[Bug rtl-optimization/56131] [4.8 regression] gcc.dg/pr56035.c ICEs gcc on sparc-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56131 --- Comment #9 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-02-04 15:39:09 UTC --- (In reply to comment #8) > Mikael, > > > I tested this on x86_64-linux and sparc64-linux. On x86_64 there were no > > test > > suite changes, > > Thanks for testing

[Bug testsuite/56206] New: [4.7.3 regression] "dg-require-effective-target arm_hard_vfp_ok" triggers many test suite errors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56206 Bug #: 56206 Summary: [4.7.3 regression] "dg-require-effective-target arm_hard_vfp_ok" triggers many test suite errors Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version:

[Bug testsuite/56206] [4.7.3 regression] "dg-require-effective-target arm_hard_vfp_ok" triggers many test suite errors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56206 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/52306] ICE in cselib_record_set, at cselib.c:2158

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52306 --- Comment #17 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-02-06 23:23:58 UTC --- Created attachment 29376 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29376 reduced test case Please disregard my last two comments, I misread the insn dump and m

[Bug libstdc++/56332] libstdc++-v3 does not support x86_64-pc-mingw64: No support for this host/target combination

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56332 --- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-02-15 08:39:20 UTC --- For mingw-w64 isn't the triplet supposed to be 'x86_64-w64-mingw32'? Or has the 'old mingw' now grown its own 64-bit support?

[Bug libstdc++/56332] libstdc++-v3 does not support x86_64-pc-mingw64: No support for this host/target combination

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56332 --- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-02-15 14:09:35 UTC --- Confusing or not, the triplet is as I stated, see e.g.: http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/mingw-w64/wiki/Answer%20Multilib%20Toolchain And the 32-bit target is 'i686-w64-mi

[Bug c/56341] GCC produces unaligned data access

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56341 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug tree-optimization/56501] gcc 4.6 ICE on noreturn function at -Os and above

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56501 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug c/56512] Memory corruption when compiling code with -O on PowerPC when using setjmp/longjmp

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56512 --- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-03-03 14:43:40 UTC --- This test case is full of undefined behaviour: - you longjmp out of a frame to an older frame, and then expect to be able to longjmp back into the younger frame; that doesn'

[Bug tree-optimization/56270] loop over array of struct float causes compiler error: segmentation fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56270 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug target/56513] Wrong code generation with -O3 on ARM

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56513 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug target/56513] Wrong code generation with -O3 on ARM

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56513 --- Comment #5 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-03-03 23:26:49 UTC --- The wrong-code stopped for 4.8 with r188526, the introduction and enabling of -ftree-coalesce-vars. At that point the wrong-code reappears with -O3 -fno-tree-coalesce-vars,

[Bug target/56513] Wrong code generation with -O3 on ARM

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56513 --- Comment #6 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-03-04 13:24:04 UTC --- The wrong-code with -O3 -fno-tree-coalesce-vars stopped occurring at r190284, Richard Biener's large "Allow anonymous SSA names" patch. The patch description mentions minor

[Bug target/56561] Miscompilation with -Os -arm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56561 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug target/56561] Miscompilation with -Os -arm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56561 --- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-03-07 18:14:17 UTC --- The wrong-code on 4.6 branch is stopped by backporting r183512 aka PR48308 fix.

[Bug target/56561] Miscompilation with -Os -arm

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56561 --- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-03-08 08:23:31 UTC --- Created attachment 29613 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29613 backport of r183512/PR48308 to 4.6 branch This is the backport I've been using since ea

[Bug c/56569] When compiling the source insn does not satisfy its constraints:with CFlags as -mcfv4e

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56569 --- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-03-08 09:25:58 UTC --- gcc-3.4.0 is ancient and hasn't been supported by upstream for years. Please try again with a supported release, e.g. 4.7.2 or 4.6.3. Also, you failed to provide a test ca

[Bug c/56569] When compiling the source insn does not satisfy its constraints:with CFlags as -mcfv4e

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56569 --- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-03-08 12:19:15 UTC --- The please close this bug report.

[Bug c/56584] _int_free assertion failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56584 --- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-03-10 10:14:46 UTC --- I can't reproduce the error with vanilla gcc-4.7.2 running on Fedora 17/x86_64, either natively or in a cross to ARM Cortex-M3.

[Bug middle-end/56657] [GCC 4.6/4.7] ICE - error: unrecognizable insn.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56657 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug middle-end/56657] [GCC 4.6/4.7] ICE - error: unrecognizable insn.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56657 --- Comment #5 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-03-20 09:07:28 UTC --- Created attachment 29698 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29698 reduced test case

[Bug ada/48835] porting GNAT to m68k-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48835 --- Comment #54 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-03-20 11:05:58 UTC --- Status update: Although gnat is solid enough to rebuild itself with (patched) gcc-4.6 on m68k, there is a regression with (similarly patched) 4.7 that breaks bootstrap:

[Bug ada/48835] porting GNAT to m68k-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48835 --- Comment #55 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-03-22 14:30:23 UTC --- (In reply to comment #54) > This ICE started with r180192, an ICE fix (PR50780). I don't see anything in > that patch that seems m68k or cc0 related Actually, r180192 i

[Bug middle-end/56712] constructor function is called twice

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56712 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug c++/56734] Even simple exceptions cause a segmentation fault in my build of gcc on Solaris 10.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56734 --- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-03-26 09:09:18 UTC --- Works for me on Solaris 2.10/SPARC, gcc-4.7.2 configured w/ Sun not GNU binutils: > g++ -O -c Core.ii > g++ -O -c CoreTest.ii > g++ Core.o CoreTest.o > ./a.out Exc

[Bug rtl-optimization/56732] ICE in advance_target_bb

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56732 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug middle-end/56712] [4.6 Regression] constructor function is called twice

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56712 --- Comment #6 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-03-26 10:24:08 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > Created attachment 29724 [details] > backport of the above mentioned fix Don't base your backport on the original patch submission, base it on

[Bug rtl-optimization/56732] ICE in advance_target_bb

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56732 --- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-03-26 13:35:30 UTC --- Started with http://gcc.gnu.org/r188742 or http://gcc.gnu.org/r188743. With r188742 I get: In file included from ploaderhook.c:25:0: /home/rajiv/ndless/ndless/Ndless-SD

[Bug rtl-optimization/56745] [4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE in merge_if_block

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56745 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug target/48326] Target attribute leaks from function pointers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48326 --- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-03-30 11:59:19 UTC --- I can reproduce the initial bug with gcc 4.4.7, 4.5.3, 4.6.3, and 4.7.0, but not with 4.5.4, 4.6-20130322, 4.7.1, or 4.7.2.

[Bug target/48326] Target attribute leaks from function pointers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48326 --- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-03-30 12:31:38 UTC --- The initial bug was fixed by r187169 on 4.7 branch, I'd say it's clearly a dup of PR53228.

[Bug bootstrap/56813] New: [4.9 regression] invalid assembly code for libiberty/cp-demangle.c on armv5tel-linux-gnueabi

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56813 Bug #: 56813 Summary: [4.9 regression] invalid assembly code for libiberty/cp-demangle.c on armv5tel-linux-gnueabi Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.9

[Bug bootstrap/56813] [4.9 regression] invalid assembly code for libiberty/cp-demangle.c on armv5tel-linux-gnueabi

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56813 --- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-03 13:10:22 UTC --- Started with Steven Bosscher's http://gcc.gnu.org/r197266, still occurs at r197407, reproducible with a cross.

[Bug c/56851] Segmentation Error using -O3 optimization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56851 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug c/56851] Segmentation Error using -O3 optimization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56851 --- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-06 11:57:13 UTC --- The SEGV stopped on trunk with r195239 aka PR55964 fix.

[Bug c/52773] internal error: in replace_pseudos_in, at reload1.c:577

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52773 --- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-08 17:11:50 UTC --- The ICE still occurs with gcc 4.6-20130405, 4.7-20130406, 4.8-20130404, and 4.9-20130407.

[Bug middle-end/56888] memcpy implementation optimized as a call to memcpy

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56888 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug middle-end/56888] memcpy implementation optimized as a call to memcpy

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56888 --- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-09 09:59:20 UTC --- Started with Richard Biener's http://gcc.gnu.org/r188261 aka PR53081 fix, which added or improved memcpy recognition. I'm guess the new code fails to check for whatever opt

[Bug other/56881] Miscompilation (optimisation failure?) causing NULL dereference and segfault at runtime

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56881 --- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-09 14:45:33 UTC --- The test case is incomplete, as it lacks both main() and domalloc(). Please add those (in a separate file if you like) so that the test case can be compiled to an executabl

[Bug bootstrap/56813] [4.9 regression] invalid assembly code for libiberty/cp-demangle.c on armv5tel-linux-gnueabi

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56813 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug tree-optimization/56899] Wrong constant folding

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56899 --- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-10 07:45:20 UTC --- What's the target? I can't reproduce on x86_64, armv5tel, or m68k.

[Bug target/56866] gcc 4.7.x/gcc-4.8.x with '-O3 -march=bdver2' misscompiles glibc-2.17/crypt/sha512.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56866 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug target/56940] internal compiler error: unrecognizable insn:

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56940 --- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-13 10:55:21 UTC --- I can reproduce the ICE with gcc 4.6.4, but not with 4.7.3 or 4.8.0, all built as crosses to arm-linux-gnueabi from unmodified FSF releases.

[Bug target/48576] wrong code when accessing variables in a large stack frame

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48576 --- Comment #7 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-13 12:26:24 UTC --- This bug still occurs with gcc 4.9-20130407, 4.8-20130411, and 4.7-20130406.

[Bug other/56881] Miscompilation (optimisation failure?) causing NULL dereference and segfault at runtime

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56881 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug other/56881] Miscompilation (optimisation failure?) causing NULL dereference and segfault at runtime

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56881 --- Comment #7 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-13 20:39:03 UTC --- Started with Bernd Schmidt's "Optimize calls to functions that return one of their arguments" patch in http://gcc.gnu.org/r187459, originally proposed in

[Bug other/56881] Miscompilation (optimisation failure?) causing NULL dereference and segfault at runtime

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56881 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC|mikpe at it dot uu.se | --- Comment #8 from

[Bug target/56866] gcc 4.7.x/gcc-4.8.x with '-O3 -march=bdver2' misscompiles glibc-2.17/crypt/sha512.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56866 --- Comment #8 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-14 15:55:32 UTC --- OK, I can confirm that compiling glibc-2.17 with gcc-4.7.3 -O3 -march=bdver1 causes the sha512 test to fail, but without "-march=bdver1" it doesn't fail. I also saw regres

[Bug target/56866] gcc 4.7.x/gcc-4.8.x with '-O3 -march=bdver2' misscompiles glibc-2.17/crypt/sha512.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56866 --- Comment #10 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-17 20:15:47 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) > How to proceed? Derive a stand-alone test case from the failing glibc module and whatever glibc code it requires, then minimize it.

[Bug target/57018] Miscompilation of bison 2.7.1 under "-Os -fomit-frame-pointer"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57018 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug bootstrap/57028] New: [4.9 regression] Fortran bootstrap fails due to missing zlib.h

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57028 Bug #: 57028 Summary: [4.9 regression] Fortran bootstrap fails due to missing zlib.h Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONF

[Bug c/57046] wrong code generated by gcc 4.8.0 on i686

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57046 --- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-23 11:31:06 UTC --- Created attachment 29918 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29918 Single-file test case. I can reproduce the wrong-code on x86_64-linux with gcc 4.9-2013

[Bug bootstrap/57028] [4.9 regression] Fortran bootstrap fails due to missing zlib.h

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57028 --- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-24 16:54:41 UTC --- As far as I understand it, there are two issues: 1. zlib isn't built unless some explicitly enabled component demands it; in my case (on x86_64) zlib was built since I had

[Bug bootstrap/57028] [4.9 regression] Fortran bootstrap fails due to missing zlib.h

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57028 --- Comment #5 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-25 09:16:12 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > Patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-04/msg01464.html . The patch doesn't work. With 4.9-20130421 + the patch I get: /tmp/objdir/

[Bug bootstrap/57028] [4.9 regression] Fortran bootstrap fails due to missing zlib.h

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57028 --- Comment #7 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-25 13:50:47 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > Updated patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-04/msg01517.html This one works. Thanks.

[Bug c/57080] Invalid optimization (-O2) when doing double -> int conversion (on big endian archs(?))

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57080 --- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-26 11:49:44 UTC --- Created attachment 29946 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29946 test case I can reproduce the issue on m68k: with the attached test case I get 4 on m6

[Bug libgcc/57085] Segmentation Fault when building a c file

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57085 --- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-27 10:00:13 UTC --- Please attach _preprocessed_ source for the test case, and tell us what options gcc was invoked when compiling the test case.

[Bug libgcc/57085] Segmentation Fault when building a c file

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57085 --- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-28 09:11:03 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > Created attachment 29954 [details] > Affected code > > Attached is contents.c that I mentioned in the initial post. This is from > system/extr

[Bug libgcc/57085] Segmentation Fault when building a c file

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57085 --- Comment #7 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-28 13:41:53 UTC --- I can't reproduce the ICE with 4.9 r198366 configured as a cross to armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabi, on either x86_64-linux or i686-linux, or natively on armv5tel-unknown-linux

[Bug libgcc/57085] Segmentation Fault when building a c file

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57085 --- Comment #9 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-28 18:08:02 UTC --- (In reply to comment #8) > Any suggestions for > troubleshooting this bug on my end? I've done a few toolchain builds and > always > run into this segfault as do others.

[Bug libgcc/57085] Segmentation Fault when building a c file

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57085 --- Comment #11 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-04-29 19:30:35 UTC --- I can't reproduce the ICE with a cross to arm-linux-androideabi either.

[Bug c/57133] false const qualifier warning typedef

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57133 --- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson 2013-05-01 11:37:56 UTC --- (In reply to comment #0) > typedef char *type; > > void f(const type t) > { This doesn't do what you think it does. t is now a const variable of type char*, not a va

[Bug c/57180] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong size

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57180 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug c/57180] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong size

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57180 --- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson --- This test case also fails on x86_64-linux with every gcc release from 3.2.3 up to today's 4.9 (r198748). Looking at the assembly code for the x[] initializer it's easy to see why: .type x, @obj

[Bug c/57180] Structures with a flexible arrray member have wrong size

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57180 --- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson --- According to , arrays of structures with trailing flex arrays are invalid and rejected. The page also gives an example of that, but

[Bug bootstrap/57266] New: [4.9 regression] comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions in fold_binary_loc breaks m68k bootstrap

: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: bootstrap Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mikpe at it dot uu.se Attempting to bootstrap gcc-4.9-20130512 on m68k-linux fails with: /mnt/scratch/objdir49

[Bug bootstrap/57266] [4.9 regression] comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions in fold_binary_loc breaks m68k bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57266 --- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson --- My m68k bootstrap has now recompiled fold-const.c + your patch three times without warnings or errors. Thanks for the quick fix.

[Bug bootstrap/54260] GCC 4.7.1 fails to build.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54260 --- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-08-16 07:24:56 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > 99 /home/Feto/sw/gcc/build/./gcc/cc1: error while loading shared libraries: > libmpc.so.2: cannot open shared object > file: No such file or directo

[Bug c/52991] attribute packed broken on mingw32?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52991 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se --- Comment #3

[Bug c/52991] attribute packed broken on mingw32?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52991 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org --- Commen

[Bug c/54340] internal compiler error: Illegal instruction (int main() returns nothing, only when -O2/-O3 used)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54340 --- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-08-21 07:22:09 UTC --- You didn't specify the host, but since it's Ubuntu I'm guessing Linux/x86_64. I can't reproduce the SIGILL with either 4.7.1, 4.6.3, or 4.5.4 on a Core i7. Can you reproduce wi

[Bug c/52991] attribute packed broken on mingw32?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52991 --- Comment #5 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-08-22 08:34:46 UTC --- The following variation of the test case was compiled with both gcc-4.7.1 and MS Visual Studio 2008: #include #if defined(__GNUC__) struct A1 { short s; struct { int i;

[Bug target/32219] optimizer causes wrong code in pic/hidden/weak symbol checking.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32219 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se --- Comment

[Bug bootstrap/54453] [4.8 Regression] r190783 breaks bootstrap on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54453 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se --- Comment #6

[Bug bootstrap/54453] [4.8 Regression] r190783 breaks bootstrap on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54453 --- Comment #7 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-09-03 11:29:09 UTC --- Bootstrap on sparc64-linux succeeded with Steven's patch applied.

[Bug preprocessor/54528] [4.8 Regression] system.h:288:78: error: integer overflow in expression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54528 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se --- Comment #2

[Bug tree-optimization/52445] [4.6 Regression] conditional store replacement causes segfault in generated code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52445 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se --- Comment

[Bug c++/54596] seg fault building Eigen stuff with cygwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54596 --- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-09-16 09:03:14 UTC --- (In reply to comment #0) > The generated *.i* is attached. No it isn't. If it's very large you may have to compress it. Also, 4.5.3 is no longer supported, please try 4.6.3 or t

[Bug tree-optimization/53663] 4.7 inconsistent inline handling of bool within union

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53663 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug tree-optimization/53663] 4.7 inconsistent inline handling of bool within union

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53663 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/53663] 4.7 inconsistent inline handling of bool within union

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53663 --- Comment #8 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-09-23 18:44:53 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) > It may be yet another SRA problem. Perhaps not, -fno-tree-sra makes no difference. Looking through the tree dumps I see the wrong code first a

[Bug tree-optimization/53663] 4.7 inconsistent inline handling of bool within union

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53663 --- Comment #10 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-09-23 22:12:07 UTC --- Although -fno-tree-fre works for the test case in #c3, adjusting it to use __builtin_memcpy() for the assignment in f() results in wrong code even with -fno-tree-fre. Th

[Bug ada/54688] New: [4.8 regression] a-ioexce.ads violation of implicit restriction "No_Elaboration_Code" breaks Ada bootstrap on sparc64-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54688 Bug #: 54688 Summary: [4.8 regression] a-ioexce.ads violation of implicit restriction "No_Elaboration_Code" breaks Ada bootstrap on sparc64-linux Classification: Unclassifi

[Bug preprocessor/54528] [4.8 Regression] system.h:288:78: error: integer overflow in expression

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54528 --- Comment #5 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-09-27 07:06:51 UTC --- The bug is still present in gcc-4.8-20120923.

[Bug c++/54741] GCC 4.4, 4.5, 4.6 4.7 (probably 4.8) Generates un-usable code on AVX supported CPUs (FreeBSD)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54741 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug ada/54843] [4.8 Regression] ada bootstrap failure on arm-linux-gnueabi

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54843 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug bootstrap/54820] [4.8 Regression] ada: cannot find -lstdc++ since 4.8.0 20121002

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug bootstrap/54863] New: [4.8 regresssion] multiple 'comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions' errors in simplify-rtx.c:simplify_truncation broke m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54863 Bug #: 54863 Summary: [4.8 regresssion] multiple 'comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions' errors in simplify-rtx.c:simplify_truncation broke m68k-linux

[Bug middle-end/54862] [4.8 Regression] error: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions in simplify-rtx.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54862 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug bootstrap/54863] [4.8 regresssion] multiple 'comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions' errors in simplify-rtx.c:simplify_truncation broke m68k-linux bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54863 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/54862] [4.8 Regression] error: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions in simplify-rtx.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54862 --- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-10-09 07:41:22 UTC --- I got the exact same failure with gcc-4.8-20121007 on m68k-linux.

[Bug target/54902] [4.7 Regression], ICE (segfault) building on arm-linux-gnueabi

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54902 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug target/54892] [4.7 Regression], ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2123

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54892 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug target/54892] [4.7 Regression], ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2123

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54892 --- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-10-13 21:35:21 UTC --- The ICE started with Richard Henderson's "[ARM] Convert to atomic optabs" patch in r183050: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-01/msg00288.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gc

[Bug bootstrap/54820] [4.8 Regression] ada: cannot find -lstdc++ since 4.8.0 20121002

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820 --- Comment #8 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-10-14 08:56:25 UTC --- Eric's patch in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg01093.html fixed the Ada bootstrap without static libstdc++ problem on my ARM box.

[Bug bootstrap/54820] [4.8 Regression] ada: cannot find -lstdc++ since 4.8.0 20121002

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820 --- Comment #10 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-10-14 10:09:12 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) > Can you confirm that the stage 2 & 3 > executables, for example cc1 and gnat1, aren't dynamically linked against > libstdc++? Yes; according

[Bug target/54943] ARM - EABI - varargs floating point issue

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54943 --- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-10-17 11:25:07 UTC --- Please provide a test case.

[Bug target/54943] ARM - EABI - varargs floating point issue

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54943 --- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-10-17 13:30:09 UTC --- Yes the EABI changes things, but I think the user error is that: 1. your sprintf uses homegrown varargs-parsing code, which won't work with EABI; you should use as suppli

[Bug target/54974] [4.8 Regression] [ARM] Incorrect placement of constant pools

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54974 Mikael Pettersson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se

[Bug target/54974] [4.8 Regression] [ARM] Incorrect placement of constant pools

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54974 --- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-10-18 19:43:02 UTC --- The test case started failing with r189790: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2012-07/msg00695.html That patch merely enabled insn splitting at -O0, so I suspect it exposed a latent

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >