--- Comment #7 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-11 22:57 ---
The testcase from comment #3 starts failing with this patch:
r97988 | dnovillo | 2005-04-11 22:06:46 + (Mon, 11 Apr 2005) | 17 lines
PR tree-optimization/20933
* tree-ssa-alias.c
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-11 23:48 ---
A regression hunt using an m68k-elf cross compiler on powerpc-linux shows
that the test failure begins with this patch:
r87487 | rakdver | 2004-09-14 08:05:46 + (Tue, 14 Sep 2004) | 17 lines
--- Comment #9 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-14 17:39 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux shows that the testcase from comment #8
starts failing with this large merge from the autovect branch, within the
date range that the submitter identified:
http://gcc.gnu.org
--- Comment #8 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-14 19:40 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using -O2 with the testcase in comment #7
identified the following large patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=100478
r100478 | dnovillo | 2005-06-02 02:57:15 +
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-14 20:43 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the testcase from comment #4
identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=100757
r100757 | nathan | 2005-06-08 11:49:23 + (Wed, 08 Jun
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-14 22:06 ---
The test works if the dg-require directive preceeds the dg-additional-sources
directive, although I haven't yet figured out why. I'll keep investigating and
add that information here, and also
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-14 22:17 ---
A regression hunt using an i686-linux cross compiler identified the following
patch where the code generation changes:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=99658
r99658 | hubicka | 2005-05-13 13:57:19 +
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-15 01:18 ---
Subject: Bug 24841
Author: janis
Date: Tue Nov 15 01:18:45 2005
New Revision: 106923
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=106923
Log:
PR testsuite/24841
* gcc.dg/attr-wea
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-15 01:25 ---
Aha, it's gcc_target_object_format that's gobbling up the additional source
file
if it hasn't already cached the result. Documentation patch in progress.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24841
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-15 01:45 ---
A regression hunt using an x86_64 cross compiler identified:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=106686
r106686 | krebbel | 2005-11-09 11:34:56 + (Wed, 09 Nov 2005) | 8 lines
2005-11-09 Andreas Kre
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-15 19:34 ---
A regression hunt identified the following patch from Janne Blomqvist:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=104662
r104662 | bdavis | 2005-09-26 20:24:45 + (Mon, 26 Sep 2005) | 28 lines
--
janis at
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-15 20:16 ---
It fails on powerpc64-linux with both -m32 and -m64 for current trunk,
4.0 branch, and GCC 4.0.0. Since it's Fortran 90 code it's not really
a regression.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24875
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-16 19:31 ---
A regression hunt using an s390-linux cross compiler on powerpc-linux
identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=103955
r103955 | ian | 2005-09-06 17:51:48 + (Tue, 06 Sep 2005)
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: powerpc-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24908
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-16 22:09 ---
Created an attachment (id=10261)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10261&action=view)
minimized testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24908
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-17 00:02 ---
A regression hunt with an hppa-linux cross compiler on powerpc-linux using
the testcase from comment #2 identified this large RTL loop versioning
patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=97481
r97481 | h
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-21 20:27 ---
A regression hunt identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=106588
2005-11-07 Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR target/24230
* config/rs600
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-28 21:48 ---
A regression hunt identified this large patch of many VPR fixes:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=100478
r100478 | dnovillo | 2005-06-02 02:57:15 + (Thu, 02 Jun 2005) | 141 lines
--
janis at gcc
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-28 23:26 ---
A regression hunt using the reduced testcase from comment #3 identified the
following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=98066
r98066 | law | 2005-04-13 04:29:40 + (Wed, 13 Apr 2005)
--
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-29 00:13 ---
A regression hunt identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=104103
r104103 | mmitchel | 2005-09-09 18:56:16 + (Fri, 09 Sep 2005) | 15 lines
PR c++/22252
* de
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-29 18:36 ---
A regression hunt identified the following patch (not terribly useful):
r81764 | dnovillo | 2004-05-13 06:41:07 + (Thu, 13 May 2004) | 3 lines
Merge tree-ssa-20020619-branch into mainline.
Andrew, are you
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-29 18:37 ---
The question in my previous comment should have been to Volker, not Andrew.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24996
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-30 19:27 ---
A regression hunt using the testcase from comment #3 identified:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=85599
r85599 | nathan | 2004-08-05 09:03:42 + (Thu, 05 Aug 2004) | 17 lines
* tr
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-30 21:33 ---
A regression hunt identified this patch to fix PR c/12913
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=98464
r98464 | jsm28 | 2005-04-20 16:41:48 + (Wed, 20 Apr 2005)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org cha
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: powerpc64-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25194
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-01 18:36 ---
Interesting, Alan can't reproduce the failure I reported but his patch at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-12/msg00015.html fixes it. I'll test
again when the patch has been checked in and then clo
ority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: powerpc-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25211
signed at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: powerpc-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25212
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-01 22:09 ---
Created an attachment (id=10385)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10385&action=view)
minimized testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25212
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-01 22:10 ---
Created an attachment (id=10386)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10386&action=view)
minimized testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25211
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-01 23:15 ---
Except that the testcase still fails and the fix for 24997 was checked in a
few days ago.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25212
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-05 19:06 ---
Subject: Bug 25247
Author: janis
Date: Mon Dec 5 19:06:11 2005
New Revision: 108069
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=108069
Log:
PR testsuite/25247
* lib/target-support
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-05 19:14 ---
This fix is also needed for the 4.1 and 4.0 branches, which I'm testing now.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25247
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-05 22:51 ---
Subject: Bug 25247
Author: janis
Date: Mon Dec 5 22:51:40 2005
New Revision: 108079
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=108079
Log:
PR testsuite/25247
* lib/target-support
--- Comment #7 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-06 18:04 ---
Subject: Bug 25247
Author: janis
Date: Tue Dec 6 18:04:00 2005
New Revision: 108124
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=108124
Log:
PR testsuite/25247
* lib/target-support
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-12 17:57 ---
This is odd, if the test case has a syntax error the xfail works as expected,
but with #error it doesn't. I'll look into it.
Take a look at gcc/testsuite/gcc.test-framework, which tests lots of
combi
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-12 22:14 ---
How embarrassing, I tried these things by adding new tests to
gcc.test-framework and the awk script that checks the results was ignoring some
of the results because of magic needed for the generated tests. Now I&#
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-13 19:08 ---
xfail within a dg-do command other than run has no effect, at least not with
DejaGnu 1.4.4 used with GCC at least as far back as 3.0. The DejaGnu
documentation doesn't mention the dg-* directives. The commen
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-14 17:56 ---
Compiling mesa with the options mentioned in the original description passes on
mainline and 4.1 with the fix for PR 24908.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25194
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-14 18:17 ---
I've got an ugly fix that reaches up a couple of levels to get the variable
from the DejaGnu proc that records that the test should be xfailed. Ben
Elliston, who is a DejaGnu maintainer, says that 1.4.5 wi
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-05 17:52 ---
My nightly build compilers don't show errors or warnings from anything later
than 3.4:
elm3b11% /opt/gcc-nightly/trunk/bin/gcc -c -mno-altivec -mabi=altivec 18631.c
elm3b11% /opt/gcc-nightly/4.1/bin/gcc -c
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-11 22:21 ---
It's easy to replace gcc.c-torture/execute/execute.exp with
compile/compile.exp, use "run" for the default instead of
"assemble", and then add test directives to the .c files to
replace t
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 19:28 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the submitter's testcase identified
the following patch as introducing the failure:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=87064
r87064 | rth | 2004-09-03 23:50
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-16 20:34 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the testcase from comment #1
identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=72611
r72611 | lerdsuwa | 2003-10-17 15:41:46 + (Fri, 17 Oct
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-18 21:24 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the submitter's testcase identified
the following very large patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=69130
r69130 | mmitchel | 2003-07-09 08:48:08 + (We
--- Comment #12 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-21 01:24 ---
A regression hunt of the trunk on powerpc-linux using the testcase in comment
#4 (modified to abort if the result is not 4) identified the following patch to
fix several C++ bugs:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev
--- Comment #7 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-19 16:51 ---
This can be closed, either as fixing the test case or as "will not fix" for
detecting in the compiler that the initialization could be done at compile
time.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28113
--- Comment #23 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-04 16:48 ---
The CPU2000 tests now pass, so as far as I'm concerned this is fixed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27770
--- Comment #10 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-08 15:51 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified the following patch where the
testcase from comment #3 starts failing:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=109938
r109938 | dberlin | 2006-01-19 01:4
--- Comment #7 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-08 15:54 ---
A regression hunt using an i686-linux cross compiler with the testcase from
comment #6 identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=111300
r111300 | dberlin | 2006-02-20 13:3
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-08 16:05 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux showed that the behavior changed with this
patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=65103
r65103 | jason | 2003-03-31 20:25:11 + (Mon, 31 Mar 2003)
There
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-08 18:31 ---
A regression hunt using an i686-linux cross compiler with the testcase from
comment #1 identified the following patch where the compiler starts
segfaulting:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=10
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-08 19:55 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this patch where a testcase based
on the submitter's test (see below) starts failing:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=95356
r95356 | paolo | 2
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-08 20:35 ---
David asked me to run a regression hunt on this, but I'm very confused about
when the problem occurs, since some of the submitter's examples look just fine
to me. Here's what it looks like to m
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-08 20:49 ---
Oops, I meant that for 4.1 powerpc-linux with sjlj exceptions, it passes for
-O0 but fails for -O[s123]. I'm trying 4.0 now, then will back up if I see
problems with 4.0.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bug
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-08 20:59 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux confirmed that this patch caused the change
in behavior:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=107702
r107702 | bonzini | 2005-11-30 08:20:23 + (Wed, 30 Nov
--- Comment #7 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-08 21:08 ---
I don't get any failures with the 4.0-branch for powerpc-linux with sjlj
exceptions. Here's the executable test case I'm using for a regression hunt:
extern "C" vo
--- Comment #9 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-09 00:13 ---
Aaron, I had not noticed that the stack pointer is modified in some of the code
that I had thought looked correct. My example works correctly with -O0 for
powerpc-linux with sjlj exceptions for 4.0 and 4.1 branches
--- Comment #10 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-09 00:21 ---
A regression hunt using the testcase from comment #7 compiled with -O1, with a
powerpc-linux compiler configured with --enable-sjlj-exceptions, identified the
following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-09 00:36 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this large patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=115086
r115086 | jason | 2006-06-30 01:15:56 + (Fri, 30 Jun 2006)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-09 15:46 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=102182
r102182 | giovannibajo | 2005-07-20 01:19:59 + (Wed, 20 Jul 2005)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-09 17:48 ---
A regression hunt using an s390-linux cross compiler on powerpc-linux, with the
submitter's testcase and options, identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=88869
r88869 | pinsk
--- Comment #9 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-10 23:15 ---
In case Jakub's patch can't be backported easily, this might be useful. A
regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified the following patch as the start of
failures for the testcase in comment #5:
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 16:17 ---
A regression hunt using an i686-linux cross compiler for the submitter's
testcase with "-O2 -march=i486 -mtune=i686" identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 18:46 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the test case added for comment #3
identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=115086
r115086 | jason | 2006-06-30 01:15:56 + (Fri
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 19:24 ---
A regression hunt using an arm-ep93xx-linux-gnueabi cross compiler on
powerpc-linux, with the testcase minimal.c, identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=105121
r105121 |
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 19:27 ---
This problem also affects powerpc-linux, where a regression hunt identified the
following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=112408
r112408 | geoffk | 2006-03-27 06:09:48 + (Mon, 27 Mar
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 22:24 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=106566
r106566 | mmitchel | 2005-11-06 19:41:18 + (Sun, 06 Nov 2005)
--
janis at gcc dot
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 22:29 ---
A regression hunt using the first testcase identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=94656
r94656 | giovannibajo | 2005-02-03 10:26:22 + (Thu, 03 Feb 2005)
A regres
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 23:00 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=114667
r114667 | mmitchel | 2006-06-15 03:40:42 + (Thu, 15 Jun 2006)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-11 23:57 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using a C compiler identified the following
patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=101799
r101799 | dberlin | 2005-07-08 23:37:11 + (Fri, 08 Jul
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-12 21:22 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the testcase from comment #1
identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=114119
r114119 | mmitchel | 2006-05-25 20:18:26 + (Thu, 25 May
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-12 21:25 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=114245
r114245 | mmitchel | 2006-05-30 21:25:02 + (Tue, 30 May 2006)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-12 21:26 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=113081
r113081 | mmitchel | 2006-04-19 16:58:23 + (Wed, 19 Apr 2006)
--
janis at gcc dot
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-12 21:28 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the testcase from the submitter's
description identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=114119
r114119 | mmitchel | 2006-05-25
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-12 21:31 ---
A testcase on powerpc-linux with the first testcase, mainline, checking
enabled, identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=113081
r113081 | mmitchel | 2006-04-19 16:58:23 +
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-12 21:36 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=102182
r102182 | giovannibajo | 2005-07-20 01:19:59 + (Wed, 20 Jul 2005)
--
janis at gcc
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-12 21:37 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=93055
r93055 | nathan | 2005-01-07 17:09:15 + (Fri, 07 Jan 2005)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-12 21:40 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=90059
r90059 | giovannibajo | 2004-11-04 13:07:35 + (Thu, 04 Nov 2004)
--
janis at gcc
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-12 21:44 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=87810
r87810 | sayle | 2004-09-21 16:20:12 + (Tue, 21 Sep 2004)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-12 21:45 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=84689
r84689 | mmitchel | 2004-07-14 15:34:30 + (Wed, 14 Jul 2004)
--
janis at gcc dot
--- Comment #7 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-14 16:16 ---
Regression hunts on powerpc-linux showed that the original testcase with -O3
and the testcase in comment #5 with -O0 both start getting segfaults with the
following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-18 18:04 ---
The testcase in comment #4 is incomplete; I get all of these errors even with
the current 4.1-branch on powerpc-linux:
elm3b11% /opt/gcc-nightly/4.1/bin/g++ -c 28753.cc
28753.cc:21: error: ISO C++ forbids declaration
--- Comment #10 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-18 21:30 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the submitter's testcase identified
the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=69921
r69921 | nathan | 2003-07-29 11:16:50 + (Tue, 29
--- Comment #8 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-18 22:20 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the testcase from comment #4
identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=110852
r110852 | rakdver | 2006-02-10 21:01:10 + (Fri, 10
--- Comment #9 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-18 23:31 ---
A regression hunt using "-O2 -w -fmove-loop-invariants" on powerpc-linux
identfied the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=99547
r99547 | rakdver | 2005-05-10 22:33:30 +000
--- Comment #10 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-21 16:34 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the testcase from comment #3
identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=91097
r91097 | kazu | 2004-11-23 17:45:50 + (Tue, 23 Nov
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-21 18:29 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=66019
r66019 | neil | 2003-04-23 22:44:06 + (Wed, 23 Apr 2003)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-21 21:20 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this patch, which is a merge of
the pch-branch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=61136
r61136 | geoffk | 2003-01-10 02:22:34 + (Fri, 10 Jan 2003)
--- Comment #8 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-21 23:34 ---
In response to Geoff's request in comment #6:
elm3b11% /home/janis/tools/gcc-3.3.5-ppc32/bin/g++ -B./ -c -x c++ 28528.i -###
Reading specs from
/home/janis/tools/gcc-3.3.5-ppc32/lib/gcc-lib/powerpc-linux/3.3.5/
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-24 23:35 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=87036
r87036 | dpatel | 2004-09-03 17:10:40 + (Fri, 03 Sep 2004)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-28 19:43 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified the following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=112361
r112361 | geoffk | 2006-03-24 21:59:48 + (Fri, 24 Mar 2006)
The log message and
--- Comment #20 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-28 20:42 ---
Subject: Bug 25259
Author: janis
Date: Mon Aug 28 20:42:12 2006
New Revision: 116528
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=116528
Log:
Backport from mainline (part of r198241)
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-28 21:03 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=110017
r110017 | mmitchel | 2006-01-20 03:07:58 + (Fri, 20 Jan 2006)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #9 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-28 22:14 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=116409
r116409 | nathan | 2006-08-25 16:56:07 + (Fri, 25 Aug 2006)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #9 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-28 22:58 ---
I can confirm that the latest regression is from r112408.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27657
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-31 17:57 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=116276
r116276 | mmitchel | 2006-08-20 23:53:10 + (Sun, 20 Aug 2006)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #5 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-31 20:27 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=99691
r99691 | kazu | 2005-05-14 00:46:12 + (Sat, 14 May 2005)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-31 20:29 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux identified this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=116213
r116213 | rakdver | 2006-08-17 08:22:05 + (Thu, 17 Aug 2006)
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-05 16:31 ---
David is pursuing this as part of a larger effort to fix licenses for GCC
libraries. David, any news?
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
201 - 300 of 930 matches
Mail list logo
