http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-13
07:11:57 UTC ---
This avoids the segfault. But what is lang_specific and why is it not set in
problem case? Where does it normally get set?
Index: trans-expr.c
==
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46460
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46460
Summary: shifting producing incorrect result
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46332
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46332
--- Comment #15 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-13
01:21:17 UTC ---
Author: ian
Date: Sat Nov 13 01:21:12 2010
New Revision: 166695
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166695
Log:
libiberty/:
PR other/46332
* cp-dem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31827
Dave Korn changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||davek at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45742
--- Comment #9 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-13
00:25:13 UTC ---
Test case:
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/volatile12.f90
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-options "-fdump-tree-optimized -O3" }
+!
+! PR fortran/45742
+!
+
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46457
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45742
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-12
23:55:06 UTC ---
The issue with the dummy is: Volatile will be set in gfc_get_symbol_decl - but
only if there is no backend declaration. For DUMMY arguments there is.
Thus, one needs to handle them di
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46459
Summary: ICE (segfault): Invalid read in compare_actual_formal
[error recovery]
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
Sever
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46458
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45742
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-12
23:32:06 UTC ---
OK. The (j>j) and the tree->RTL issue are solved by the following patch. Thanks
to Andrew, Ian, Richard et al. (at #gcc) for the debugging help.
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-common
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45742
Bug 45742 depends on bug 46458, which changed state.
Bug 46458 Summary: Volatile status ignored for "(j > j)" during
fold_comparison of fold-const.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46458
What|Old Value
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46454
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45794
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45794
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-12
23:17:27 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Nov 12 23:17:24 2010
New Revision: 166687
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166687
Log:
2010-11-12 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/457
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46458
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-12
23:17:58 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> operand_equal_p should have return false for volatile declarations which it
> does in the C case.
That probably means that C has TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS set while
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45794
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-12
23:07:24 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Nov 12 23:07:18 2010
New Revision: 166686
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166686
Log:
2010-11-12 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/457
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46458
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2010-11-12
23:05:55 UTC ---
operand_equal_p should have return false for volatile declarations which it
does in the C case.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46455
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2010-11-12
23:04:46 UTC ---
yes, that's fine, thanks
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45742
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-12
23:02:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> > volatile integer(kind=4) j;
> I see:
> foo (integer(kind=4) & restrict j)
> so the volatile is missing. Huh?
Seemingly, we have tested different thing
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46458
Summary: Volatile status ignored for "(j > j)" during
fold_comparison of fold-const.c
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46457
Summary: Bogus warning about bitwise combination of enum flags
in case statement
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45742
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig 2010-11-12
21:56:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > Apparently, VOLATILE has no effect at all. Another test case:
> [...]
> > Tobias, any ideas?
>
> No idea:
>
> $ cat test.f90.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46177
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-12
21:54:53 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Nov 12 21:54:47 2010
New Revision: 166679
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166679
Log:
PR tree-optimization/46177
* gcc.dg/pr4617
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46456
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2010-11-12 21:44:00 UTC ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Nov 12 21:43:54 2010
New Revision: 166678
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166678
Log:
PR bootstrap/46456
* cppbuiltin.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46456
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46456
Summary: cppbuiltin.o fails to build for arm-eabi
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46435
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2010-11-12 20:52:36 UTC ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Nov 12 20:52:33 2010
New Revision: 166673
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166673
Log:
PR target/46435
* config/cris/cr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46455
--- Comment #3 from Zouzou 2010-11-12 20:56:14 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #2)
> What's the value of __gnu_cxx::__default_lock_policy on Mingw?
> Is it the same for GCC 4.4 and 4.5?
it is 1 on both.
(i got it using std::cout << __gnu_cxx::__def
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46435
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45742
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-12
20:33:36 UTC ---
I think the first test case is wrongly folded already by the front end:
program main
integer, volatile :: j
if (j>j) call notfound
end program main
Gives the original dump:
MAIN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46455
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2010-11-12
20:25:19 UTC ---
What's the value of __gnu_cxx::__default_lock_policy on Mingw?
Is it the same for GCC 4.4 and 4.5?
Between 4.4 and 4.5 there are some changes to the ghtr-win32.h file which
provides
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45794
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45742
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-12
20:22:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Apparently, VOLATILE has no effect at all. Another test case:
[...]
> Tobias, any ideas?
No idea:
$ LANG= gfortran -v 2>&1|grep -E 'experi|Targ'
Target: x
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46455
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2010-11-12
20:14:38 UTC ---
I don't think anything in shared_ptr changed between 4.4 and 4.5, though I
don't know what thread layer is used by MinGW.
I'll look into it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46438
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46438
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2010-11-12 20:07:38 UTC ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Nov 12 20:07:34 2010
New Revision: 166672
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166672
Log:
PR target/46438
* config/xtensa/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45742
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46454
Alexander Taradov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |c
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Tarad
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46451
--- Comment #2 from Jack Howarth 2010-11-12
19:44:01 UTC ---
I can confirm that...
Author: grosser
Date: Fri Nov 12 18:29:27 2010
New Revision: 19
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=19
Log:
Pass PPL libraries to CLooG
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46455
Summary: shared_ptr consuming too many semaphores on Windows
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assign
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46437
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46437
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2010-11-12 19:35:21 UTC ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Nov 12 19:35:17 2010
New Revision: 166671
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166671
Log:
PR target/46437
* config/mcore/m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46454
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46454
Summary: Pointer to pointer function parameter handled
incorrectly
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46447
--- Comment #2 from Kyle Kloepper
2010-11-12 18:22:13 UTC ---
Created attachment 22382
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22382
Gzipped tarball of source code used to measure times of atomics.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45934
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39415
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill 2010-11-12
18:00:25 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Nov 12 18:00:21 2010
New Revision: 17
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=17
Log:
PR c++/39415
* typeck.c (build_static_cast_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46450
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46450
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2010-11-12 17:46:08 UTC ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Nov 12 17:46:02 2010
New Revision: 15
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=15
Log:
PR target/46450
* config/stormy1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46428
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46428
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2010-11-12 17:43:26 UTC ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Nov 12 17:43:21 2010
New Revision: 14
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=14
Log:
PR target/46428
* config/moxie/m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46431
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45722
--- Comment #34 from Eric Botcazou 2010-11-12
17:36:43 UTC ---
> The patch in comment #16 makes sense (it's similar to what we do in
> memcpy folding to avoid the situation - and to avoid re-writing of
> strict-alignment target handling in memory
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45722
--- Comment #33 from Eric Botcazou 2010-11-12
17:34:26 UTC ---
> The memory has MEM_ALIGN 8, but we of course just ignore that for
> STRICT_ALIGNMENT targets. So the situation is similar to the old
> mishandling of
>
> typedef int myint __attri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46431
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2010-11-12 17:34:09 UTC ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Nov 12 17:34:04 2010
New Revision: 13
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=13
Log:
PR target/46431
* config/fr30/fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44769
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2010-11-12 17:24:22 UTC ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Nov 12 17:24:16 2010
New Revision: 12
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=12
Log:
PR middle-end/44769
* final.c (s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44769
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46412
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44767
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46412
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2010-11-12 17:15:23 UTC ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Nov 12 17:15:18 2010
New Revision: 11
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=11
Log:
PR target/46412
* config/bfin/bf
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44767
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2010-11-12 17:11:17 UTC ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Nov 12 17:11:06 2010
New Revision: 10
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=10
Log:
PR bootstrap/44756
PR build/4476
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44756
--- Comment #8 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2010-11-12 17:11:14 UTC ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Fri Nov 12 17:11:06 2010
New Revision: 10
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=10
Log:
PR bootstrap/44756
PR build/4476
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46453
Summary: MIPS backend is not using special instructions for
__builtin_bswap32
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46422
Quentin Neill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46447
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
Assigne
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46451
--- Comment #1 from Jack Howarth 2010-11-12
15:55:57 UTC ---
Fixing this seems problematic. While config/cloog.m4 currently has the location
of the ppl headers passed to CFLAGS for these tests...
dnl clooglibs & clooginc may have been initiali
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46355
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44691
--- Comment #9 from Alexander Monakov 2010-11-12
15:47:46 UTC ---
Author: amonakov
Date: Fri Nov 12 15:47:38 2010
New Revision: 166653
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166653
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2010-08-19
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45886
--- Comment #3 from Siarhei Siamashka
2010-11-12 15:30:24 UTC ---
Richard, what would be the appropriate target milestone to get this bug fixed?
This needs just a backport of a trivial patch from trunk to 4.5 branch, but
delaying this fix increa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46058
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at redhat dot com
--- Comment #3 from H.J
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46315
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2010-11-12
14:56:54 UTC ---
loop-header copying is where things start to be different.
In the end the asm doesn't make much sense:
parse_ranged.clone.0:
.LFB2:
.cfi_startproc
leaq2(%rdi),
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6936
fabien at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42844
Fabien Chene changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45074
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46355
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46177
--- Comment #10 from Richard Guenther 2010-11-12
14:43:25 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 12 14:43:19 2010
New Revision: 166652
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166652
Log:
2010-11-12 Richard Guenther
Backport
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46170
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46177
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46194
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46304
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45819
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenthe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19377
fabien at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45967
--- Comment #6 from Andreas Krebbel 2010-11-12
14:26:56 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > Fixed for trunk sofar. Let's see if there is any fallout.
>
> This seems to have broken bootstrap on s390x. From a first gla
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43719
Fabien Chene changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
../gcc-4.6-20101112/configure --prefix=/sw --prefix=/sw/lib/gcc4.6
--mandir=/sw/share/man --infodir=/sw/lib/gcc4.6/info
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,objc,obj-c++,java --with-gmp=/sw
--with-libiconv-prefix=/sw --with-ppl=/sw --with-cloog=/sw --with-mpc=/sw
--with-system-zlib --x-includes=/u
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46446
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46220
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29043
Fabien Chene changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46172
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46165
--- Comment #9 from Zdenek Sojka 2010-11-12 14:09:39
UTC ---
trunk r166509 compiles fine, even with -fno-tree-fre -fno-tree-pre:
$ gcc -O -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-copy-prop -fno-tree-dce -fno-tree-fre
-fno-tree-pre pr46165.c -c
with yes,rtl,df ch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46168
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46080
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45983
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46159
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45886
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.5.2 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46452
Summary: Apparently invalid optimization of bitfield access
(4.5 regression?)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45705
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|ASSIGNED
1 - 100 of 165 matches
Mail list logo