http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51336
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler
2011-11-29 07:08:45 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> When you instantiate A, the declaration of the template constructor
> is
> also instantiated, but at that point A is an incomplete type.
I just recognize
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51301
--- Comment #2 from irar at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-29 07:00:57 UTC ---
Author: irar
Date: Tue Nov 29 07:00:53 2011
New Revision: 181797
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181797
Log:
PR tree-optimization/51301
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51321
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51321
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery,
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50618
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhezherun at yandex dot ru
--- Comment #7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51331
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51343
Bug #: 51343
Summary: compile GCC4.6.2 in apple OS X 10.6.8, error found.
and also in 4.6.1 4.5.0
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51342
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51342
Bug #: 51342
Summary: -O2 optimization fails in gcc-4.6.2, but succeeds when
-fno-inline-small-functions is added
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51279
--- Comment #6 from Jack Howarth 2011-11-29
00:25:09 UTC ---
Fixed with the proposed patch from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51014#c4.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51307
--- Comment #5 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-11-29 00:16:11 UTC ---
On 28-Nov-11, at 4:48 AM, charlet at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Here is the patch from Thomas Quinot fixing this issue, I'll commit it
> when I get a chance, feel free to us
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51315
--- Comment #1 from Jurij Smakov 2011-11-28 23:45:19
UTC ---
Debian gcc maintainers suggested that I try to build the test case with various
gcc versions available in Debian and post the results here. Here's a summary:
Debian's gcc-4.4 is not af
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50749
--- Comment #9 from Kazumoto Kojima 2011-11-28
23:29:57 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Specifying -fno-tree-forwprop doesn't seem to have any effect on these cases.
For that function, -fdump-tree-all shows that the tree loop ivopts
optimizat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50775
--- Comment #5 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-11-28
23:26:18 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Wrong profitable hard regs calculation for register files requiring aligned
> start register was a merging problem with a patch for allocation without co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51338
--- Comment #6 from Bud Davis 2011-11-28 23:20:27
UTC ---
The above patch has no new testsuite regressions.
If someone wants to check and make sure the optimisation(s) that could or were
being done is still correct, and check this in, feel free t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51340
--- Comment #1 from Kazumoto Kojima 2011-11-28
23:09:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> Is there any particular reason why this should not be enabled by
> default for SH targets that support the FMAC insn?
PR29100?
BTW, if SH fmac satisfies
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51341
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51341
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |preprocessor
--- Comment #1 from Andrew P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51338
--- Comment #5 from Bud Davis 2011-11-28 22:49:33
UTC ---
Index: gcc/gcc/fortran/dependency.c
===
--- gcc/gcc/fortran/dependency.c(revision 181789)
+++ gcc/gcc/fortran/dependency
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51341
Bug #: 51341
Summary: make cannot detect head file change by dependency file
with gcc 4.6.1 on ubuntu 11.10
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50749
--- Comment #8 from Oleg Endo 2011-11-28 22:31:44 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #7)
> The problem is that SH target can't do those simple array accesses
> well at QI/HImode because of the lack of displacement addressing
> for those modes.
In thes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51338
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51340
Bug #: 51340
Summary: SH Target: Make -mfused-madd enabled by default
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41975
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51338
--- Comment #3 from Bud Davis 2011-11-28 21:59:02
UTC ---
Reduced:
SUBROUTINE PAXCUT(CHIN,CHOUT)
CHARACTER*(*) CHIN,CHOUT
IF(INDEX(CHOUT(K:),'.OR.').EQ.INDEX(CHOUT(K:),'.AND.')) THEN
ENDIF
END
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51339
Bug #: 51339
Summary: [4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE: in convert_move, at
expr.c:326 with -fopenmp and parallel for
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50775
--- Comment #4 from Vladimir Makarov 2011-11-28
21:48:20 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
>
> Also, I have a question about the following fields of `ira_allocno':
> /* The number of objects tracked in the following array. */
> int num_obje
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51338
Bud Davis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bdavis at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51336
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse 2011-11-28
21:17:30 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> IMO you need one further indirection, e.g.
Ah, yes, makes sense (although clang accepts both versions).
> Btw.: Neither of these forms can ever prevent the "
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51338
--- Comment #1 from dcb 2011-11-28 21:10:25 UTC ---
Created attachment 25940
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25940
preprocessed Fortran code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50907
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50682
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50078
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.6/4.7 Regression]|[4.6 Regression] combine
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51337
Bug #: 51337
Summary: SH Target: Various testsuite ICEs for -m2a -O0
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51338
Bug #: 51338
Summary: seg fault in gfc_dep_compare_expr with -O2
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51072
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #8 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50078
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28
21:03:16 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Nov 28 21:03:11 2011
New Revision: 181786
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181786
Log:
PR tree-optimization/50078
* tree-ssa-forw
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51335
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50907
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28
21:04:15 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Nov 28 21:04:10 2011
New Revision: 181787
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181787
Log:
PR middle-end/50907
* function.c (convert_j
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28
21:04:49 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Nov 28 21:04:45 2011
New Revision: 181788
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181788
Log:
PR debug/50317
* tree-ssa.c (execute_updat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50682
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28
21:02:33 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Nov 28 21:02:27 2011
New Revision: 181785
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181785
Log:
PR tree-optimization/50682
* tree-eh.c (may
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51336
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51323
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28
20:38:59 UTC ---
That would be too big hammer approach. While the fix is in arch independent
code, on most architectures you could hit it only with > 6 resp. > 8 arguments
and with similar scenario ea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51014
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28
20:12:10 UTC ---
Created attachment 25939
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25939
gcc47-pr51014.patch
Untested fix.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51289
--- Comment #2 from dodji at seketeli dot org
2011-11-28 20:12:38 UTC ---
A candidate patch for this was submitted to
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg02488.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28718
--- Comment #11 from Joerg Wunsch 2011-11-28
19:45:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Jörg, could you prepare a list of functions that shall be excluded from
> libgcc?
> You can also answer to my mail "PR28718 Infos?" from 2011-11-10.
Well,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51323
--- Comment #5 from David Kastrup 2011-11-28 19:33:26 UTC
---
Question: the proposed fix is in gcc/calls.c which looks somewhat architecture
independent. Am I right in assuming that this means that the bug may manifest
itself under architectures
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50906
--- Comment #18 from Kyle Moffett 2011-11-28
19:30:07 UTC ---
I am happy to report that your updated 4.6.2 patch seems to be 100% functional
on e500/SPE.
I get identical "test-summary" reports for patched-4.6.2 with and without
BOOT_CFLAGS="-g -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51014
--- Comment #3 from Jack Howarth 2011-11-28
19:16:25 UTC ---
Note, like PR51279, the testcases both ICE the compiler at -O1 -g
-funroll-loops but not at -O0 -g -funroll-loops on x86_64-apple-darwin11.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51014
Jack Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||howarth at nitro dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51336
Bug #: 51336
Summary: [C++11] is_abstract and sfinae
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51014
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51335
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-11-28
18:24:56 UTC ---
dup of PR 51072 ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51323
--- Comment #4 from David Kastrup 2011-11-28 18:24:10 UTC
---
I can confirm that my version of gcc identifying itself as
gcc version 4.6.1 (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.6.1-9ubuntu3)
makes your test program abort under -O2. If you _cannot_ confirm this with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51329
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski 2011-11-28
18:23:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > Thanks, will report to apple.
>
> Reporting to Apple is useless, they have long moved to Clang, so they won't
> fix
> bugs in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51335
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu 2011-11-28 17:58:52
UTC ---
We should either enable C++ or disable libitm in this case.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51335
Bug #: 51335
Summary: [4.7 Regression] --enable-languages=c
--disable-bootstrap doesn't work
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51323
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51334
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||46328
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40958
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50993
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from R
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51334
Bug #: 51334
Summary: [OOP] ICE with type-bound operator: tree check:
expected record_type or union_type or qual_union_type,
have function_type in gfc_conv_component_ref, at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49629
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49629
--- Comment #10 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-11-28
16:21:24 UTC ---
Yes from my side.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51022
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51022
--- Comment #6 from Rainer Orth 2011-11-28 16:02:16 UTC
---
Author: ro
Date: Mon Nov 28 16:02:10 2011
New Revision: 181782
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181782
Log:
Cleanup rs6000/t-ppccomm configurations (PR other/51022)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51056
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49629
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50237
--- Comment #30 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-11-28 15:40:32 UTC ---
> Getting rid of the attribute constructor in libcpp/lex.c isn't that hard
> either.
... but doesn't help for the Go comparison failures.
Rainer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51289
Dodji Seketeli changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|dodji at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51289
Dodji Seketeli changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28
15:32:18 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > Perhaps we could drop the var ={v} {CLOBBER} stmts when renaming the var
> > into SSA instead.
>
> I think your current patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51333
David Kastrup changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|4.5.2 |
--- Comment #2 from David Kastrup 2011-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47858
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49719
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50074
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28
15:15:32 UTC ---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg02413.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50237
--- Comment #29 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28
15:10:00 UTC ---
Created attachment 25937
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25937
gcc47-pr50237.patch
Getting rid of the attribute constructor in libcpp/lex.c isn't that hard
either
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317
--- Comment #10 from Michael Matz 2011-11-28 14:52:50
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Perhaps we could drop the var ={v} {CLOBBER} stmts when renaming the var
> into SSA instead.
I think your current patch is better, no use in slowing down th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51308
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus 2011-11-28
14:47:45 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Mon Nov 28 14:47:39 2011
New Revision: 181779
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181779
Log:
Really commit the test case:
2011-11-28 Tobias B
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51296
--- Comment #17 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-11-28
14:40:21 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> The strange thing is that is seems to have worked so far without issues,
> e.g. in emutls.c.
and in libstdc++-v3/include/ext/concurrence.h
maybe the di
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51333
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-11-28
14:38:15 UTC ---
works with -lsupc++ but I'm not sure why it fails without
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28
14:36:53 UTC ---
Created attachment 25936
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25936
gcc47-pr50317-3.patch
Alternative to gcc47-pr50317-3.patch (everything untested), which adds some
ha
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51296
--- Comment #16 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-11-28 14:34:38 UTC ---
> Does this work?
No, I still get EINVAL.
> Otherwise I suppose we must not define __GTHREAD_MUTEX_INIT on Tru64, causing
> std::mutex to use the init function i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51308
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40958
--- Comment #4 from Joost VandeVondele
2011-11-28 14:24:02 UTC ---
Just for reference, compiling CP2K_2009-05-01.f90 results in 684 modules,
stracing yields something like 12000 calls to open, and 148'847'399 calls to
lseek.
Clearly anything red
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51296
--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-11-28
14:22:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> > --- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-11-26
> > 15:18:40 UTC ---
> > Does this reduced test work with -std=gnu++11 -pthread ?
>
> Unfortunately
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51308
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus 2011-11-28
14:21:38 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Mon Nov 28 14:21:33 2011
New Revision: 181778
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181778
Log:
2011-11-28 Tobias Burnus
Steven G.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51308
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus 2011-11-28
14:17:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> I kept the SAVE attribute because the comment (which you remove
> in your patch) claims that it is needed to actually allow the
> the compiler to initialize
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28
14:10:40 UTC ---
Perhaps we could drop the var ={v} {CLOBBER} stmts when renaming the var into
SSA instead.
As for gcc47-pr50317-1.patch, the another walk isn't because of the CLOBBERs,
what it tries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51308
--- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl
2011-11-28 13:58:02 UTC ---
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 07:51:02AM +, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51308
>
> --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2011-11-28
> 07:51
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317
--- Comment #7 from Michael Matz 2011-11-28 13:46:45
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Patch to drop ={v} {CLOBBER} stmts when the lhs lost TREE_ADDRESSABLE bit
> during execute_update_addresses_taken.
Actually it's not only the loss of TREE_AD
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51333
Bug #: 51333
Summary: cxxabi.h incompatible with -fkeep-inline-functions at
link time
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50814
--- Comment #5 from Kazumoto Kojima 2011-11-28
13:43:16 UTC ---
BTW, when regtesting, I've found that there are many ICEs at -O0.
A typical one is gcc.c-torture/compile/2923-1.c with -m2a -O0:
...: error: insn does not satisfy its constraint
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51288
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51288
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-28 13:24:29 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Nov 28 13:24:23 2011
New Revision: 181775
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=181775
Log:
2011-11-28 Paolo Carlini
PR libs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28
13:17:02 UTC ---
Created attachment 25934
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25934
gcc47-pr50317-2.patch
Patch to drop ={v} {CLOBBER} stmts when the lhs lost TREE_ADDRESSABLE bit
duri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50317
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-11-28
13:11:49 UTC ---
Created attachment 25933
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25933
gcc47-pr50317-1.patch
One way to fix this regression is schedule another update_addresses_taken
befo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51296
--- Comment #14 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-11-28 12:42:17 UTC ---
> --- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-11-26
> 15:18:40 UTC ---
> Does this reduced test work with -std=gnu++11 -pthread ?
Unfortunately not, I still get
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50751
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #25848|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51323
David Kastrup changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|4.5.0 |4.5.2
--- Comment #2 from David Kastrup
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo