http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55520
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53952
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51727
--- Comment #33 from Joost VandeVondele
2012-11-29 07:30:58 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #31)
> As for the backport, I think the patch is absolutely risk-free, and it should
> have been approved for 4.7 even though it doesn't fulfill the f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55527
Bug #: 55527
Summary: Passing structures containing floats by value in calls
are underoptimized
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Sta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55526
Bug #: 55526
Summary: [C++11] Irrelevant error message for function
parameter wrongly used in noexcept specifier
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55525
--- Comment #2 from Dmitry Gorbachev
2012-11-29 03:07:21 UTC ---
4.8.0:
In file included from :0:0:
1.c:3:6: warning: type of 's' does not match original declaration [enabled by
default]
char s[8];
^
In file included from 1.c:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55525
Dmitry Gorbachev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #28826|application/octet-stream|text/plain
mime type
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55525
Bug #: 55525
Summary: ICE: tree check: expected array_type, have
pointer_type in array_ref_low_bound, at expr.c:6768
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52654
--- Comment #20 from emsr at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-29 02:30:48 UTC ---
Author: emsr
Date: Thu Nov 29 02:30:44 2012
New Revision: 193918
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193918
Log:
gcc/c-family/
2012-11-29 Ed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54910
bin.cheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker.cheng at gmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55524
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2012-11-29 02:10:12 UTC ---
Created attachment 28825
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28825
Patch to prioritize existing fnma over non-existing fms
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55524
Bug #: 55524
Summary: If fnma exists but not fms, convert_mult_to_fma should
prefer to former over the latter.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55522
--- Comment #1 from Andy Lutomirski 2012-11-29 01:48:53
UTC ---
I mean IEEE754, of course.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55523
Bug #: 55523
Summary: gencondmd C++ conversion breaks peephole2 predicates
use of get_attr_*
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55401
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55522
Bug #: 55522
Summary: -funsafe-math-optimizations is unexpectedly harmful,
especially w/ -shared
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55521
--- Comment #5 from Jack Howarth 2012-11-29
00:47:14 UTC ---
This problem doesn't occur with x86_64 Fedora 15 built with --disable-tls.
Also, using llvm 3.2's clang++ on x86_64-apple-darwin12, I can compile...
/sw/opt/llvm-3.2/bin/clang+
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53952
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55507
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-11-28
23:01:21 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 28 23:01:03 2012
New Revision: 193911
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193911
Log:
PR debug/36728
PR debug/55467
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55467
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-11-28
23:01:21 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 28 23:01:03 2012
New Revision: 193911
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193911
Log:
PR debug/36728
PR debug/55467
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55511
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-11-28
23:01:21 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 28 23:01:03 2012
New Revision: 193911
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193911
Log:
PR debug/36728
PR debug/55467
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36728
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-11-28
23:01:14 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 28 23:01:03 2012
New Revision: 193911
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193911
Log:
PR debug/36728
PR debug/55467
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55521
--- Comment #4 from Jack Howarth 2012-11-28
22:28:55 UTC ---
Debugging a similar build of cond1.exe on darwin12 without -fsanitize=address
show exactly the same trace except...
Single stepping until exit from function dyld_stub_pthread_o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55521
--- Comment #3 from Jack Howarth 2012-11-28
22:16:25 UTC ---
I don't see the g++.dg/eh/cond1.C execution failures on x86_64 Fedora 15 so
this may well be darwin specific. In gdb, on x86_64 darwin12 this traces as...
# gdb ./cond1.exe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54279
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54279
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski 2012-11-28
22:11:35 UTC ---
Author: pinskia
Date: Wed Nov 28 22:11:29 2012
New Revision: 193910
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193910
Log:
2012-11-28 Andrew Pinski
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52161
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55521
--- Comment #2 from Jack Howarth 2012-11-28
21:55:14 UTC ---
The majority of the libstdc+++-v3 testsuite failures seen with
-fsanitize=address appear to be of the same form. It is difficult to get an
accurate count because many instances s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53094
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse 2012-11-28 21:52:54
UTC ---
Handling subscripts will be harder. Currently, v[1] is turned into ((const
long*)&v)[1]. But (const long*)&v doesn't work as a constant expression. So we
would need to change the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55521
--- Comment #1 from Jack Howarth 2012-11-28
21:47:41 UTC ---
Created attachment 28823
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28823
assembly file for failing g++.dg/eh/cond1.C -std=c++98 with -fsanitize=address
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55052
rsand...@gcc.gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resoluti
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55052
--- Comment #7 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-11-28 21:45:08 UTC ---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Wed Nov 28 21:45:03 2012
New Revision: 193909
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193909
Log:
gcc/
PR rtl-optimi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55521
Bug #: 55521
Summary: many instances of ASAN:SIGSEGV failures in g++
testsuite with -fsanitize=address
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52161
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2012-11-28
21:42:21 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Wed Nov 28 21:42:17 2012
New Revision: 193908
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193908
Log:
2012-11-28 Tobias Burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54283
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou 2012-11-28
21:40:38 UTC ---
> The general assumption on non-cross scenarios is that we're able to run a
> program created by CC and CXX. If this is not the case, not even
> configure-time execution tests involv
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55466
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55520
etlverified at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[C++11 |[C++11] ICE when cap
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55520
Bug #: 55520
Summary: [C++11
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53094
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #28820|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55518
--- Comment #7 from Jack Howarth 2012-11-28
21:02:32 UTC ---
I meant many instances in a single g=+/libstdc++-v3 testsuite failure showing
mulitple instances of ASAN:SIGSEGV.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48076
--- Comment #8 from Richard Henderson 2012-11-28
21:01:29 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Wed Nov 28 21:01:26 2012
New Revision: 193907
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193907
Log:
PR libgcc/48076
* emutls.c (_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52173
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIX
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52173
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55052
rsand...@gcc.gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55438
rsand...@gcc.gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resoluti
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55518
--- Comment #6 from Jack Howarth 2012-11-28
20:18:00 UTC ---
Jakub, I've reposted the current results on x86_64-apple-darwin12 for...
make -k check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=unix'{-fsanitize=address}'"
with manual adjustments to the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55438
--- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-11-28 20:13:39 UTC ---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Wed Nov 28 20:13:22 2012
New Revision: 193905
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193905
Log:
gcc/
PR middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55492
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amacleod at redhat dot com
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55358
--- Comment #10 from Markus Trippelsdorf
2012-11-28 19:58:43 UTC ---
iterative_hash_canonical_type (type=0x5941dc8, val=0) at
/home/markus/gcc/gcc/gimple.c:3170
3170 *slot = (void *) mp;
(gdb) bt
#0 iterative_hash_canonical_type (t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55507
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski 2012-11-28
19:40:30 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> On 11/28/2012 1:25 PM, rth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> > Since this is _powtf2, you probably need --enable-long-double-128 in the
> > configure line
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55519
Bug #: 55519
Summary: [asan] False positive -Wmaybe-uninitialized
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54791
--- Comment #30 from David Edelsohn 2012-11-28
19:35:36 UTC ---
> 1) how did you install the gcc(you said it works on your aix) ? I mean what
> mpfr,gmp, libmpc did you use and how did you install them?
I built gmp, mpfr and mpc from sou
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55371
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu 2012-11-28 19:29:25
UTC ---
Also
/export/gnu/import/git/gcc/libgfortran/intrinsics/unpack_generic.c: In function
‘unpack_internal’:
/export/gnu/import/git/gcc/libgfortran/intrinsics/unpack_generic.c:149:12:
warning:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53860
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54283
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55508
--- Comment #3 from Jack Howarth 2012-11-28
18:57:10 UTC ---
This failure in expand_call_tm, at trans-mem.c:2273 is also seen in the libitm
testsuite for...
FAIL: libitm.c/dropref-2.c (internal compiler error)
FAIL: libitm.c/dropref-2.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55507
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-11-28 18:50:26 UTC ---
On 11/28/2012 1:25 PM, rth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Since this is _powtf2, you probably need --enable-long-double-128 in the
> configure line when cross-compiling
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55507
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #2 from Uros Bi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55507
--- Comment #1 from Richard Henderson 2012-11-28
18:25:03 UTC ---
Created attachment 28821
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28821
preprocessed alpha source
Looks like the same problem for alpha, occurring elsewhere in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55518
--- Comment #5 from Jack Howarth 2012-11-28
18:23:45 UTC ---
Considering that H.J. is working towards a --with-build-config=bootstrap-asan
option, it would seem wise to allow for testing the existing FSF gcc testsuite
against libasan witho
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55512
--- Comment #3 from Vladimir Makarov 2012-11-28
17:42:50 UTC ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Wed Nov 28 17:42:39 2012
New Revision: 193901
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193901
Log:
2012-11-28 Vladimir Makarov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55494
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52844
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jondreads at gmail dot com
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53094
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse 2012-11-28 17:25:51
UTC ---
Created attachment 28820
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28820
Incomplete patch
Slightly ridiculous: with this patch, v+v still fails because we don't manag
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55518
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-11-28
17:23:32 UTC ---
I still think it is a very bad idea. As I said earlier, there are lots of
similar compiler options that require their corresponding runtime libraries,
and adding lots of junk t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55518
Jack Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|IN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55358
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-11-28
16:49:49 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 28 16:49:35 2012
New Revision: 193900
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193900
Log:
PR other/55358
* dse.c (rest_of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55518
--- Comment #2 from Jack Howarth 2012-11-28
16:48:55 UTC ---
This seems to be sufficient for libstc++-v3...
Index: libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp
===
--- libstdc+
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55505
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55504
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55505
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-11-28
16:29:13 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 28 16:28:57 2012
New Revision: 193899
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193899
Log:
PR testsuite/55505
* gcc.c-tort
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55504
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-11-28
16:28:19 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 28 16:28:06 2012
New Revision: 193898
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193898
Log:
PR testsuite/55504
* gcc.c-tort
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55481
--- Comment #13 from rakdver at iuuk dot mff.cuni.cz 2012-11-28 16:19:11 UTC ---
> now, but iv->no_overflow is false (and IVOPTs nowhere uses that flag ...).
>
> I can fix this for example with
>
> Index: tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c
> ==
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52161
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55513
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-11-28
15:51:21 UTC ---
Reduced testcase:
void
f1 ()
{
char s[10];
const int t = __builtin_snprintf (s, 10, "Hello");
__builtin_printf ("%d %s\n", t, s);
}
void
f2 ()
{
char s[10];
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55518
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55481
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rakdver at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55481
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55481
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener 2012-11-28
15:16:00 UTC ---
Caused by
2012-06-27 Richard Guenther
PR middle-end/53676
* tree-chrec.c (chrec_convert_1): Represent truncation to
a type with undefined over
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55513
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55481
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener 2012-11-28
15:14:20 UTC ---
Testcase that fails (infinite loop) with both the C and the C++ frontend at
-O2:
int main()
{
signed char result = 0;
int n;
for (n = 0; n < 13; ++n)
{
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52161
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-11-28
15:12:52 UTC ---
Still there at revision 193884.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55518
Bug #: 55518
Summary: boehm-gc, libatomic, libffi and libgomp testsuite
can't find path to libasan for make check with
-fsanitizer
Classification: Unclassified
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55469
Matthias Krack changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matthias.krack at gmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55501
--- Comment #12 from Tobias Burnus 2012-11-28
14:54:33 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> integer :: i(-1:1) = 0
> print *, lbound(merge(i,i,.true.))
> Without the patch, this prints:
>1
> And with the patch:
> -1
Ma
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55358
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55477
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55474
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54795
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Version|4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54795
--- Comment #28 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-28
14:38:50 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Nov 28 14:38:40 2012
New Revision: 193893
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193893
Log:
Handle OPT_SPECIAL_XXX in LTO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55474
--- Comment #2 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-28
14:38:50 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Nov 28 14:38:40 2012
New Revision: 193893
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193893
Log:
Handle OPT_SPECIAL_XXX in LTO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48076
--- Comment #7 from torvald at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-28 14:29:47 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> There seems to be a similar bug in code generated for function static
> variables.
> The fast-path load is a plain load rather than atomic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55513
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55264
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55511
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Krebbel 2012-11-28
14:10:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > Is this with the first build of libgcc? I.e. is it likely that I'll
> > see this with just a cross-build?
> >
> >
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55485
--- Comment #9 from Kostya Serebryany 2012-11-28
14:00:53 UTC ---
Correct.
__asan_handle_no_return may loose some of the stack-buffer overflows.
It is also used to handle clone case, where the entire stack should be
unpoisoned.
http:/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54791
--- Comment #29 from Adi 2012-11-28 14:00:55 UTC
---
Ok... if you are so kind please tell me exactly
1) how did you install the gcc(you said it works on your aix) ? I mean what
mpfr,gmp, libmpc did you use and how did you install them?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55485
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-11-28
13:47:41 UTC ---
If I understand it right, that clears all shadow memory corresponding to
current thread's stack, rather than trying to figure out into which function it
longjmps and clearing on
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55485
--- Comment #7 from Kostya Serebryany 2012-11-28
13:37:02 UTC ---
Note that the LLVM implementation inserts a call to __asan_handle_no_return
before every "no-return" call instruction.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55511
--- Comment #2 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2012-11-28
13:36:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Is this with the first build of libgcc? I.e. is it likely that I'll
> see this with just a cross-build?
>
> Also, can you please check whethe
1 - 100 of 155 matches
Mail list logo
