https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64477
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57748
--- Comment #61 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Mikael Pettersson from comment #60)
> FWIW I've been including backports of r202778 and r206437 (which I think are
> the two relevant fixes) in my 4.8-based GCCs on x86_64, sparc64, powerpc64,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64688
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|vmakarov at re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64580
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Annotating rs6000_stack_info() in perf shows:
│/* First, find out if we use _any_ altivec registers. */
│for (i = FIRST_ALTIVEC_REGNO; i <= LAST_ALTIVEC_REGNO; ++i)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 34527
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34527&action=edit
gcc5-ice-nobt.patch
Untested fix for the undesirable backtrace from driver.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57748
--- Comment #62 from Mikael Pettersson ---
(In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #61)
> if you already have used/tested that patch on 4.8 for such a long time,
> I would appreciate it very much if you post it on the gcc-patches mailing
> list
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63970
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64535
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 22 09:21:48 2015
New Revision: 219988
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219988&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-22 Richard Biener
PR libstdc++/64535
* libsupc++/e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60570
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
It would appear so, in which case the following (untested, only quick hack)
should work:
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/cpp/pr36320.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/cpp/pr36320.c
index d136a69..ebd5191 100644
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64725
Bug ID: 64725
Summary: FAIL: libgo/runtime TestFinalizerType testing.go:278:
#2: finalizer for type func(*int) didn't run
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60570
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
-#elif /* { dg-error "with no expression" } */
+#elif
Perhaps turn it into dg-bogus instead?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64726
Bug ID: 64726
Summary: [OpenACC] ICE with -fopenacc and reduction(+:a)
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, openacc
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64535
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63861
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64727
Bug ID: 64727
Summary: [5 Regression]
g++.dg/torture/darwin-cfstring-3.C:11:80: internal
compiler error: Segmentation fault: 11
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64727
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Can you reproduce it with stage1 cc1plus? As in, is it miscompiled compiler or
just some problem on the testcase? If the former, can you bisect exactly to
the version and bisect which *.o file it is?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64715
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Of course the question is whether
int
main (void)
{
struct A { char buf1[9]; char buf2[1]; } a;
char *p = a.buf1;
p += 4;
strcpy (p, str1 + 5);
}
should detect a buffer overflow - because that's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61831
--- Comment #35 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I see three possibilities for this PR:
(1) Revert r211405 for 5.0 and r212329 for 4.9.
(2) Understand why elemental procedures expose the problem when expr->expr_type
== EXPR_ARRAY.
(3) Apply the con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64715
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Schwab ---
The original test case is already using the equivalent of &a.buf1[4], without
any intermediate variable.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64715
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Note that if I fix this the only possible fix will complain for
char *p = (char *)&a;
p += 4;
...
as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64727
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64727
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If stage1 fails, then it is not miscompilation of the compiler itself (or it
would be miscompilation by your system compiler instead).
So no *.o bisection is needed. That said, I don't see what commit in tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64727
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> If stage1 fails, then it is not miscompilation of the compiler itself
> (or it would be miscompilation by your system compiler instead).
My bootstrap compiler is
gcc version 5.0.0 20150107 (experim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64690
--- Comment #2 from Maxim Ostapenko ---
Author: chefmax
Date: Thu Jan 22 10:55:32 2015
New Revision: 219990
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219990&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-22 Max Ostapenko
PR driver/64690
* gcc.c (insert_c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64727
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The only FE change among those is r219973.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46164
Hale Wang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Hale.Wang at arm dot com
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63307
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64728
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
Summary|internal compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64728
Bug ID: 64728
Summary: internal compiler error: SSA corruption
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64722
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
After some debugging, root cause appears to be in initialization of
pic_offset_table_rtx.
In i386.h:
/* Register to hold the addressing base for position independent
code access to data items. We don't u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64722
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Indeed, adding this to toplev.c fixes the issue:
@@ -2166,7 +2169,8 @@ toplev::finalize (void)
{
rtl_initialized = false;
this_target_rtl->target_specific_initialized = false;
+ this_target_rtl->x_pic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64728
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64728
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63325
--- Comment #4 from tbsaunde at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: tbsaunde
Date: Thu Jan 22 11:55:33 2015
New Revision: 219994
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219994&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
make fold ignore decl_with_vis.symtab_node
gcc/
PR m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63325
tbsaunde at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64728
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=64722
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64728
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Started with r217034.
Reduced testcase for -O:
char a[128];
int b, d;
void baz (long);
int setjmp (char [128]);
static void
bar (long *x)
{
if (d)
*x = b;
}
void
foo ()
{
baz (0);
if (setjmp (a))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64729
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64729
Bug ID: 64729
Summary: gcc.dg/stackprotectexplicit1.c FAILs
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-01/msg01884.ht
ml
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64726
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
Patch, lightly tested. (The test case will later fail in gimplify.c with
"sorry, not implemented".)
(In the function below, only op == EXEC_OACC_PARALLEL_LOOP or op ==
EXEC_OACC_KERNELS_LOOP are permitted [o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64342
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61225
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #17 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63861
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openmp
Summary|OpenACC coarra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64510
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64728
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Index: tree-ssa-coalesce.c
===
--- tree-ssa-coalesce.c (revision 219989)
+++ tree-ssa-coalesce.c (working copy)
@@ -1213,8 +1215,11 @@ coalesce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64722
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64730
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64730
Bug ID: 64730
Summary: g++.dg/ipa/pr64049-1.C ICE: SEGV when printing NULL
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64612
--- Comment #16 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> If you are willing to cook up an effective-target for that in
> lib/target-supports.exp, sure, go ahead.
Given the complexity of the HAVE_COM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64728
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> Index: tree-ssa-coalesce.c
> ===
> --- tree-ssa-coalesce.c (revision 219989)
> +++ tree-ssa-coale
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64730
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Summary|g++.dg/ipa/pr6404
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64159
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64728
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 22 Jan 2015, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64728
>
> --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63439
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63439
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
Summary|FAIL: gcc.dg/vec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63439
--- Comment #4 from Rainer Orth ---
Created attachment 34530
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34530&action=edit
sparc vectorizer dump
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64612
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #16)
> > --- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> > If you are willing to cook up an effective-target for that in
> > lib/target-supports.exp, sure, g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64277
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64722
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Can you explain it? Usually when this function is called, pic_offset_table_rtx
is NULL and your i386.h macro relies on that.
When initializing default target during initialization it is NULL of course,
and a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60570
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
dg-bogus is better, yet. FWIW, the patch has been successfully
regtested/bootstrapped now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64722
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Also, if you keep pic_offset_table_rtx NULL, then PIC_OFFSET_TABLE_REGNUM will
be 3 instead of -1 in other places.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59366
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 34531
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34531&action=edit
gcc5-pr64511.patch
The #c13 testcase can be fixed by the attached patch. Not including the
testcase, as it ta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60570
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61403
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64231
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Andrew, are you going to post the patch? I think it is pretty obvious...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59107
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Updated patch for 5.0
--- ../_clean/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h2015-01-19 02:01:40.0 +0100
+++ gcc/fortran/gfortran.h2015-01-22 11:42:56.0 +0100
@@ -1451,7 +1451,7 @@ typedef struc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64477
--- Comment #8 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Jan 22 14:43:55 2015
New Revision: 22
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=22&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/64688
PR target/64477
* config/i386/sse.md (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64688
--- Comment #5 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Jan 22 14:43:55 2015
New Revision: 22
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=22&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/64688
PR target/64477
* config/i386/sse.md (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64722
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> But then wonder if/how target_reinit works for i?86 32-bit.
> Perhaps pic_offset_table_rtx should be cleared in init_emit_regs before
> computing it?
> pic_offs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64722
--- Comment #8 from Ilya Enkovich ---
different hooks(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Can you explain it? Usually when this function is called,
> pic_offset_table_rtx is NULL and your i386.h macro relies on that.
> When initializing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61403
Stupachenko Evgeny changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64722
--- Comment #9 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Can you explain it? Usually when this function is called,
> pic_offset_table_rtx is NULL and your i386.h macro relies on that.
> When initializing default target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 61403, which changed state.
Bug 61403 Summary: An opportunity for x86 gcc vectorizer (~40% gain)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61403
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64731
Bug ID: 64731
Summary: poor code when using vector_size((32)) for sse2
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64732
Bug ID: 64732
Summary: [5 Regression] julia build failure: double free or
corruption in libgfortran.so.3
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64722
--- Comment #10 from David Malcolm ---
Notes to self on how I debugged this:
I added the following to harness.h:
gcc_jit_context_set_bool_option (
ctxt,
GCC_JIT_BOOL_OPTION_DUMP_EVERYTHING,
1);
gcc_jit_context_set_bool_option (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64727
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> The only FE change among those is r219973.
And indeed if I revert it, the ICE disappears.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64722
--- Comment #11 from Ilya Enkovich ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #10)
> which led to investigating this code in ix86_conditional_register_usage:
> 4394 j = PIC_OFFSET_TABLE_REGNUM;
> 4395 if (j != INVALID_REGNUM)
> 4396fixed_r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64712
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64728
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 22 16:07:36 2015
New Revision: 220003
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220003&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-22 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/64728
* tree-ssa-co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64712
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
I also don't see the failure.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64732
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64732
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=64731
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64728
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64732
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #2)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> > Waiting for some kind of a testcase (or at least a pointer to what Julia
> > is).
>
> Judging by the .jl suffi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64731
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Doesn't look like a regression, I see roughly same code quality all the way
from 4.1 which I tried first to current trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64326
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=64731
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 22 Jan 2015, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64731
>
> --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Doesn't look like a regression, I see roughl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64732
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64732
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64727
--- Comment #7 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #6)
> > The only FE change among those is r219973.
>
> And indeed if I revert it, the ICE disappears.
Do you see the regression, with r219973
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64712
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64727
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Do you see the regression, with r219973 in place, if you bootstrap with gcc
> 4.9.2 rather than gcc 5.0svn? It also seems odd, if r219973 triggers this bug,
> that you see it when bootstrapping with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64727
--- Comment #9 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
My mistake, I thought FX wasn't showing the errors.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64712
--- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 34532
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34532&action=edit
compile.sh, script used to reproduce on command-line
Running 10 iterations:
...
$ ./compile.sh
./unch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64733
Bug ID: 64733
Summary: MOV instruction error when inline assembly code is
used in a C function
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64733
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
