http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49000
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-05-18
06:05:53 UTC ---
It is the same bug actually and is also fixed by the patch. I'll post the
patch momentarily.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49037
Summary: SEGV within __gnu_cxx::bitmap_allocator if used within
in constructor of global static
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49020
--- Comment #10 from __vic 2011-05-18 05:36:38 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> 3.4 and 4.1 are ancient history, active release series are listed on the home
> page, http://gcc.gnu.org/
Yes, I know. But I have no ability to upgrade them in all
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49036
Summary: gcj-mp-4.5: Internal error: Abort trap (program ecj1)
on Mac OS X 10.5.8
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49020
--- Comment #9 from __vic 2011-05-18 05:33:24 UTC ---
The libstdc++ uses glibc anyway? What about alternative implementations like
hp-gcc for HP-UX?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49036
--- Comment #1 from Jim DeLaHunt 2011-05-18
05:14:36 UTC ---
Bug 41991 - gcj segfaults on i686-apple-darwin9 and x86_64-apple-darwin9
(http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41991) is possibly related to this
bug. It was the only GCC bug rep
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10474
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||scovich at gmail dot com
--- Comment #9 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49035
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49033
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||spop at gcc dot gnu.org
Summary|ICE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49000
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu 2011-05-18 03:29:11
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Please also check any proposed fix against this second failure, which looks to
> me as if it's caused by the same thing. I've renamed homologous structures to
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49035
--- Comment #1 from Ryan Johnson 2011-05-18 02:56:23
UTC ---
Update: using __attribute__((noinline)) it is actually possible to force the
compiler to do the right thing, though it makes the code significantly less
readable:
=== example.cpp =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49033
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Summary|ICE in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49035
Summary: Avoid setting up stack frame for short, hot code paths
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49034
Summary: ARM optimizer generating incorrect code (causing bad
pointer dereference)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49033
--- Comment #2 from Arthur O'Dwyer
2011-05-18 01:19:22 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> -march=native is useless. Please show outputs from
>
> # gcc -w -std=c99 -O3 -march=native -fcheck-data-deps test891883150.c -v
> # cat /proc/cpuinfo
I c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46072
--- Comment #30 from Daniel Richard G. 2011-05-18
01:12:17 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #29)
> If you would look at comment #2, that is what I did.
Ah, thanks for the reminder.
The generated assembly appears to include artifacts (e.g. type decl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49026
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-05-18 01:12:53 UTC ---
Should be fixed by r173845.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49033
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49000
--- Comment #9 from Arthur O'Dwyer
2011-05-18 00:48:32 UTC ---
Please also check any proposed fix against this second failure, which looks to
me as if it's caused by the same thing. I've renamed homologous structures to
emphasize the similarity.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48932
--- Comment #7 from John David Anglin 2011-05-18
00:33:24 UTC ---
Author: danglin
Date: Wed May 18 00:33:22 2011
New Revision: 173844
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173844
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/48932
Fix type in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46072
--- Comment #29 from Paul Pryor 2011-05-17 23:49:44
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #28)
> (In reply to comment #25)
> > An upgrade to the AIX assembler has introduced a bug that can generate
> > invalid
> > object files. The is an AIX bug, not a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48283
Michael Hope changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||michael.hope at linaro dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49031
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49033
Summary: ICE in compute_affine_dependence
(tree-data-ref.c:4090) with -O3 -fcheck-data-deps
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48493
Michael Hope changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||michael.hope at linaro dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49031
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-05-17
21:17:01 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> the gcc -lm library
There's no such thing, gcc is a compiler, libm is part of the C library
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33905
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48702
--- Comment #18 from davidxl 2011-05-17 20:40:41
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> > This is not really heuristic -- it prevents compiler from generating code in
> > ivopt that violates the aliasing assumption.
>
> no, it does not.
Does, bu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48702
--- Comment #17 from rakdver at kam dot mff.cuni.cz 2011-05-17 20:18:39 UTC ---
> This is not really heuristic -- it prevents compiler from generating code in
> ivopt that violates the aliasing assumption.
no, it does not. For example, you only
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48702
--- Comment #16 from davidxl 2011-05-17 19:57:01
UTC ---
This is not really heuristic -- it prevents compiler from generating code in
ivopt that violates the aliasing assumption.
David
(In reply to comment #15)
> Hi,
>
> > The following patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33050
--- Comment #5 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-05-17
19:28:11 UTC ---
Created attachment 24271
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24271
Assembler output with 4.7.0 r173649
This code is as you expected.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33050
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49031
Summary: powl() function gives wrong results in some situations
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assigne
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42210
--- Comment #3 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-05-17
19:16:45 UTC ---
Created attachment 24269
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24269
Patch against 4.7.0 (r173832)
See also
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-04/msg02099.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49032
Summary: -gstabs generates reference to deleted static variable
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assigne
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48702
--- Comment #15 from rakdver at kam dot mff.cuni.cz 2011-05-17 19:26:18 UTC ---
Hi,
> The following patch fixes the problem. Is it ok?
as a heuristic, this probably makes sense. Still, it does
not fix the problem, just masks it and makes it har
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49026
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-05-17
19:03:55 UTC ---
Created attachment 24266
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24266
assembly for r173808 (working)
ble-languages=c++ --disable-shared
--disable-libmudflap --disable-libssp
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.7.0 20110517 (experimental) [trunk revision 173832] (GCC)
$ ./xgcc -B. -O1 ~/ice.i
/home/ryan/ice.i: In function 'bar':
/home/ryan/ice.i:33:1: internal compiler error: in get_arm_c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49026
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-05-17
19:05:21 UTC ---
Created attachment 24267
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24267
assembly for r173809 (not working)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33049
--- Comment #11 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-05-17
19:00:05 UTC ---
Created attachment 24265
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24265
Assembler output from 4.7.0 (r173832) with patch applied.
Assembler output from 4.7.0 (r173832)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33049
--- Comment #10 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-05-17
18:57:39 UTC ---
Created attachment 24264
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24264
Proposed patch.
Proposed Patch (also compatible with older versions of GCC).
The insn needs at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49026
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-05-17 18:48:26 UTC ---
Before-and-after .s output might be useful.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49016
--- Comment #12 from Lee Merrill 2011-05-17
18:42:47 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> (In reply to comment #10)
> > And the compile (and the compile in the "rc" script here) is indeed
> > specifying
> > -mcmodel=kernel in the flags.
>
> -mcm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49029
Ryan Mansfield changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46072
--- Comment #28 from Daniel Richard G. 2011-05-17
18:12:26 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #25)
> An upgrade to the AIX assembler has introduced a bug that can generate invalid
> object files. The is an AIX bug, not a GCC bug.
I'm not yet convince
bmudflap --disable-libssp
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.7.0 20110517 (experimental) [trunk revision 173832] (GCC)
$ ./xgcc -B. ~/ice.i
/home/ryan/ice.i: In function 'bar':
/home/ryan/ice.i:19:29: internal compiler error: in simplify_subreg, at
simplify-rtx.c:5266
Please submit a ful
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49021
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-05-17
17:28:44 UTC ---
slightly more reduced
#include
struct vector
{
typedef int* const* const_iterator;
~vector() { data = 0; }
int* data;
const_iterator begin() const { return &dat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49021
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49028
--- Comment #1 from Piotr Wyderski 2011-05-17
17:24:03 UTC ---
If I change the function to:
template void R::xxx_release(void* p) {
char* q = reinterpret_cast(m_Cursor);
char* b = reinterpret_cast(m_Data);
q = ((q + sizeof(v
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48702
--- Comment #14 from davidxl 2011-05-17 17:17:11
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> (In reply to comment #12)
> > (In reply to comment #3)
> > > I have a patch that makes it fail on trunk as well. IVOPTs generates
> > >
> > > for (p = &a; p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49028
Summary: Missed optimization of pointer arithmetic
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49016
--- Comment #11 from Mikael Pettersson 2011-05-17
16:58:02 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> And the compile (and the compile in the "rc" script here) is indeed specifying
> -mcmodel=kernel in the flags.
-mcmodel=kernel isn't enough, you're st
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |SUSPENDED
--- Comment #14 from Paolo Carl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49000
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-05-17
17:03:00 UTC ---
Needs to be guarded additionally with && gimple_debug_bind_has_value_p (stmt)
otherwise it doesn't get too far.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48417
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se
--- Comment #5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49027
Summary: g++ ignores -fno-exceptions in uninstantiated template
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedT
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #12 from Gabriel Dos Reis 2011-05-17
16:23:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> For sure that works.
>
> Gaby, just to make sure we are on the same page: did you send a message to the
> reflector about this issue already? Or do you
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49000
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #13 from Gabriel Dos Reis 2011-05-17
16:24:57 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> All in all, now that I understand the issue with the temporary, this seems
> really sort of a NAD, maybe the wording needs only clarifying that you don'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49013
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49025
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26007
--- Comment #4 from licheng.1212 at gmail dot com 2011-05-17 16:12:07 UTC ---
can anybody tell me how to change the final form .data to .rodata.
which files have the check in gcc?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49010
--- Comment #11 from Janne Blomqvist 2011-05-17
16:18:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 02:17:22PM +, jb at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> >
> > So does the fallback path actually ever get used? AFAICS the builtins are
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26007
licheng.1...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||licheng.1212 at gmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49026
Summary: [4.7 Regression] FAIL:
gcc.target/i386/sse4_1-(ceil|floor)-vec.c execution
test at r173809 on x86_64-apple-darwin10
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #11 from Paolo Carlini 2011-05-17
15:54:19 UTC ---
All in all, now that I understand the issue with the temporary, this seems
really sort of a NAD, maybe the wording needs only clarifying that you don't
want to add std::begin and std:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #10 from Paolo Carlini 2011-05-17
15:49:25 UTC ---
For sure that works.
Gaby, just to make sure we are on the same page: did you send a message to the
reflector about this issue already? Or do you want me (us) to do that? Shall we
su
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-05-17
15:27:01 UTC ---
The workaround for users is to construct a valarray from the expr:
std::valarray result(x + y);
std::begin( result );
That avoids the problem of returning an iterator into
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49025
Summary: gfortran bug: Local variable does not hide generic
procedure.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48417
licheng.1...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45221
Navin Kumar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.5.0 |4.6.0
--- Comment #11 from Navin Kumar 201
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46072
--- Comment #27 from Dr. David Kirkby
2011-05-17 15:25:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #25)
> The fixed assembler is available as an efix for customers who ask.
Can you give me more precise details about how to get this. Who do I ask - I
don't
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini 2011-05-17
15:17:01 UTC ---
Ok, I'll follow the discussion...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #7 from Gabriel Dos Reis 2011-05-17
15:14:04 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Double Sigh! I was hoping very few overloads would be enough... If we are
> really talking about many I would be in favor of raising the issue, indeed.
T
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
Gabriel Dos Reis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gdr at gcc dot gnu.org
Assigne
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini 2011-05-17
15:09:44 UTC ---
Double Sigh! I was hoping very few overloads would be enough... If we are
really talking about many I would be in favor of raising the issue, indeed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |paolo.carlini at oracle dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49016
--- Comment #9 from Lee Merrill 2011-05-17
14:47:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> ... the ABI says that 128 bytes below the %rsp are
> reserved, so the interrupt code first needs to subtract 128 from %rsp before
> calling any functions and m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49010
--- Comment #10 from Steve Kargl
2011-05-17 14:50:52 UTC ---
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 02:17:22PM +, jb at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> So does the fallback path actually ever get used? AFAICS the builtins are
> always available, and if the built
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-05-17
14:52:41 UTC ---
[valarray.syn] paragraph 4
for every function taking a const valarray&, identical functions
taking the replacement types shall be added;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46072
--- Comment #26 from Michael Haubenwallner 2011-05-17 14:52:36 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #25)
> The fixed assembler is available as an efix for customers who ask.
We did do this here, but the efix'ed assembler just dumps core upon some C++
con
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49016
--- Comment #10 from Lee Merrill 2011-05-17
14:49:33 UTC ---
And the compile (and the compile in the "rc" script here) is indeed specifying
-mcmodel=kernel in the flags.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jwakely.gcc at gmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||g...@integrable-solutions.ne
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49010
--- Comment #9 from Steve Kargl
2011-05-17 14:02:11 UTC ---
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 06:05:50AM +, thenlich at users dot sourceforge.net
wrote:
> --- Comment #5 from Thomas Henlich
> 2011-05-17 05:51:56 UTC ---
> The fmod behaviour is correc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46072
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49014
--- Comment #2 from Andrey Belevantsev 2011-05-17
14:20:52 UTC ---
That patch is most likely just exposed a sel-sched bug or a target bug. I will
be looking at it tomorrow.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49010
--- Comment #8 from Janne Blomqvist 2011-05-17 14:02:07
UTC ---
So does the fallback path actually ever get used? AFAICS the builtins are
always available, and if the builtin results in a call to fmod{f,,l,Q} we have
fallback implementations in c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49024
Summary: REAL*16 ERFC_SCALED inaccuracy
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libfortran
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49016
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-05-17
14:01:51 UTC ---
It is of course fine if an interrupt uses the same stack, after all, user
interrupts do that too. But the ABI says that 128 bytes below the %rsp are
reserved, so the interrupt code fi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49014
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49021
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-05-17
13:52:40 UTC ---
The temporary returned by getv() seems to be destroyed too early, before the
printf that uses it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49016
--- Comment #7 from Lee Merrill 2011-05-17
13:42:23 UTC ---
I think what is happening in the compiler BTW is that a "sub $XX, %rsp" is
dropping out, perhaps as an optimization. If for example, you comment out the
"#define inline" line in the test
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49023
Summary: ICE on invalid code with C_ASSOCIATED
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassig...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49020
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-05-17
13:38:57 UTC ---
3.4 and 4.1 are ancient history, active release series are listed on the home
page, http://gcc.gnu.org/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49016
--- Comment #6 from Lee Merrill 2011-05-17
13:29:56 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Yeah, 128 bytes below %rsp can be freely used on x86_64, interrupts must not
> clobber those.
I should have mentioned that this is kernel driver code, so then
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
Summary: [C++0x] std::begin and std::end specialized for
std::valarray with some operators are missing.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49020
__vic changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #7 from __vic 2011-05-17 13:2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49020
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 f
1 - 100 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
