 4]
lda $2,a # 27*movdi/7[length = 4]
ldq $3,0($2) # 6*movdi/8[length = 4]
lda $2,b # 26*m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63483
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 33665
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33665&action=edit
Proposed patch
Proposed patch prevents MEM_READONLY_P memory references to be moved over
possibly aliased memory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63483
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
The patched compiler creates prevents scheduler to move "unchanging" reference
over possibly aliasing memory:
7: r74:QI=0x1
5: r73:DI=`a'
14: r79:DI=`b'
6: r72:DI=[r73:DI]
REG_DEAD r73:DI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63445
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ---
> The range of n_7 is suboptimal and the test on _6 can be eliminated.
The previous enhancement was apparently:
2010-04-06 Richard Guenther
PR tree-optimization/43627
* tree-vrp.c (extra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63483
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Patch at [1].
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-10/msg00625.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63483
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63480
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63480
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
I think it makes sense just not to warn on { }, much as we intentionally don't
warn for { 0 }.
I'm testing a patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63480
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
In C++ we don't warn for { }. OTOH, C++ warns for { 0 } - I think it should
not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63480
--- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
Found it: PR61489
I think warning for {0} is on purpose, since one cannot tell if the struct
originally had one field and now it has two. But I don't really agree with it.
I think it is too noisy.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60406
--- Comment #23 from Dominik Vogt ---
Regarding the new patch:
1) We need to call __builtin_extract_return_address(retaddr) in
__go_set_defer_retaddr() too. (On s390 (31 bit) this is necessary to remove
the most significant bit of the address w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63480
--- Comment #5 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
The C warning is also nicer than the C++ one because it says where the field is
declared. It also only mentions one missing field per declaration, whereas the
C++ warning mentions all, which is terribly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63473
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60406
--- Comment #24 from Dominik Vogt ---
> --snip--
> -g->defer->__retaddr = retaddr;
> +g->defer->__retaddr = __builtin_extract_return_addr (retaddr);
> --snip--
We need to double check whether this would break Sparc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63480
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63480
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Also note PR39589, a request for -Wmissing-field-initializers=2, but it's not
as trivial as it seems.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #25 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
>
> --- Comment #24 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> But is warning/error attribute the only thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63483
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||alpha
Component|rtl-optimizati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63445
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou ---
> The range of n_7 is suboptimal and the test on _6 can be eliminated.
Which turns out to be counter-productive for the testcase because the test is
used to derive information by the sccp pass; as a result,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63482
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63476
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63471
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63483
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> The bug is clearly in
>
> "
> > Btw, if the mem is MEM_READONLY_P how can it be part of
> > a {un}aligned_store sequence?
>
> This flag is copied from the origin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62053
--- Comment #5 from Alexander Ivchenko ---
Ping.. any updates? We cannot build Android since the beginning of Jul, and,
hence, cannot evaluate 5.0 candidate for it. I find it very unfortunate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39589
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
--- Comment #3 from Man
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63403
--- Comment #5 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
Hi Richard,
On 7-Oct-14, at 2:48 PM, rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Can you try the patches I posted here:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg02636.html
> https://gcc.gnu.o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63484
Bug ID: 63484
Summary: misleading/obsolete -fdelete-null-pointer-checks
documentation
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63362
--- Comment #23 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Ville Voutilainen from comment #22)
> This test fails the static_assert for TType (which is a trivial type),
> PODType and DelDef, and it would be expected that all those static_asserts
> succee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63482
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Created attachment 33666
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33666&action=edit
somewhat reduced testcase
% g++ -c -O2 CustomReactionTest.ii
CustomReactionTest.ii:536:44: internal comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60406
--- Comment #25 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
(In reply to Dominik Vogt from comment #22)
> >> Hm, so the patch penalises platforms that cannot deal with the
> >> 16 byte window?
>
> > Yes, but, recall that on your system almost all tests pass using
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63362
--- Comment #24 from Ville Voutilainen ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #23)
> (In reply to Ville Voutilainen from comment #22)
> > This test fails the static_assert for TType (which is a trivial type),
> > PODType and DelDef, and it w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63471
--- Comment #1 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Hmm, any idea how to fix it? Apparently just defining _REENTRANT globally might
not be a good idea, as some systems may require linking in some other C library
(libc_rt or such) then. We don't want to use t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63362
--- Comment #25 from Jason Merrill ---
And the ICE reduces to
struct A {
A(...);
};
int main()
{
volatile A a;
volatile A a2(a);
}
which crashes from infinite recursion trying to copy a for passing to So,
not an __is_trivially_cons
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63362
--- Comment #26 from Ville Voutilainen ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #25)
> And the ICE reduces to
>
> struct A {
> A(...);
> };
>
> int main()
> {
> volatile A a;
> volatile A a2(a);
> }
>
> which crashes from infinite rec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63471
--- Comment #2 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Hmm, maybe add something like
AC_CHECK_DECLS_ONCE([ttyname_r])
to configure.ac and then in unix.c(stream_ttyname) check with
#ifdef HAVE_TTYNAME_R && HAVE_DECL_TTYNAME_R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60406
--- Comment #26 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
(In reply to Dominik Vogt from comment #23)
>
> 1) We need to call __builtin_extract_return_address(retaddr) in
> __go_set_defer_retaddr() too. (On s390 (31 bit) this is necessary to remove
> the most s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63485
Bug ID: 63485
Summary: [5 Regression] ICE: canonical types differ for
identical types A::type and const
char_type [3]
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63486
Bug ID: 63486
Summary: Magic Statics lock guard does not include registration
into atexit handler
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63483
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63483
>
> --- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60406
--- Comment #27 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Wed Oct 8 14:03:13 2014
New Revision: 216003
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216003&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/60406
runtime: Check callers in can_recover if return ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60406
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63485
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63483
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
How can I reproduce this? Even with -mcpu=ev4 I get
$foo..ng:
foo:
.frame $30,0,$26,0
$LFB0:
.cfi_startproc
.prologue 0
mov $31,$2
ldq_u $1,1($2)
zapnot $1,2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63483
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> How can I reproduce this? Even with -mcpu=ev4 I get
>
> $foo..ng:
> foo:
> .frame $30,0,$26,0
> $LFB0:
> .cfi_startproc
> .prologue 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63483
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Ok, I believe that even
char * const a;
int * const b;
void foo (void)
{
a[1] = 1;
b[2] = 1;
}
int bar (void)
{
return a && b;
}
does not reproduces the issue.
$foo..ng:
.prologue 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61969
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53775
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56072
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||e716018 at rtrtr dot com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63380
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Hmm. We end up with
main ()
{
int d.0_4;
int e.1_5;
int _7;
int b.7_11;
int a.8_12;
:
d.0_4 = d;
e.1_5 = 1 >> d.0_4;
e = e.1_5;
_7 = 31 / 0;
in the end. Which is caused by tail-mergi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60349
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63487
Bug ID: 63487
Summary: typo in documentation
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: trivial
Priority: P3
Component: libquadmath
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63488
Bug ID: 63488
Summary: large errors in y0q
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libquadmath
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54012
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63483
--- Comment #11 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> Ok, I believe that even
>
> char * const a;
> int * const b;
>
> void foo (void)
> {
> a[1] = 1;
> b[2] = 1;
> }
>
> int bar (void)
> {
> return a && b;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63487
--- Comment #1 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Wed Oct 8 15:33:41 2014
New Revision: 216006
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216006&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libquadmath/63487
* libquadmath.texi (sincosq): F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63487
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
1 - 100 of 105 matches
Mail list logo
