https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78572
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53203
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70710
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70565
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
This is similar to pr70565 but fails in an entirely different manner in the C
front-end:
abulafia:/build/t/gcc$ cat b.c
int array[1024];
void foo()
{
_Cilk_for (int i = 0; i
||2017-01-17
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
The problem here is that the parser builds an ARRAY_NOTATION_REF with a type of
ptrdiff for length and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79116
--- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Tue Jan 17 15:27:18 2017
New Revision: 244533
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244533&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/79116
* array-notation-common.c (cilkplus_extract_an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79116
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70565
--- Comment #4 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Tue Jan 17 16:54:55 2017
New Revision: 244538
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244538&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/70565
* cp-array-notation.c (expand_array_notation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70565
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6/7 Regression] ICE at |[5/6 Regression] ICE at
||2017-01-18
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Confirmed. Mine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79123
--- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez ---
[Just thinking out loud here.]
Yeah. There's no correct range information available. For the argument to
alloca we have:
# RANGE ~[2305843009213693952, 16140901064495857663]
n_9 = (long unsigned int)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79123
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79123
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Tue Jan 24 09:50:33 2017
New Revision: 244859
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244859&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/79123
* gimple-ssa-warn-alloca.c (alloca_ca
||2017-01-24
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #9 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Confirmed with:
$ wget http://www.phoronix-test-suite.com/benchmark-files/c-ray-1.1.tar.gz
$ tar -xzf c-ray
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77468
--- Comment #13 from Aldy Hernandez ---
The aarch64-linux-gnu regression originally reported for -mcpu=cortex-a53 was
caused by:
commit 08993ad1c669cab64baf352f79cd7f8584dd8e0c
Author: jgreenhalgh
Date: Thu Oct 1 09:33:40 2015 +
[Pat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77468
--- Comment #14 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Since the culprit for the reported regression is aarch64 specific, I think we
should open an independent x86-64 PR (or an architecture independent PR if the
other reported problem by Richi is reproducible o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77468
--- Comment #16 from Aldy Hernandez ---
>
> Could you dump me the assembly of the hot loop before and after that change
> - I'll see if we're doing anything particularly offensive with the
> scheduling, though I still don't have access to the so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77468
--- Comment #17 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 40573
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40573&action=edit
preprocessed testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77468
--- Comment #18 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #17)
> Created attachment 40573 [details]
> preprocessed testcase
Here's the preprocessed testcase generated on:
openSUSE Leap 42.1 (aarch64)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71691
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #20 from Aldy Hernandez
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68664
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68664
--- Comment #8 from Aldy Hernandez ---
FYI, on aarch64, the problem can be reproduced with:
./cc1 -quiet -I./ a.c -O3 -ffast-math -mcpu=cortex-a53
on ppc64 with:
./cc1 -quiet -I./ a.c -O3 -ffast-math
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68664
--- Comment #9 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 40613
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40613&action=edit
preprocessed testcase for reproducing on ppc64 and aarch64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68664
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71691
--- Comment #21 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Tue Jan 31 10:30:47 2017
New Revision: 245057
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245057&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/71691
* bitmap.h (class auto_bitmap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71691
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6/7 Regression] wrong code |[6 Regression] wrong code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67326
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to work||4.7.4
Known to fail||4.8.1, 4.8.2, 4.8.3, 4.8.4,
||7.0
--- Comment #7 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Using http://gcc.godbolt.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #29 from Aldy Hernandez ---
> Are there any other particular tricks for bootstrapping GCC circa 219827 on
> this AIX? Are there any other configury or otherwise flags?
FYI, I also tried --disable-nls as per comment 21, but I get a d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #31 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to David Edelsohn from comment #30)
> .../src/src/configure --disable-werror --with-gmp=/opt/cfarm
> --with-libiconv-prefix=/opt/cfarm --disable-libstdcxx-pch
> --with-included-gettext
>
> By the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #33 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 40666
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40666&action=edit
patch attempting to bootstrap 219827 on gcc119 (AIX 7.2)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #34 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to David Edelsohn from comment #32)
> How far are you going back in the bisection effort? You may be earlier than
> the point at which GCC on AIX generated stab strings continuation lines. At
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #35 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Hmmm, I see the changes in gcc/dbxout.h may override the DBX_* changes I made
to config/rs6000/rs6000.h. I'll attempt to patch gcc/dbxout.h instead. I will
report back.
BTW David, if there's a point in t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #37 from Aldy Hernandez ---
The patch that causes the bootstrap problem to go away is:
commit 42b45e81de1263454d6df22ca745db858c19e5b5
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Aug 12 14:27:40 2015 +
2015-08-12 Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #40666|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #40 from Aldy Hernandez ---
I am correct to assume that there is no workable debugger capable of debugging
gcc on our AIX boxes?
power8-aix:~/bisect-succeeds/gcc$ gdb cc1
GNU gdb (GDB) 7.8.2
Copyright (C) 2014 Free Software Foundati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #44 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to David Edelsohn from comment #43)
> I upgraded GDB on gcc119 with GDB 7.9.1 + IBM patches. It may work a little
> better.
FWI, the gdb on /opt/freeware/bin/gdb is even worse now. I can't put an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #45 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 40683
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40683&action=edit
reduced testcase that exhibits problem on a cross build (function crapola)
This pre-processed source is misco
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #50 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to David Edelsohn from comment #48)
> Based on Comment #45, is this a problem in the Stage 1 compilers? Note that
> Alan and Segher adjusted the doloop patterns in this release cycle. Does
> bac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #53 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 40690
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40690&action=edit
reduced testcase with rtl dumps and assembly
Ughh, that was painful. The attached .tar.gz file has a reduced
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #57 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 40697
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40697&action=edit
untested patch possibly solving AIX bootstrap
Taking in Jeff and Segher's suggestions, I propose something li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
--- Comment #60 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Proposed all-inclusive patch for this PR.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-02/msg00691.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79529
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Looks reasonable, thanks.
I would probably check for def == NULL too, just in case:
if (!def || gimple_nop_p (def))
return true;
...since I see that replace_ssa_name can set it to NULL:
/* Now tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59371
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83096
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81897
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
00:00:00 |2017-12-08
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez ---
I can't reproduce this with neither current trunk nor the aforementioned
r228318 that allegedly st
||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
--- Comment #19 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Nobody can reproduce this, and I've been asking for more information on this
for over a year. If someone can reproduce this or provide more inform
||2017-12-08
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Confirmed.
Started with r254707:
commit 86136db8efde2401b066fee95c546365b75dce2e
Author: tromey
Date
||2017-12-08
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Confirmed. Any update on this amker?
Started with:
commit a9b41911523c1db8042f1f38d1ed814326ef
Author
||2017-12-08
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Confirmed on trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3
--- Comment #4 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 39901
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39901&action=edit
proposed patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3
--- Comment #5 from Aldy Hernandez ---
simple_type_specificer() is dereferencing a NULL result from
c_common_type_for_mode and segfaulting:
int prec = TYPE_PRECISION (t);
if (ALL_FIXED_POINT_MODE_P (TYPE_MODE (t)))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3
--- Comment #6 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Fri Oct 28 16:41:29 2016
New Revision: 241653
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241653&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/3
* c-pretty-print.c (simple_type_specifier)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|7.0 |6.2.1
Summary|[6/7 Regressio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3
--- Comment #8 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Fri Oct 28 18:34:25 2016
New Revision: 241657
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241657&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/3
* c-pretty-print.c (simple_type_specifier)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
||2016-11-04
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
I cannot reproduce on mainline. I just get a compile error, not an ICE:
reynosa:/build/t$ cat /tmp/a.cc
||2016-11-04
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Confirmed. I'll take a peek.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77949
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Caused by:
commit b65b8df248d4eb4801cbe16287cf32eda9325dec
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Tue Jul 5 15:50:54 2016 +
PR c++/62314: add fixit hint for "expected ';' after class definition"
gcc/cp/Cha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72803
--- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez ---
This looks like a duplicate of pr77949, but I cannot confirm since I can't
reproduce it. Since this looks like it could be white space or column
sensitive, could the reporter please include the testcase as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72803
--- Comment #5 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Confirmed with the attachment. Thanks.
Let's leave this open for now, as the ICE occurs in a different place than
PR77949. It could be another unrelated bug caused by the same patch. Though
it seems like
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72803
--- Comment #6 from Aldy Hernandez ---
In cp_lexer_new_main() we read all the tokens from the preprocessor:
/* Get the remaining tokens from the preprocessor. */
while (token.type != CPP_EOF)
{
cp_lexer_get_preprocessor_token (lexer
||2016-11-11
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
As Solaris boxes with their header files are not readily available (at least to
me), would you mind
||2016-11-11
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
I cannot reproduce on a cross build with --target=hppa-unknown-linux-gnu. Is
this problem still present
||2016-11-11
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Confirmed with a cross build.
||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #8 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Fixed in mainline.
||2016-11-11
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
I cannot reproduce this on a cross build from x86-64 Linux to
--target=powerpc-*-linux-gnu. I cannot
||2016-11-11
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org,
||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Confirmed on a cross build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77849
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77849
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
||2016-11-11
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #5 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Confirmed with a cross build with:
cat >a.c <
Date: Fri Oct 21 13:52:53 2016 +
Start
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77346
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Nope, still can't reproduce. Can you run your compile line with -v and post
the results, to see if there are any other flags passed to cc1 that I am
unaware of?
powerpc-e300c3-linux-gnu-gcc-7.0.0-alpha2016
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78264
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78264
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i386-pc-solaris2.12,|i386-pc-solaris2.12,
||2016-11-14
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Confirmed. Mine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77346
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77346
--- Comment #7 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #6)
> Did you copy your session verbatim in #c5? If so, -f(no-)stack-protector
> apparently has nothing to do w/ the issue. Your cross-compilers most likely
> defaul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61409
--- Comment #25 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Sun Nov 20 18:34:06 2016
New Revision: 242639
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242639&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/61409
* tree-ssa-uninit.c: Define new glob
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61409
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6/7 regression] |[5/6 regression]
|-Wm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25672
--- Comment #42 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Tue Mar 10 16:37:53 2015
New Revision: 221326
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221326&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/25672
* configure.ac: Do not initialize CFLAGS_FOR_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25672
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.8/4.9/5 Regression] |[4.8/4.9 Regression] cross
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57059
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57059
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #20 from Aldy Hernandez ---
The testcases were deemed invalid and changed on mainline by r219061, and thus
no longer fail. Can we close this PR, remove the GCC 5 regression tag, or is
perhaps another similar testcase (??) still exhibiting a
||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from Aldy Hernandez ---
>From Mike's comment I see this should fail on ppc -m64, however on ppc64-linux
I see:
[aldyh@gcc1-power7 gcc]$ make check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS=struct-layout-1.exp
...
=== gcc Summary ===
# of expecte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34010
--- Comment #8 from Aldy Hernandez ---
PING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34010
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66085
--- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Sat May 9 13:50:21 2015
New Revision: 222969
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222969&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/66085
* decl2.c (note_mangling_alias): Decla
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66085
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56572
--- Comment #8 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Proposed patch and subsequent discussions:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-12/msg01693.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56572
--- Comment #9 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 31787
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31787&action=edit
removal of transactions from clones
This is a patch that fixes part of the problem, but as discussed in the thre
||2014-01-09
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #5 from Aldy Hernandez ---
I cannot reproduce this on either 4.8 or the 4.9 candidate (trunk).
reynosa:/dev/shm/trunk/gcc$ ./cc1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47889
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47889
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 from Aldy Hernandez ---
No ICE on 4.[789]:
reynosa:/build/pristine-4_8/gcc$ ./xgcc -B./ main.c s.c -flto -O -DPR47888
main.c:1:13: warning: type of 's' does not match original declaration [enabled
by default]
exter
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47889
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
801 - 900 of 1818 matches
Mail list logo
