[Bug fortran/47674] New: gfortran.dg/realloc_on_assign_5.f03: Segfault at run time

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47674 Summary: gfortran.dg/realloc_on_assign_5.f03: Segfault at run time Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-code Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/43494] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] Overlooked dependency causes wrong scheduling, wrong code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43494 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/47463] [OOP] ICE in gfc_add_component_ref

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47463 --- Comment #17 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com 2011-02-10 05:24:24 UTC --- Dear Janus, > Apparently it's not needed, since removing the line does not introduce any > regressions in the testsuite. Perhaps it was making up for another bu

[Bug testsuite/47622] [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/pr42631.c scan-rtl-dump-not web "Web oldreg"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47622 Jie Zhang changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug testsuite/47622] [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/pr42631.c scan-rtl-dump-not web "Web oldreg"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47622 --- Comment #6 from Jie Zhang 2011-02-10 04:22:49 UTC --- Author: jiez Date: Thu Feb 10 04:22:44 2011 New Revision: 169997 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169997 Log: PR testsuite/47622 Revert 2011-02-05 Jie Zh

[Bug rtl-optimization/42631] [4.5 Regression] "-fcompare-debug failure" with "-O1 -funroll-loops"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42631 --- Comment #16 from Jie Zhang 2011-02-10 04:22:48 UTC --- Author: jiez Date: Thu Feb 10 04:22:44 2011 New Revision: 169997 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169997 Log: PR testsuite/47622 Revert 2011-02-05 Jie Z

[Bug fortran/47667] I/O for reals: READ waits for input after "i" and "n"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47667 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/47324] r157762 caused g++.dg/torture/stackalign failures with -O3 -g at -m32 on darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47324 --- Comment #30 from Jack Howarth 2011-02-10 03:03:21 UTC --- Don't we have to change cfi->dw_cfi_oprnd2.dw_cfi_loc before it is assigned to loc in output_cfa_loc when for_eh?

[Bug target/47324] r157762 caused g++.dg/torture/stackalign failures with -O3 -g at -m32 on darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47324 --- Comment #29 from Jack Howarth 2011-02-10 02:18:36 UTC --- (In reply to comment #28) > Then let's find out why that is. > > The patch in comment #23 looks clearly incorrect to me. Okay. The problem with the patch in Comment 27 is that it onl

[Bug tree-optimization/35692] DSE not removing redundant stores

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35692 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/47673] Redundant NULL check

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47673 --- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2011-02-10 00:22:05 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > if (p2->p1 + -1 <= -3B) > > We should disable the optimization which converts > p2->p1 != 0 && p2->p1 != (struct s1 *) -1 into p2->p1 + -1 <= -3B for

[Bug libstdc++/47668] missing 'typename' in debug-mode map

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47668 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|paolo.carlini

[Bug libstdc++/47668] missing 'typename' in debug-mode map

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47668 --- Comment #6 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-10 00:08:53 UTC --- Author: paolo Date: Thu Feb 10 00:08:42 2011 New Revision: 169990 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169990 Log: 2011-02-09 Paolo Carlini PR libs

[Bug middle-end/47673] Redundant NULL check

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47673 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/47673] New: Redundant NULL check

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47673 Summary: Redundant NULL check Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimizati

[Bug rtl-optimization/43494] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] Overlooked dependency causes wrong scheduling, wrong code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43494 --- Comment #35 from Steve Ellcey 2011-02-09 23:42:57 UTC --- I think it is PR47614, I tried the first patch in that defect report and it fixed my test case.

[Bug c/47672] math-68881.h does not support C99

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47672 --- Comment #1 from Vincent Riviere 2011-02-09 23:27:51 UTC --- Created attachment 23291 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23291 Fix for math-68881.h and C99 This patch fixes the problem.

[Bug libstdc++/43863] Unused recursive_init_error class defined with -fno-exceptions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43863 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c/47672] New: math-68881.h does not support C99

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47672 Summary: math-68881.h does not support C99 Product: gcc Version: 4.5.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.o

[Bug libstdc++/43863] Unused recursive_init_error class defined with -fno-exceptions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43863 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-02-09 23:22:31 UTC --- Author: redi Date: Wed Feb 9 23:22:27 2011 New Revision: 169989 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169989 Log: 2011-02-09 Jonathan Wakely PR libstdc++/43

[Bug fortran/47352] [F03] ICE with proc-pointers in generic procedures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47352 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/47352] [F03] ICE with proc-pointers in generic procedures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47352 --- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-09 22:59:08 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Wed Feb 9 22:59:02 2011 New Revision: 169987 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169987 Log: 2011-02-09 Janus Weil PR fortran/4

[Bug rtl-optimization/43494] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] Overlooked dependency causes wrong scheduling, wrong code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43494 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #34

[Bug rtl-optimization/43494] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] Overlooked dependency causes wrong scheduling, wrong code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43494 Steve Ellcey changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED CC|

[Bug c++/34949] Dead code in empty destructors.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34949 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jyasskin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug c++/47671] Missed optimization on empty virtual destructors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47671 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c++/47671] New: Missed optimization on empty virtual destructors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47671 Summary: Missed optimization on empty virtual destructors Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo

[Bug fortran/47352] [F03] ICE with proc-pointers in generic procedures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47352 --- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-09 22:00:21 UTC --- Here is yet another variant: Index: gcc/fortran/resolve.c === --- gcc/fortran/resolve.c(revision 169985) +

[Bug c/47670] Gcc 4.5.1 inconsistent optimisation of loop with mixed 32bit and 64bit arithmetic

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47670 Peter de Rivaz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED --- Comment #4 from Peter de Riva

[Bug c/47670] Gcc 4.5.1 inconsistent optimisation of loop with mixed 32bit and 64bit arithmetic

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47670 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 f

[Bug c/47670] Gcc 4.5.1 inconsistent optimisation of loop with mixed 32bit and 64bit arithmetic

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47670 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c/47670] Gcc 4.5.1 inconsistent optimisation of loop with mixed 32bit and 64bit arithmetic

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47670 --- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2011-02-09 21:13:46 UTC --- Singed overflow invokes undefined behavior, use count += ((long long)i) * 0x4000 instead.

[Bug rtl-optimization/47614] [4.6 Regression] cpu2000 benchmark 301.apsi fails with revision 169782

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47614 --- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-02-09 21:10:23 UTC --- Please move the side_effects_p check in reload_cse_simplify_operands right before the cselib_lookup call, there is no point calling cselib_lookup if it has side effects. BTW, on power

[Bug fortran/47463] [OOP] ICE in gfc_add_component_ref

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47463 --- Comment #16 from Tobias Burnus 2011-02-09 21:06:05 UTC --- (In reply to comment #13) > I am going to commit the patch in comment #11 as obvious ... Can you CC the patch to gcc-patches@ & fortran@?

[Bug rtl-optimization/47614] [4.6 Regression] cpu2000 benchmark 301.apsi fails with revision 169782

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47614 --- Comment #14 from Pat Haugen 2011-02-09 21:03:31 UTC --- (In reply to comment #13) > Alternatively, if we go the first patch route, I > think side_effects_p guard in reload_cse_simplify_operands is still desirable. My bootstrap/regtest (of es

[Bug c++/47658] -Os generates bigger code than -O2/3 for many small inline functions (objects)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47658 --- Comment #4 from Michał Walenciak 2011-02-09 21:00:46 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > (In reply to comment #1) > > > It works for me, > > > > what do you mean by "works" ?:) > > works as "expected" ;) At -Os

[Bug libstdc++/47668] missing 'typename' in debug-mode map

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47668 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot

[Bug c/47670] New: Gcc 4.5.1 inconsistent optimisation of loop with mixed 32bit and 64bit arithmetic

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47670 Summary: Gcc 4.5.1 inconsistent optimisation of loop with mixed 32bit and 64bit arithmetic Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Prior

[Bug libstdc++/47668] missing 'typename' in debug-mode map

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47668 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-02-09 20:53:23 UTC --- I know g++ has bugs in this area, so I'm cautious about assuming "it works with g++" means it's correct, but that seems to work ok in a couple of quick tests I did with both g++ and

[Bug libstdc++/47668] missing 'typename' in debug-mode map

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47668 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-02-09 20:49:26 UTC --- hmm, yes, that might be ok too, as it will still be found from the base class (I think!)

[Bug fortran/47463] [OOP] ICE in gfc_add_component_ref

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47463 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug libstdc++/47668] missing 'typename' in debug-mode map

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47668 --- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2011-02-09 20:35:45 UTC --- What if we remove the using altogether?

[Bug fortran/47463] [OOP] ICE in gfc_add_component_ref

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47463 --- Comment #14 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-09 20:30:23 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Wed Feb 9 20:30:20 2011 New Revision: 169985 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169985 Log: 2011-02-09 Janus Weil PR fortran/

[Bug c/47530] [trans-mem] tail call optimization problem with _ITM_commitTransaction

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47530 Richard Henderson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c/47530] [trans-mem] tail call optimization problem with _ITM_commitTransaction

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47530 --- Comment #2 from Richard Henderson 2011-02-09 20:24:02 UTC --- Author: rth Date: Wed Feb 9 20:23:56 2011 New Revision: 169984 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169984 Log: PR 47530 * trans-mem.c (expand_block_edge

[Bug lto/47669] New: bootstrap failure due to undefined references

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47669 Summary: bootstrap failure due to undefined references Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: lto AssignedTo: unassi

[Bug fortran/47463] [OOP] ICE in gfc_add_component_ref

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47463 --- Comment #13 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-09 20:18:31 UTC --- (In reply to comment #12) > I do not see whether the line makes sense or not. The idea seems to be to fix > not fully resolved TBP -- but it is not completely clear to me whe

[Bug c++/47658] -Os generates bigger code than -O2/3 for many small inline functions (objects)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47658 --- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-02-09 20:12:20 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > It works for me, > > what do you mean by "works" ?:) works as "expected" ;) At -Os we inline to remove abstraction penalt

[Bug middle-end/47664] early inliner now needs iteration for multiple calls

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47664 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug middle-end/47664] early inliner now needs iteration for multiple calls

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47664 --- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2011-02-09 20:05:01 UTC --- Author: rguenth Date: Wed Feb 9 20:04:56 2011 New Revision: 169983 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169983 Log: 2011-02-09 Richard Guenther PR tree-op

[Bug middle-end/47646] [4.6 Regression] Revision 169918 caused many testsuite failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47646 --- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-02-09 19:41:50 UTC --- > OK, will take care of it, as well as the adjustment for Ada. Thanks!-)

[Bug objc/46710] fast enumeration tests failing on ia64-suse-linux-gnu

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46710 Nicola Pero changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c++/47658] -Os generates bigger code than -O2/3 for many small inline functions (objects)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47658 --- Comment #2 from Michał Walenciak 2011-02-09 19:34:18 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > It works for me, what do you mean by "works" ?:) > the abstraction is completely eliminated by early inlining. > At -Os we do not inline E::foo2 into E

[Bug c++/47666] [4.6 Regression] ICE in dfs_walk_once

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47666 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at redhat dot com --- Comment #2 from H.J

[Bug middle-end/47646] [4.6 Regression] Revision 169918 caused many testsuite failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47646 --- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou 2011-02-09 19:23:06 UTC --- Author: ebotcazou Date: Wed Feb 9 19:23:02 2011 New Revision: 169982 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169982 Log: PR middle-end/47646 * gnat.dg/uninit_fu

[Bug libstdc++/47668] missing 'typename' in debug-mode map

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47668 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-02-09 19:01:03 UTC --- This certainly isn't high priority to fix, and I'm not sure what the best fix is given that G++ has problems with parsing the required typename (PR 14258) so I'm not going to change

[Bug middle-end/47646] [4.6 Regression] Revision 169918 caused many testsuite failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47646 --- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou 2011-02-09 18:58:16 UTC --- > So any comment for obj-c++.dg/attributes/method-noreturn-1.mm applies as well > to objc.dg/attributes/method-noreturn-1.m. Last point I don't have any commit > right. OK, will take

[Bug fortran/47463] [OOP] ICE in gfc_add_component_ref

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47463 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #12

[Bug rtl-optimization/47614] [4.6 Regression] cpu2000 benchmark 301.apsi fails with revision 169782

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47614 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #23288|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug libstdc++/47668] New: missing 'typename' in debug-mode map

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47668 Summary: missing 'typename' in debug-mode map Product: gcc Version: 4.3.5 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ AssignedTo: unassig...

[Bug rtl-optimization/47614] [4.6 Regression] cpu2000 benchmark 301.apsi fails with revision 169782

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47614 --- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou 2011-02-09 18:42:01 UTC --- > Or simply reject side effects, similarly how we reject them elsewhere in > postreload. Yes, I think that's good enough for now.

[Bug rtl-optimization/47614] [4.6 Regression] cpu2000 benchmark 301.apsi fails with revision 169782

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47614 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-02-09 18:31:51 UTC --- Created attachment 23288 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23288 gcc46-pr47614-2.patch Or simply reject side effects, similarly how we reject them elsewhere in post

[Bug rtl-optimization/47614] [4.6 Regression] cpu2000 benchmark 301.apsi fails with revision 169782

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47614 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-02-09 18:30:29 UTC --- Created attachment 23287 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23287 gcc46-pr47614.patch Actually, I can reproduce it, I've just been looking for pre_modify instead of

[Bug middle-end/47650] wrong output of print_generic_decl() called from a plugin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650 --- Comment #12 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-02-09 18:14:36 UTC --- > > That could be related to the function pointer issue where > > print_generic_decl() > > also rather repeats the declaration instead of printing the new type. > > You shoul

[Bug middle-end/47650] wrong output of print_generic_decl() called from a plugin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650 --- Comment #11 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-02-09 18:11:10 UTC --- Created attachment 23286 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23286 A C file that provokes wrong output of print_generic_decl()

[Bug fortran/47463] [OOP] ICE in gfc_add_component_ref

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47463 --- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-09 18:08:45 UTC --- The strange behavior of the test case in comment #9 can be cured by just removing one peculiar line of code: Index: gcc/fortran/resolve.c ===

[Bug middle-end/47650] wrong output of print_generic_decl() called from a plugin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650 --- Comment #10 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-02-09 18:08:32 UTC --- Created attachment 23285 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23285 A small test plugin that calls print_generic_decl()

[Bug middle-end/47646] [4.6 Regression] Revision 169918 caused many testsuite failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47646 --- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-02-09 18:06:22 UTC --- > > No. The problem is that two dg-warnings would be at the same line then. > > Then merge them, it's essentially the same warning issued twice. 1) I have noticed the failures

[Bug fortran/47667] I/O for reals: READ waits for input after "i" and "n"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47667 --- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus 2011-02-09 18:03:08 UTC --- Other input which is handled specially is: Input new value: .e 3 ioerr = 5010 a = -999.0 Interestingly the following works: Input new value: .e4 ioerr =

[Bug c/47530] [trans-mem] tail call optimization problem with _ITM_commitTransaction

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47530 Richard Henderson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/47665] [4.6 Regression] ICE in trunc_int_for_mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47665 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|unassigned at

[Bug middle-end/47383] ivopts miscompiles Pmode != ptr_mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47383 --- Comment #11 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-09 17:20:07 UTC --- Author: hjl Date: Wed Feb 9 17:20:00 2011 New Revision: 169979 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169979 Log: Disable ivopts for non-constant base with n

[Bug fortran/47667] New: I/O for reals: READ waits for input after "i" and "n"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47667 Summary: I/O for reals: READ waits for input after "i" and "n" Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assign

[Bug target/47324] r157762 caused g++.dg/torture/stackalign failures with -O3 -g at -m32 on darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47324 --- Comment #28 from Ian Lance Taylor 2011-02-09 16:53:22 UTC --- Then let's find out why that is. The patch in comment #23 looks clearly incorrect to me.

[Bug c++/47666] [4.6 Regression] ICE in dfs_walk_once

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47666 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/47666] [4.6 Regression] ICE in dfs_walk_once

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47666 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Component|ada |c++ Target Milestone|---

[Bug ada/47666] New: [4.6 Regression] ICE in dfs_walk_once

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47666 Summary: [4.6 Regression] ICE in dfs_walk_once Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug middle-end/47650] wrong output of print_generic_decl() called from a plugin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650 --- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de 2011-02-09 16:33:30 UTC --- On Wed, 9 Feb 2011, joe at mcknight dot de wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650 > > --- Comment #8 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-02-09 16:23:44 UT

[Bug target/47324] r157762 caused g++.dg/torture/stackalign failures with -O3 -g at -m32 on darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47324 --- Comment #27 from Jack Howarth 2011-02-09 16:28:55 UTC --- Ian, Just using... Index: gcc/dwarf2out.c === --- gcc/dwarf2out.c(revision 169978) +++ gcc/dwarf2out.c(worki

[Bug target/47665] [4.6 Regression] ICE in trunc_int_for_mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47665 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/47650] wrong output of print_generic_decl() called from a plugin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650 --- Comment #8 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-02-09 16:23:44 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-01/msg00956.html for a patch > (queued for 4.7, several tree-dump check testcases have to be adjusted). Ri

[Bug fortran/47660] Retain warning text of -Wconversion messages when -Wconversion-extra is in effect

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47660 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 CC|

[Bug target/47665] [4.6 Regression] ICE in trunc_int_for_mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47665 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0

[Bug target/47665] New: [4.6 Regression] ICE in trunc_int_for_mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47665 Summary: [4.6 Regression] ICE in trunc_int_for_mode Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compon

[Bug fortran/47659] -Wconversion[-extra] should emit warning for constant expressions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47659 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 CC|

[Bug middle-end/47663] Very simple wrapper not inlined

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47663 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug testsuite/47622] [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/pr42631.c scan-rtl-dump-not web "Web oldreg"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47622 --- Comment #5 from Jie Zhang 2011-02-09 16:04:53 UTC --- I think my patch which causes this bug might be wrong after checking this test case in details. I may work out a new patch following Jeff's suggestion.

[Bug fortran/47637] [OOP] Memory leak involving INTENT(OUT) CLASS argument w/ allocatable components

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47637 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/47637] [OOP] Memory leak involving INTENT(OUT) CLASS argument w/ allocatable components

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47637 --- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-09 15:58:11 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Wed Feb 9 15:58:05 2011 New Revision: 169978 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169978 Log: 2011-02-09 Janus Weil PR fortran/4

[Bug middle-end/47664] New: early inliner now needs iteration for multiple calls

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47664 Summary: early inliner now needs iteration for multiple calls Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end Assi

[Bug middle-end/47663] New: Very simple wrapper not inlined

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47663 Summary: Very simple wrapper not inlined Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: midd

[Bug fortran/47583] [4.6 Regression] Inquire affected by previous read

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47583 --- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-09 15:47:26 UTC --- There is some debate whether or not I did this properly. I was rushing last night, cobbled the PR number in the email subject, omitted the patch to the mailing list, left the pr numb

[Bug target/47324] r157762 caused g++.dg/torture/stackalign failures with -O3 -g at -m32 on darwin

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47324 --- Comment #26 from Ian Lance Taylor 2011-02-09 15:13:22 UTC --- I think the patch to dwarf2out.c is all you need and I don't understand why you are thinking about any patch to config/i386/darwin.h and config/i386/darwin.c at all.

[Bug libstdc++/47662] [4.6 Regression] -fno-operator-names no longer works with STL headers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47662 --- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini 2011-02-09 15:10:39 UTC --- Thanks Jon, for sure that 'or' hasn't been added on purpose.

[Bug libffi/46661] 32-bit cls_pointer.c, cls_pointer_stack.c FAIL on IRIX 6.5

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46661 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug libffi/46661] 32-bit cls_pointer.c, cls_pointer_stack.c FAIL on IRIX 6.5

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46661 --- Comment #3 from Rainer Orth 2011-02-09 14:40:18 UTC --- Author: ro Date: Wed Feb 9 14:40:15 2011 New Revision: 169972 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169972 Log: PR libffi/46661 * testsuite/libffi.call/cls_poin

[Bug lto/45375] [meta-bug] Issues with building Mozilla with LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375 --- Comment #41 from Mike Hommey 2011-02-09 14:34:08 UTC --- (In reply to comment #40) > I have just checked-out mozilla-central entirely by doing > > hg clone http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/ > > and the elfhack test still segfaults for

[Bug libstdc++/47662] [4.6 Regression] -fno-operator-names no longer works with STL headers

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47662 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-02-09 14:32:50 UTC --- I've also just noticed the manual for -fno-operator-names could do with some improvement: those alternative tokens aren't technically keywords, they're certainly not "synonyms as key

[Bug middle-end/47646] [4.6 Regression] Revision 169918 caused many testsuite failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47646 --- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou 2011-02-09 14:28:03 UTC --- > No. The problem is that two dg-warnings would be at the same line then. Then merge them, it's essentially the same warning issued twice.

[Bug c++/47172] [4.6 Regression] [C++0x] cannot call member function without object

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47172 --- Comment #3 from Dodji Seketeli 2011-02-09 14:27:44 UTC --- Candidate patch posted to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-02/msg00603.html

  1   2   >