http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56613
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55996
--- Comment #5 from Steven Bosscher 2013-03-13
22:34:37 UTC ---
Fix for DSE causing combine compile time and memory explosion:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-03/msg00379.html (rationale)
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-03/ms
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48308
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Last reconfirmed|2011-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45685
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steven at gcc dot gnu.org
---
IL_REGS -o t.s.NAIL
$ ./cc1 -quiet -m32 -O2 t.c -UNAIL_REGS -o t.s
$ ./cc1 -quiet -m32 -O2 t.c -UNAIL_REGS -o t.s.sched_pres \
-fschedule-insns -fsched-pressure
$ egrep -c '%ebp|%esp' t.s*
t.s:366
t.s.NAIL:305
t.s.sched_pres:277
$ grep ident t.s
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 4.8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43052
--- Comment #23 from Steven Bosscher 2013-03-13
20:13:32 UTC ---
Honza, ping?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38134
--- Comment #21 from Steven Bosscher 2013-03-13
20:09:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> Ok, the goal would be to have all !targetm.legitimate_constant_p ()
> constants assigned to a pseudo (and in GIMPLE to an SSA name).
I'm not s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56446
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression]|Generate one fewer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55295
--- Comment #8 from Oleg Endo 2013-03-13 18:21:37
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
>
> This is another reason for adding a new ABI, BTW.
Just for the record, I've opened a new PR 56592 for this.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49880
--- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo 2013-03-13 18:09:16
UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Wed Mar 13 18:09:10 2013
New Revision: 196636
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=196636
Log:
PR target/49880
* config/sh/sh.o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56614
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2013-03-13
17:36:27 UTC ---
Ah, thanks. I reduced it from 300KLOC and apparently stopped too soon :)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56614
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2013-03-13
17:29:02 UTC ---
A few details can be removed from the testcase:
#include
struct vector
{
vector(std::initializer_list);
};
void func();
struct C
{
template
C(T, vector
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56614
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56581
--- Comment #9 from Walt Brainerd 2013-03-13
16:12:35 UTC ---
Thanks for sending me this.
Maybe I did after all provide something that will help you.
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:05 PM, tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org <
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56524
--- Comment #13 from clm at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-13 15:38:37 UTC ---
Author: clm
Date: Wed Mar 13 15:37:36 2013
New Revision: 196635
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=196635
Log:
2013-03-13 Catherine Moore
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56346
--- Comment #7 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2013-03-13 15:23:11 UTC ---
On 3/13/2013 10:42 AM, jason at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> That's odd, the change seems unlikely to have changed the flow analysis. But
>
> anyway, this patch always
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56614
Bug #: 56614
Summary: [4.7/4.8 Regression] error: default argument
'std::vector(std::initializer_list{((const E*)(&
._0)), 1u}, (*(const std::allocator*)(&
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56346
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #29638|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56307
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-03-13
14:33:07 UTC ---
Ah yes, I forgot that all of -fvar-tracking is disabled for non-dwarf debug.
Yeah, passing -fvar-tracking -fvar-tracking-assignments in dg-options is
desirable for that test.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56607
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill 2013-03-13
14:18:34 UTC ---
The patch is OK for 4.8.1.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56596
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55947
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-03-13
14:15:51 UTC ---
Not wrong, if the code isn't inlined and thus the model is variable, HLE hints
will be ignored and seq_cst model will be used.
If you want something else, even for -O0, just use
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55948
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55947
--- Comment #3 from Andi Kleen 2013-03-13
13:49:10 UTC ---
It was pointed out to me that atomic triggers this with, when compiled with no
optimization. For HLE wrong hints would be generated.
bool test_and_set(memory_order __m = memory
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56613
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2013-03-13
13:35:14 UTC ---
Oops, the program isn't quite valid C++03, I forgot these members of the
allocator:
pointer address(reference x) const throw() { return &x; }
const_pointer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56613
Bug #: 56613
Summary: [4.8 Regression] map::operator[](key_type&&) fails
with custom allocator
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Stat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56608
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.0
Summary|[4.7/4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56611
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini 2013-03-13
12:31:38 UTC ---
Done, thanks (in the future, please void DOS-style CRs in the testcases)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56608
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener 2013-03-13
12:15:22 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Mar 13 12:15:06 2013
New Revision: 196632
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=196632
Log:
2013-03-13 Richard Biener
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56611
--- Comment #7 from Antoine Poliakov 2013-03-13
12:15:30 UTC ---
Thanks. You can remove struct result1 (lines 11-15 in alias-decl-32.C) from the
test-case, it's not necessary (I would have done it but it's a very minor edit
and I don't hav
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56611
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56611
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-03-13 11:44:47 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Mar 13 11:44:32 2013
New Revision: 196631
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=196631
Log:
2013-03-13 Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56609
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56609
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-03-13 11:16:05 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Mar 13 11:15:45 2013
New Revision: 196630
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=196630
Log:
2013-03-13 Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56611
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #4 from Paolo C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56611
--- Comment #3 from Antoine Poliakov 2013-03-13
11:12:25 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> The attachment is missing.
Thanks! I got an error on first upload, but I thought it was ok - sorry.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56612
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56611
--- Comment #2 from Antoine Poliakov 2013-03-13
11:09:19 UTC ---
Created attachment 29662
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29662
g++ -std=c++11 -Wall -Wextra -c gcc-test.cpp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56611
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53265
--- Comment #24 from Richard Biener 2013-03-13
11:00:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #23)
> Created attachment 29661 [details]
> gcc48-pr53265.patch
>
> Updated patch as per IRC discussions. Still need to look at longbranch2.C and
> d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56612
Bug #: 56612
Summary: basic-block vectorization does not replace all scalar
uses
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRME
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56608
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener 2013-03-13
10:43:23 UTC ---
Ick. SLP replaces
scale_51 = sqrt (_50);
with
scale_51 = 0.0;
but has not eliminated all uses of it. I have a simple fix, but really
I see no reason why DCE sh
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45078
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Kn
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53265
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #29657|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56611
Bug #: 56611
Summary: [C++11] Template instanciation failure with variadic
arguments and template aliases
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56593
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener 2013-03-13
09:59:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> But if you strip that info away, you'll never get correct DWARF debug info for
> the nested function, I believe you'll never get it whenever you put
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56609
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini 2013-03-13
09:58:29 UTC ---
Thanks. Let's go ahead then and resolve this specific issue as you filed it.
The fix should be very safe because std::is_fundamental is not used anywhere
as an implementation d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56609
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Krügler
2013-03-13 09:55:33 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Seems straightforward enough to be fixable in 4.8.0 too. Does this patchlet
> cover all the issues you can see?
Thanks Paolo! I cannot test this from here
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54896
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener 2013-03-13
09:53:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> With r196576 on x86_64 (gcc17):
>
> at -O1:
> alias stmt walking : 30.99 (36%) usr
> reload CSE regs : 18.94 (22%) usr
> CSE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56607
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Target Milestone|4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45078
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-03-13
09:48:01 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Mar 13 09:47:41 2013
New Revision: 196629
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=196629
Log:
PR plugins/45078
* config.gcc:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56609
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56610
Bug #: 56610
Summary: IPA(-CP) clone materialization fails to cleanup the
CFG
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56608
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56593
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2013-03-13
09:05:34 UTC ---
But if you strip that info away, you'll never get correct DWARF debug info for
the nested function, I believe you'll never get it whenever you put the nested
functions in a diff
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56593
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener 2013-03-13
08:53:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> The ICE in output_die is a known issue: when LTO puts nested and parent
> functions in different partitions, implicit assumptions made in dwarf2out.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56607
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56607
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56609
Bug #: 56609
Summary: [C++11] Several type traits give incorrect results for
std::nullptr_t
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
59 matches
Mail list logo
