--- Comment #30 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 11:25
---
(In reply to comment #28)
> Hm, no, I was too quick pruning my inbox. The patch apparently has
> not been applied to the 4.5 branch.
>
It's on its way. I've been testing in conjunction wit
--- Comment #15 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-02 13:05
---
Subject: Bug 45070
Author: ibolton
Date: Thu Sep 2 13:05:30 2010
New Revision: 163774
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=163774
Log:
2010-09-02 Ian Bolton
Backport from
--- Comment #34 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-02 13:10
---
(In reply to comment #33)
> Yes, 4.4.5 and maybe 4.4.6 is planned.
>
(In reply to comment #31)
> (In reply to comment #30)
> > (In reply to comment #28)
> > > Hm, no, I was too quick prun
--- Comment #17 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-07 09:26
---
(In reply to comment #16)
> I'd like it backported to 4.4 if possible, thanks
>
Just awaiting approval on the mailing list. It's ready to go.
--
ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #35 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-07 09:27
---
(In reply to comment #32)
> I don't know if there are plans for more releases in the 4.4 series, but can
> it
> be applied to the 4.4 branch too?
>
The backport for 4.4 is ready. I am just wai
--- Comment #18 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-07 11:07
---
Subject: Bug 45070
Author: ibolton
Date: Tue Sep 7 11:07:31 2010
New Revision: 163945
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=163945
Log:
2010-09-07 Ian Bolton
Backport from
--
ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-07 13:05 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Created an attachment (id=21454)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21454&action=view) [edit]
> Testcase
>
OK. I can see this happening on trunk,
--- Comment #22 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-07 14:44
---
(In reply to comment #21)
> Subject: Re: Make fails in zlib
>
> Hello;
> Well I solved my problem, however the issue still remains. I installed
> the latest native binutils and gcc-4.
--- Comment #5 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-07 16:24 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> I my earlier tests I failed to notice that this test case triggers one of two
> different ICEs, depending on options and compiler version. I also mistakenly
> tested with
--- Comment #7 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-08 08:49 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > Do we need to act as if
> > -fno-ira-share-spill-slots
> > is set in cfun->calls_setjmp functions?
>
> At least in my case &
--- Comment #3 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-08 09:12 ---
Thanks for raising this bug, Gergely, and suggesting a patch. I've moved the
bug to the NEW state, so if you want to post your patch to the gcc-patches
list, then you will hopefully get some feedback on it
--- Comment #5 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-08 10:02 ---
Confirmed on latest 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6 (trunk).
Related GCC documentation on alignment of structure fields is here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.5.0/gcc/Variable-Attributes.html#Variable-Attributes
In the
--- Comment #23 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-08 10:06
---
(In reply to comment #21)
> Subject: Re: Make fails in zlib
>
> Hello;
> Well I solved my problem, however the issue still remains. I installed
> the latest native binutils and gcc-4.
--- Comment #1 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-08 16:21 ---
reg is assigned to a temporary (reg.0) at the very first tree pass, as shown by
this 004t.gimple dump:
d ()
{
struct b * const reg.0;
unsigned int * D.2019;
int D.2020;
goto ;
:
c ();
:
reg.0 = reg
--- Comment #36 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-09 15:37
---
Fixed in 4.4, 4.5 and trunk.
--
ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-13 11:04 ---
Reporter needs to try again with different configure options. (We may still
want a more user-friendly way of catching the original problem though.)
--
ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #6 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-14 14:29 ---
Technically, this is ICE on invalid code, but a more user-friendly error would
be better. As it happens, one has been added to trunk, as of 16th June.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-06/msg01501.html
I
--- Comment #3 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-21 14:40 ---
Which architecture/cpu are you wanting to build for? I'm not sure what the
default is. If you can specify that when you configure, and then post the
outcome of the build, that would be helpful.
--
ibolt
--- Comment #1 from ibolton at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-21 15:30 ---
Unfortunately, LTO does not officially work on ARM yet. There are many LTO
failures in the gcc testsuite at the moment.
Can you retry without LTO so we can diagnose the interworking problems?
--
ibolton at gcc
20 matches
Mail list logo
