http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60186
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42575
--- Comment #12 from Bernd Edlinger ---
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/home/ed/gnu/arm-linux-gnueabihf/libexec/gcc/armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/4.9.0/lto-wrapper
Target: armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf
Config
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42575
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot
de
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60175
Yury Gribov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||y.gribov at samsung dot com
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60187
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59335
Joey Ye changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60035
Gregory R. Warnes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at warnes dot net
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60190
Bug ID: 60190
Summary: [c++1y] ICE with invalid return type of template
lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60189
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60189
Bug ID: 60189
Summary: ICE with invalid use of _Cilk_sync
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
A
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60188
Bug ID: 60188
Summary: [c++11] ICE with parameter pack in default template
parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60187
Bug ID: 60187
Summary: [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] [c++11] ICE with parameter
pack as underlying type for enum
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60152
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60152
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 13 22:42:44 2014
New Revision: 207770
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207770&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/60152
* dwarf2out.c (gen_subprogram_die): Don't call
ad
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60186
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60186
Bug ID: 60186
Summary: [4.9 Regression] [c++11] ICE with invalid value in
constexpr array initializer
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60185
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60185
Bug ID: 60185
Summary: [4.9 Regression] ICE with invalid default parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60141
--- Comment #3 from Teresa Johnson ---
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
> This appears to have been exposed, not caused, by the change to the
> pass ordering. It is in fact a duplicate of PR middle-end/43631, which
> was fix
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #26 from tejohnson at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: tejohnson
Date: Thu Feb 13 21:15:06 2014
New Revision: 207766
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207766&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-02-13 Teresa Johnson
For Google b/129715
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60184
Bug ID: 60184
Summary: g++ does not allow static members of named unions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60183
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60181
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
There are no specified accuracy requirements for complex multiplication /
division, even under Annex G (parts of which - imaginary types in
particular - are not implemented in GCC at present
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60182
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60141
Han Shen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||shenhanc at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57936
Orion Poplawski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||orion at cora dot nwra.com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60176
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Our std::list needs work to conform to C++11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60178
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Component|c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60141
--- Comment #1 from Teresa Johnson ---
This appears to have been exposed, not caused, by the change to the
pass ordering. It is in fact a duplicate of PR middle-end/43631, which
was fixed on trunk by r197994 on 4/15/13. I will backport the fix to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60183
Bug ID: 60183
Summary: [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] phiprop creates invalid code
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60182
Bug ID: 60182
Summary: g++ segfault within template expansion using "using"
aliasing
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Pr
UST COALESCE.
i_34(ab) and i_399(ab)
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.9.0 20140213 (experimental) [trunk revision 207749] (x86_64-suse-linux) GCC
error:|
| SSA corruption |
| Error detected aro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60174
--- Comment #10 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
That was my thought as well. I've got some unexpected family stuff to deal
with over the next couple days, but I don't see any reason why this can't be
nailed down early next week.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60174
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60180
--- Comment #1 from EP ---
Created attachment 32128
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32128&action=edit
dump created by gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60073
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60181
Bug ID: 60181
Summary: constant folding of complex number incorrect
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: targe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60073
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Thu Feb 13 16:18:13 2014
New Revision: 207763
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207763&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libffi/60073
* src/sparc/ffitarget.h (FFI_TARGET_SPECIFIC_VAR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60180
Bug ID: 60180
Summary: internal compiler error: in use_thunk, at
cp/method.c:338
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60179
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60179
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #32125|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60179
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 32125
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32125&action=edit
untested patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60179
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60179
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tmsriram at google dot com
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60179
Bug ID: 60179
Summary: [4.9 Regression] target optimization attribute
streaming is broken
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: lto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60178
Bug ID: 60178
Summary: std::mutex::try_lock failing
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assigne
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60174
--- Comment #8 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> Ok, I believe this is caused by some jump-threading threading over a copy of
> an SSA name used in abnormal context. You can try verifying if
> -fno-tree-domina
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60174
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Ok, I believe this is caused by some jump-threading threading over a copy of
an SSA name used in abnormal context. You can try verifying if
-fno-tree-dominator-opts fixes this (maybe you also need -fno-tree-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60177
Bug ID: 60177
Summary: Unable to deduce template base of derived class in
function template accepting a simple-template-id
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60174
--- Comment #6 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Created attachment 32123
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32123&action=edit
output from -fdump-tree-dom1-details
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> Looks like so. Can you atta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60174
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60174
--- Comment #4 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Created attachment 32122
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32122&action=edit
output from -fdump-tree-all
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60176
Bug ID: 60176
Summary: [C++11] void return value in std::list<>::insert()
c++1 should be an iterator
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60174
--- Comment #3 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Can you check from the -fdump-tree-all dumps where i_34(ab) and i_399(ab)
> start to have overlapping life-ranges?
OK, i used grep 'i_\(34\|399\)(ab)' cc3305a.a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60165
--- Comment #15 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #10)
> Now, I agree that ideally, GCC should warn for your last testcase. But I
> guess in that case inlining either doesn't happen or it happens too late, so
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59878
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59878
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Feb 13 13:35:10 2014
New Revision: 207758
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207758&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-02-13 Richard Biener
PR bootstrap/59878
* doc/install.te
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60165
--- Comment #14 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #9)
> The definition of a function changes with inlining ;-)
It shouldn't: what happens at run time isn't changed by inlining.
> f(&i) is considered as an initializat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60174
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43546
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.9.0
Summary|[4.7/4.8/4.9 Reg
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43546
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 13 13:20:06 2014
New Revision: 207757
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207757&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/43546
* expr.c (compress_float_constant): If x is a hard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60175
Bug ID: 60175
Summary: ICE on gcc.dg/asan/nosanitize-and-inline.c
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60174
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Can you check from the -fdump-tree-all dumps where i_34(ab) and i_399(ab)
start to have overlapping life-ranges?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60174
Bug ID: 60174
Summary: ICE on ACATS cc3305a
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
Assignee: unass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60165
--- Comment #13 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #10)
> Now, I agree that ideally, GCC should warn for your last testcase. But I
> guess in that case inlining either doesn't happen or it happens too late, so
> GCC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60165
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Only in your reading of the documentation.
You clearly don't know what you are asking for, even the very common case of
pthread_t th;
if (pthread_create (&th, NULL, tf, NULL))
goto fail;
pthread_join (th,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60165
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60165
--- Comment #10 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #8)
> Concerning the "if it cannot prove the uninitialized paths are not executed
> at run time" part, GCC should be able to prove more things with -O3 than
> w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60165
--- Comment #9 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #8)
> The -Wmaybe-uninitialized rule given in the gcc man page is (for GCC 4.8):
>
> -Wmaybe-uninitialized
> For an automatic variable, if there exists a path fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60165
Vincent Lefèvre changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60162
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59335
--- Comment #10 from PaX Team ---
please reopen, this bug is not fixed yet.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60172
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60165
--- Comment #7 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> How can the compiler know that fn2 never returns 0, without inlining (not in
> this case), some attribute (not provided, gcc right now has returns_nonnull
> attr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60162
--- Comment #2 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Created attachment 32120
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32120&action=edit
Reduced from gzip.
Command line options.
-march=armv7-a -mfpu=neon -mfloat-abi=hard -mthumb -O3 -mlra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60165
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
How can the compiler know that fn2 never returns 0, without inlining (not in
this case), some attribute (not provided, gcc right now has returns_nonnull
attribute but that is only for pointers) or some interpr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60173
Bug ID: 60173
Summary: [4.9 Regression]: gcc.dg/binop-xor1.c
scan-tree-dump-times
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60171
--- Comment #1 from Dario Lombardo ---
On my local platform (ubuntu 12.04, with same version of gcc as travis), I
don't have the problem.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60165
--- Comment #5 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> The code path exists in the code,
It exists *only* if fn2() can return 0. But the fact is that in the reality,
this can never happen (with the original non-redu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60172
Bug ID: 60172
Summary: ARM performance regression from trunk@207239
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60162
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
Summary|[4.9 lra regres
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60166
--- Comment #2 from Joey Ye ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #1)
> Isn't this a dup of PR59833.
It isn't. This one is only impacts QNAN.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60165
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> (In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #2)
> > Well, the code paths in question do not necessarily exist (you could say the
> > same thing with -O2, where the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60169
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.3
Summary|ICE ARM thumb1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60171
Bug ID: 60171
Summary: SEGFAULT when compiling with --coverage on travis-ci
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60167
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60165
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60165
--- Comment #2 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
Well, the code paths in question do not necessarily exist (you could say the
same thing with -O2, where the function is not inlined: there may be some code
paths for which fn1() doesn't initialize c).
Actua
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60166
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59737
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Fixed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60165
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
91 matches
Mail list logo
