https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64407
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63709
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63901
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63901
--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Peter,
The whole hardware multiply selection thing is a bit of a mess...
The uploaded patch should resolve the problem for now by building newlib with
software multiply enabled.
In the long term we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63901
--- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Peter,
> In mspgcc, TI provided a CSV file that listed every device along with all
> its characteristics. This is still present in the GCC header bundle TI
> provides. This in turn was processed to produ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64010
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64010
--- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Alex,
This appears to be a reload bug. Before reload we have:
(call_insn 12 (call:HI (mem:HI (mem:HI (plus:HI (reg:HI R14)
(const_int 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64010
--- Comment #9 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Ulrich,
Thanks - ypur patch does work, and it is certainly better than mine. Will
you be applying it to the gcc mainline sources ? (And maybe the 4.9 branch as
well ?)
Cheers
Nick
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64160
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64160
--- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Ulrich,
> if (reg_overlap_mentioned_p (operands[3], operands[7])
> || reg_overlap_mentioned_p (operands[3], operands[8]))
>FAIL;
Thanks - that is indeed a better solution to the bug.
> B.t.w. i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62218
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68304
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68638
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66655
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68795
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68795
--- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi David,
> Bother; I have another patch for this I was about to post, which is
> bootstrapping right now
Oops - sorry for treading on your toes!
Cheers
Nick
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66827
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66764
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67598
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68770
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68913
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68770
--- Comment #5 from Nick Clifton ---
Created attachment 37099
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37099&action=edit
Initialise the t_icode field of the sri structure created by copy_cost.
Hi Markus,
Please could you try out t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68770
--- Comment #8 from Nick Clifton ---
Patch applied. (Unfortunately I cannot close this BZ...)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60410
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #14
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60410
--- Comment #15 from Nick Clifton ---
Sorry I meant:
I am not sure of the best way to proceed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43052
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #32
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66655
--- Comment #11 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Marek,
> You need to sign in with your @gcc.gnu.org address.
Doh! Totally forgot about that. Thanks!
Cheers
Nick
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69012
--- Comment #18 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Bernd,
> I am still unsure, if we shouldn't also do something like this,
> to prevent any remaining possibility for a further regression:
> + /* Don't change the frame info after reload completed. */
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66655
--- Comment #31 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Alexander,
> Nick, can you please post the patch to gcc-patches too, to avoid confusing
> future people who wouldn't be able to find the explanation of the patch in the
> archives?
> (did you get approval
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48897
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48899
--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton 2011-05-09 10:07:20
UTC ---
I have checked in a patch to initialise the iq2000_tune variable, thus
eliminating the warning.
--- Comment #1 from nickc at redhat dot com 2010-07-22 09:42 ---
Hi Kazuhiro-san,
This is not a bug, it is the expected behaviour.
What is happening is that the return value from func() is being promoted to
"signed int" (and not "unsigned int" as you might expe
--- Comment #3 from nickc at redhat dot com 2010-07-28 13:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=21338)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21338&action=view)
Force functions that return small unsigned values to use zero-extension
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/b
--- Comment #4 from nickc at redhat dot com 2010-07-28 14:05 ---
Hi Kazuhiro-san,
> If the func() is external function, output code is the following.
> bsr_func
> mouv.B r1, r1
> If the return value is zero exteneded,
> "movu.B r1, r1" code can be r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46432
--- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton 2010-11-15 12:37:35
UTC ---
Hi Joern,
> FWIW, following the GNU coding standard advice on 'swallowing the semicolon'
> avoids the warning:
I think that it would be better to just delete the definitions. They
a
gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: nickc at redhat dot com
GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44438
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49403
--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton 2011-06-14 15:32:13
UTC ---
Fixed in mainline.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49402
--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton 2011-06-14 15:32:49
UTC ---
Fixed in mainline.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49899
Summary: ICE when redeclaring a static function as weak
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo
--- Comment #11 from nickc at redhat dot com 2007-11-01 14:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=14451)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14451&action=view)
Add a param to squelch runaway memory consumption
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32575
--- Comment #12 from nickc at redhat dot com 2007-11-01 14:05 ---
Hi Guys,
I have uploaded a patch for a possible workaround for this problem. It adds
a new param (max-partial-antic-length) which with its default value will stop
the tree-pre optimization from eating up all the
--- Comment #14 from nickc at redhat dot com 2007-11-01 14:57 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2/4.3 regression] With -ftree-vrp
miscompiles a single line of code in SQLite
Hi Jakub,
> Nick, your patch is most probably fixing PR32540 rather than PR32575, doesn't
> it?
Doh. Yes.
--- Comment #16 from nickc at redhat dot com 2007-11-08 13:47 ---
Hi Bernhard,
I have applied your patch. I made one small change: I adjusted the new
comments in the header files to:
/* TARGET_BIG_ENDIAN_DEFAULT is set in
config.gcc for big endian configurations. */
This
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2005-05-23 08:46
---
Hi Guys,
I have checked in a patch which restores Kazuhiro's original patch and which
should stop the testsuite from complaining.
Cheers
Nick
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21707
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2004-12-06 12:32
---
Fixed by this patch:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2004-12-06 Nick Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED] by this patch:
* gcc.dg/builtins-config.h: Use instead of
because the latter comes from gcc's
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2004-12-06 12:32
---
Fixed by this patch:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2004-12-06 Nick Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* gcc.dg/builtins-config.h: Use instead of
because the latter comes from gcc's include
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2004-12-06 12:35
---
Fixed by this patch:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2004-12-06 Nick Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* gcc.dg/builtins-config.h: Use instead of
because the latter comes from gcc's include
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88539
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #4
101 - 148 of 148 matches
Mail list logo