https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63403
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63203
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Nov 24 13:35:08 2014
New Revision: 218017
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218017&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2014-11-24 Jonathan Wakely
Paolo Carlini
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63432
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63537
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63577
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63636
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Is this fixed now (why is it in WAITING?)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63657
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||5.0
Summary|[4.9/5 regressio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63658
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||5.0
Summary|[4.9/5 Regressio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63661
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
v.value.LocalizedText = (LocalizedTextStruct*) "Localized Text";
if you access v.value.LocalizedText as a LocalizedTextStruct the above causes
undefined code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63636
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> Is this fixed now (why is it in WAITING?)
Because you changed the status to WAITING?
I will retest this once all P1 ICF issues are fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63657
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|rguenth at gcc d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64046
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63740
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63748
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64048
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |testsuite
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64046
--- Comment #2 from Peter Wu ---
Since it is only reproducible with ld.gold, I have duplicated the report at
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17639
What about the application of optimization? Doesn't that have something to do
with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63311
--- Comment #8 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> Confirmed that it is ifcombine. Not sure if I'd call it wrong-code though.
>
> Note that there are no default-defs involved thus ifcombine doesn't see
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63203
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64048
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64044
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64004
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Nov 24 14:02:36 2014
New Revision: 218018
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218018&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-11-24 Richard Biener
PR java/64004
* class.c (build_cl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Nov 24 14:07:18 2014
New Revision: 218019
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218019&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-11-24 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/63679
* tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63636
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64050
Bug ID: 64050
Summary: [5 Regression] r218009 causes LTO/PGO bootstrap
failure: ICE: in inline_small_functions, at
ipa-inline.c:1709
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64051
Bug ID: 64051
Summary: broken exception model detection in libobjc's
configure
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
--- Comment #5 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> v.value.LocalizedText = (LocalizedTextStruct*) "Localized Text";
>
>
> if you access v.value.LocalizedText as a LocalizedTextStruct the above
> causes undefin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64051
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
As far as I know a Canadian cross requires the cross toolchain to that target
at least the same languages as the Canadian cross. This check is the same check
in libstdc++ also.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59708
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #34091|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #34090|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #34092|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59708
--- Comment #23 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #22)
> So fixed?
Not on ppc64:
trippels@gcc2-power8 ~ % cat out_check15 | grep overflow
FAIL: gcc.dg/builtin-arith-overflow-1.c execution test
FAIL: c-c++-comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64051
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #34094|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64052
Bug ID: 64052
Summary: compilation error "local frame unavailable" appears
for some optimization levels
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35261
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64025
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64050
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Breakpoint 1, inline_small_functions () at ../../gcc/gcc/ipa-inline.c:1709
1709 gcc_assert (current_badness >= badness);
(gdb) l
1704 /* When updating the edge costs, we only decrease
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64053
Bug ID: 64053
Summary: asm labels to accept extra parameters
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64054
Bug ID: 64054
Summary: 27_io/basic_ostream/inserters_arithmetic/char/hexfloat
.cc FAILs
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64054
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64053
--- Comment #1 from Eugene ---
Created attachment 34098
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34098&action=edit
code sample for illustartion
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58561
--- Comment #6 from David Edelsohn ---
Author: dje
Date: Mon Nov 24 14:59:52 2014
New Revision: 218020
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218020&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/58561
* dbxout.c: Include stringpool.h
(dbxo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917
Roger Orr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rogero at howzatt dot
demon.co.uk
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63375
--- Comment #13 from Pranith Kumar ---
The main concern here is moving the read past the fence instruction
irrespective of volatile semantics. The fence instruction guarantees that
accesses before the fence will complete before the accesses comin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64055
Bug ID: 64055
Summary: [5 regression] gnat.dg/derived_aggregate.adb FAILs on
32-bit i386
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64055
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64024
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64056
Bug ID: 64056
Summary: gcc.target/i386/chkp-strlen-4.c etc. FAIL
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64056
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63375
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
How is that observable (other than looking at the assembly)?
val1 is an automatic variable whose address doesn't escape to other threads,
and isn't volatile either. Why do you care?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63482
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63621
tbsaunde at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tbsaunde at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63621
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63621
--- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to tbsaunde from comment #3)
> r217991 seems to work
Not for me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63621
--- Comment #6 from Trevor Saunders ---
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 03:32:37PM +, trippels at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63621
>
> --- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
> (In reply to tbsaunde fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64051
--- Comment #3 from Pierre Ossman ---
libstdc++ compiles fine though, but the previous stage did indeed include a C++
compiler. But even with that requirement, it still seems a bit dangerous. What
if the previous compiler uses a different excepti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64021
--- Comment #7 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
The Go language says that "Pointers to distinct zero-size variables may or may
not be equal" (http://golang.org/ref/spec#Comparison_operators). So in the
language sense it would be OK to always convert ze
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63972
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63972
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Author: pinskia
Date: Mon Nov 24 15:40:19 2014
New Revision: 218023
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218023&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-11-24 Andrew Pinski
PR rtl-opt/63972
* shrink-w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64051
--- Comment #4 from Pierre Ossman ---
I assumed that this would be what happened:
Given --build=B --host=H and --target=T:
1. A gcc would be configured with --build=B --host=H --target=T and put in the
installation directory.
2. A second gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64051
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64021
--- Comment #8 from Richard Henderson ---
(In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #7)
> I note that a zero-sized array is converted to an empty struct in go-ffi.c.
> I wonder how libffi handles that today.
It doesn't. There will be an asser
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64024
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Perhaps for the linear arguments we could remember the {initial_val,
linear_step} pair from the analysis phase (somewhere in the stmt_info) and if
simple_iv would fail during the transform phase, use that (af
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64057
Bug ID: 64057
Summary: Overlapping memcpy generated for array assignment
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64024
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Generally calling SCEV analysis again during the transform phase asks for
trouble
(though it may work in most cases). This means that the simple_iv calls (which
are mostly useless as computed stuff isn't ac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64055
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64050
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63375
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
Note that the technical issue here is that the memory is considered as not
aliased and thus all barriers would need to explicitely reference it as
used and clobbered.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63524
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think this should be fixed at r216398
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64051
--- Comment #6 from Pierre Ossman ---
Just to make sure I understand you perfectly. This is not supported:
../configure --build=A --host=B --target=B
Instead you have to do:
../configure --build=A --host=A --target=B
Then use that to:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64052
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64050
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63671
--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Mon Nov 24 16:15:46 2014
New Revision: 218024
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218024&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/63671
* ipa-inline-transform.c (can_remove_node_now_p_1):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64024
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> Generally calling SCEV analysis again during the transform phase asks for
> trouble
> (though it may work in most cases). This means that the simple_iv calls
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64054
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Weird. Somehow the double variable 'd' is getting set to 6 after it is
(correctly) written to the stream, so converting "0x1.1p+8" back to
a double doesn't compare equal to it, because 272. != 6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64051
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Pierre Ossman from comment #6)
> Just to make sure I understand you perfectly. This is not supported:
>
> ../configure --build=A --host=B --target=B
By itself yes this is not supported.
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64024
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> > Generally calling SCEV analysis again during the transform phase asks for
> > trouble
> > (though it may work in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64024
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Usually it is only that which is hard to recompute, the base is pretty much
stable. But of course you never know. You could also simply add
a vec to the stmt vinfo struct ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63703
--- Comment #12 from Rohit ---
Created attachment 34100
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34100&action=edit
Proposed patch
Francois,
Can you please test the attached patch?
2014-11-24 Rohit
[gcc]
PR bootstrap/63703
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63671
--- Comment #14 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #13)
> Author: hubicka
> Date: Mon Nov 24 16:15:46 2014
> New Revision: 218024
>
> URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218024&root=gcc&view=rev
> Log:
> PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64049
--- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu ---
It was caused by r215898.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63671
--- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka ---
The performance regression seems solved on my setup (Trevor, can you double
check?).
-Ofast -fdevirtualize:
Time spent in iteration: 4.11598
-Ofast -fno-devirtualize
Time spent in iteration: 4.17063
-Ofast
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60102
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #23 from Richard Bi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63671
--- Comment #16 from Jan Hubicka ---
The ICE will probably go away with
Index: ipa-prop.c
===
--- ipa-prop.c (revision 217980)
+++ ipa-prop.c (working copy)
@@ -2155,7 +2155,7 @@ i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61294
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61527
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63703
--- Comment #13 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Rohit from comment #12)
> Created attachment 34100 [details]
> Proposed patch
> Can you please test the attached patch?
In this case you could test just by building a cc1 for powerpc-apple-darwi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61763
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #8 from Richard Bie
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61765
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61776
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64054
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab ---
6 is the output from "cout << os.precision() << endl;", not the value of d.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63965
--- Comment #10 from Pat Haugen ---
(In reply to Michael Meissner from comment #6)
> Author: meissner
> Date: Fri Nov 21 18:03:09 2014
> New Revision: 217940
>
> URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217940&root=gcc&view=rev
> Log:
> 2014-11-21
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61294
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||carlos at redhat dot com
--- Comment #11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61831
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Known to fail|4.10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61917
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
101 - 200 of 277 matches
Mail list logo
