https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78365
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #11)
> (In reply to Andrew Senkevich from comment #10)
> > This commit breaks 5 SPEC CPU 2006 benchmarks (416.gamess, 454.calculix,
> > 459.GemsFDTD, 465.tonto, 481.wr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78365
--- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #11)
> Looks like a GC issue as I was reducing the code but removing the comments
> and empty lines caused the testcase to no longer crash. Adding --param
> ggc-min-e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79080
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jan 16 21:34:35 2017
New Revision: 244506
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244506&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/79080
* loop-doloop.c (doloop_modify): Call unsh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79089
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jan 16 21:35:30 2017
New Revision: 244507
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244507&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/79089
* gimplify.c (gimplify_init_constructor): If wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79108
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note "--param ggc-min-expand=0 --param ggc-min-heapsize=0" is required to
reproduce the issue. Otherwise it passes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79080
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79089
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49726
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6/7 Regression] -g0 |[5/6 Regression] -g0 file.S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79108
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57042
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE/Segfault with |Strange typespec with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77484
--- Comment #28 from Jan Hubicka ---
> On SPEC2000 the latest changes look good, compared to the old predictor gap
> improved by 10% and INT/FP by 0.8%/0.6%. I'll run SPEC2006 tonight.
It is rather surprising you are seeing such large changes fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79107
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33562
--- Comment #32 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Mon Jan 16 23:43:05 2017
New Revision: 244509
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244509&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-01-16 Jeff Law
PR tree-optimization/79090
PR tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61912
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Mon Jan 16 23:43:05 2017
New Revision: 244509
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244509&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-01-16 Jeff Law
PR tree-optimization/79090
PR tree-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77485
--- Comment #16 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Mon Jan 16 23:43:05 2017
New Revision: 244509
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244509&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-01-16 Jeff Law
PR tree-optimization/79090
PR tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79090
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Mon Jan 16 23:43:05 2017
New Revision: 244509
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244509&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-01-16 Jeff Law
PR tree-optimization/79090
PR tree-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78880
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79095
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79095
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78608
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Tue Jan 17 00:14:52 2017
New Revision: 244511
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244511&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/78608 - gimple-ssa-sprintf.c:570:17: runtime error:
n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78608
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78703
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79109
Bug ID: 79109
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/attr-alloc_size-4.c (test for excess
errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77484
--- Comment #29 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #28)
> > On SPEC2000 the latest changes look good, compared to the old predictor gap
> > improved by 10% and INT/FP by 0.8%/0.6%. I'll run SPEC2006 tonight.
>
> It is rather su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79110
Bug ID: 79110
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/format/pr78304.c (test for warnings,
line 9)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77484
--- Comment #30 from Jan Hubicka ---
>
> When I looked at gap at the time, the main change was the reordering of a few
> if statements in several hot functions. Incorrect block frequencies also
> change
> register allocation in a bad way, but I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77484
--- Comment #31 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #30)
> >
> > When I looked at gap at the time, the main change was the reordering of a
> > few
> > if statements in several hot functions. Incorrect block frequencies also
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53203
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79111
Bug ID: 79111
Summary: demangle_template tries to allocate
18446744070799748648 bytes
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77445
--- Comment #12 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 40526
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40526&action=edit
Patch I am testing
The profile is quite inconsistent since thread1.
The problem is that duplicate_thread_path do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79106
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79066
--- Comment #7 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Jan 17 02:54:11 2017
New Revision: 244515
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244515&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR79066, non-PIC code generated for powerpc glibc with -fpic
PR tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79066
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78633
--- Comment #19 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Author: kkojima
Date: Tue Jan 17 04:07:51 2017
New Revision: 244516
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244516&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/78633
* config/sh/sh.md (cmpeqsi_t+1): Call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78633
--- Comment #20 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
I've applied a quick fix. I'd like to keep this open for further
checks.
101 - 135 of 135 matches
Mail list logo