http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57896
--- Comment #34 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Fri Feb 21 07:55:35 2014
New Revision: 207983
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207983&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2014-02-21 Jakub Jelinek
* c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60052
--- Comment #1 from Adam Butcher ---
Author: abutcher
Date: Fri Feb 21 07:47:55 2014
New Revision: 207980
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207980&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/60052 and PR c++/60053.
PR c++/60052
PR c++/60053
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60053
--- Comment #1 from Adam Butcher ---
Author: abutcher
Date: Fri Feb 21 07:47:55 2014
New Revision: 207980
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207980&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/60052 and PR c++/60053.
PR c++/60052
PR c++/60053
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60292
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60286
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60286
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Feb 21 07:37:06 2014
New Revision: 207979
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207979&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-02-21 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/60286
* libgfortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60216
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-invalid-code |ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #2 from Jas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60219
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60224
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60227
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60248
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60252
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60297
--- Comment #1 from David Krauss ---
Woops, I neglected to check a POD class type. Removing the destructor from
"notpod" has no effect. The condition seems to apply to all scalar types
instead.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60051
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60167
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ondrej.kolacek1 at centrum dot
cz
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60274
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60167
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60222
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60250
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #2 from J
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60250
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58606
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Feb 21 04:42:59 2014
New Revision: 207978
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207978&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60274
Revert:
PR c++/58606
* pt.c (template_parm_to_a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60274
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Feb 21 04:42:59 2014
New Revision: 207978
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207978&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60274
Revert:
PR c++/58606
* pt.c (template_parm_to_a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60251
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #3 from J
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60251
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60297
Bug ID: 60297
Summary: Temporary lifetime not extended by reference bound to
POD member
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59850
--- Comment #19 from Josh Triplett ---
(In reply to Tom Tromey from comment #18)
> (In reply to Tom Tromey from comment #17)
> > It seems that "force" works on function parameters and casts
> > but not direct assignments:
>
> It's also an error i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60274
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59850
--- Comment #18 from Tom Tromey ---
(In reply to Tom Tromey from comment #17)
> It seems that "force" works on function parameters and casts
> but not direct assignments:
It's also an error in conditional expressions and in a "return".
I can imp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59850
--- Comment #17 from Tom Tromey ---
It seems that "force" works on function parameters and casts
but not direct assignments:
bapiya. nl -ba /tmp/q.c
1#define A(N) __attribute__((address_space (N)))
2#define force __attribute__((
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60272
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60272
--- Comment #6 from Richard Henderson ---
Author: rth
Date: Fri Feb 21 00:14:05 2014
New Revision: 207973
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207973&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60272
gcc/
* builtins.c (expand_builtin_atomic_compare_exchang
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60272
--- Comment #5 from Richard Henderson ---
Author: rth
Date: Fri Feb 21 00:11:43 2014
New Revision: 207972
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207972&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60272
* builtins.c (expand_builtin_atomic_compare_exchange
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60295
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
-flto=jobserver is added by bootstrap-lto.mk. There are
static void
stream_out (char *temp_filename, lto_symtab_encoder_t encoder, bool last)
{
#ifdef HAVE_WORKING_FORK
static int nruns;
if (!lto_parallelism
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60295
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka ---
> It happens during a GCC LTO+FDO bootstrap with
>
> ../src-trunk/configure \
> --prefix=/usr/4.9.0 --enable-clocale=gnu --with-system-zlib
> --enable-shared --with-demangler-in-ld --with-build-config=boot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60295
Bug ID: 60295
Summary: [4.9 Regression] Too many lto1-wpa-stream processes
are forked
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60296
Bug ID: 60296
Summary: Confusing -Wformat warning on invalid format string
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60294
Bug ID: 60294
Summary: missing diagnostic with -Wmaybe-uninitialized
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60221
--- Comment #6 from Ruud Koolen ---
This fix solves my original problem. Resolved, as far as I'm concerned.
Will this fix also be applied to 4.7 and 4.8?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60287
--- Comment #3 from Chengnian Sun ---
Thanks, Tobias and Manuel.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57896
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression]|[4.7 Regression] ICE in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57896
--- Comment #32 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 20 20:40:52 2014
New Revision: 207970
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207970&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/57896
* config/i386/i386.c (expand_vec_perm_interleave2):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57896
--- Comment #31 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 20 20:39:46 2014
New Revision: 207969
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207969&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/57896
* config/i386/i386.c (expand_vec_perm_interleave2):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60291
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56490
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 32184
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32184&action=edit
gcc49-pr56490.patch
Untested fix (cleanups plus the limiting param).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60293
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60293
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60293
Bug ID: 60293
Summary: ALLOCATE and DEALLOCATE intrinsics are not in the
gfortran manual
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60271
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #4)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> > The same thought occurred to me, but I didn't file an issue.
>
> Should I do it, or are you going to?
Please go
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60272
--- Comment #4 from Richard Henderson ---
Author: rth
Date: Thu Feb 20 17:43:53 2014
New Revision: 207966
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207966&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60272
gcc/
* builtins.c (expand_builtin_atomic_compare_exchang
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60292
Bug ID: 60292
Summary: [4.9 Regression] ICE: in fill_vec_av_set, at
sel-sched.c:3863 with -m64 after r206174 on
powerpc-apple-darwin9.8.0
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57896
--- Comment #30 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #25)
> Created attachment 32180 [details]
> gcc48-pr57896.patch
>
> So like this (4.8 version, untested)? Uros, can you please double-check it?
> The point is, if d->te
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56490
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60291
--- Comment #7 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> For reference (in testing)
Looks promising:
Without LTO: 2:27.39 total
WithLTO: 35.485 total (60% faster than clang)
> throwing that to callgrind n
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60271
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> The same thought occurred to me, but I didn't file an issue.
Should I do it, or are you going to?
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3)
> It's certainly
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58873
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58873
--- Comment #5 from Kai Tietz ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Thu Feb 20 16:04:37 2014
New Revision: 207963
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207963&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/58873
* parser.c (cp_parser_functional_cast): Treat NULL_TREE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58873
--- Comment #4 from Kai Tietz ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Thu Feb 20 16:03:38 2014
New Revision: 207962
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207962&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/58873
* parser.c (cp_parser_functional_cast): Treat NULL_TREE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58873
--- Comment #3 from Kai Tietz ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Thu Feb 20 16:02:24 2014
New Revision: 207961
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207961&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/58873
* parser.c (cp_parser_functional_cast): Treat NULL_TREE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60291
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
For reference (in testing)
Index: gcc/tree-ssa-live.c
===
--- gcc/tree-ssa-live.c (revision 207960)
+++ gcc/tree-ssa-live.c (working copy)
@@ -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55260
--- Comment #17 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #16)
> Not yet on the 4.8 branch, but I'm re-running the tests there now and
> hopefully will commit it also there today or tomorrow.
Ah, sorry.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55260
--- Comment #16 from Martin Jambor ---
Not yet on the 4.8 branch, but I'm re-running the tests there now and hopefully
will commit it also there today or tomorrow.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60291
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
remove_unused_locals is called from at least cfgcleanup-post-optimizing at -O0.
At -O0 I have (trunk)
expand : 481.98 (94%) usr 1.15 (17%) sys 481.94 (93%) wall
293891 kB (15%) ggc
TOT
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55260
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60291
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||compile-time-hog
Status|UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60288
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60288
--- Comment #3 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Thu Feb 20 15:20:26 2014
New Revision: 207960
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207960&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/60288
compiler: Avoid crash, give error for *&x when x is n
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60276
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 32183
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32183&action=edit
patch
Patch I am testing.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60271
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Even if max_element() isn't made constexpr, we can make __max_element constexpr
(once the FE supports it) and use it directly in max.
It's certainly solvable, I just wanted to create this PR so we don't for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60291
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Perf shows:
24.26% cc1 cc1 [.] bitmap_set_bit(bitmap_head*, int)
20.88% cc1 cc1 [.] mark_all_vars_used_1(tree_node**, int*, void*)
14.18% cc1 cc1 [.] operand_equal_p(tree_node const*, tree_n
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60288
--- Comment #2 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
I don't think there is any parsing issue with the omitted error on line 5.
It's just that gccgo converts *&x to x for any x, and forgets to test that x
must be addressable.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60271
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The same thought occurred to me, but I didn't file an issue.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56807
--- Comment #26 from Kai Tietz ---
ICE was resolved for x86_64.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60271
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
In my opinion, the sensible thing to do is add constexpr to max_element (and
the __ops helpers) once the front-end supports it, not duplicate the code in
max(initializer_list). Well, since max_element is just on
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58835
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58835
--- Comment #3 from Kai Tietz ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Thu Feb 20 14:31:01 2014
New Revision: 207957
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207957&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/58835
* semantics.c (finish_fname): Handle error_mark_node.
Mo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60291
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58835
--- Comment #2 from Kai Tietz ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Thu Feb 20 14:29:55 2014
New Revision: 207956
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207956&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/58835
* semantics.c (finish_fname): Handle error_mark_node.
Mo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58835
--- Comment #1 from Kai Tietz ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Thu Feb 20 14:28:16 2014
New Revision: 207955
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207955&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/58835
* semantics.c (finish_fname): Handle error_mark_node.
Mo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60291
--- Comment #1 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
For -ftime-report -O1 most highlighting lines are:
phase opt and generate : 175.81 (98%) usr 4.61 (51%) sys 180.95 (95%) wall
1833542 kB (86%) ggc
expand : 20.05 (11%) usr 0.71 (
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
--- Comment #15 from Rainer Orth ---
Author: ro
Date: Thu Feb 20 14:04:53 2014
New Revision: 207951
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207951&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
XFAIL sourcelocation (PR libgcj/55637)
PR libgcj/55637
* testsuite/libj
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60291
Bug ID: 60291
Summary: slow compile times for any mode (-O0/-O1/-O2) on large
.c source file (30MBs)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59431
--- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #3 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
> Yeah, I didn't think that would fix this problem, I was just hoping for more
> consistent error messages--e.g., "out of memory" rather than "c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55260
--- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Thu Feb 20 13:28:34 2014
New Revision: 207941
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207941&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-02-20 Martin Jambor
PR ipa/55260
* ipa-cp.c (cgraph_edge
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60290
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Even with the r207623 fix?
Yes, this is from the latest r207783 bootstraps.
Rainer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60204
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60290
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60268
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If this works, fine with me, but I'll defer the review to Vladimir.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57896
--- Comment #29 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #28)
> Perhaps just make it gcc_checking_assert?
On release branches perhaps, but the consequences of
crtl->emit.regno_pointer_align_length == 0 warrant ICE even in the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60276
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
Note that in r196871 this was broken, but r196872 is fine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57896
--- Comment #28 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Perhaps just make it gcc_checking_assert?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60276
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> But you can clearly see that this isn't valid vectorization because of the
> read-after-write dependence of out[x].
Well, only after unrolling which happens her
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60290
Bug ID: 60290
Summary: 32-bit g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc FAILs on
Solaris/x86
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60290
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60276
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
But you can clearly see that this isn't valid vectorization because of the
read-after-write dependence of out[x].
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57896
--- Comment #27 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #25)
> Created attachment 32180 [details]
> gcc48-pr57896.patch
>
> So like this (4.8 version, untested)? Uros, can you please double-check it?
> The point is, if d->te
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60276
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
And with less convoluted vectorized code but still broken (avoids integer
promotions):
extern void abort (void);
static void
foo (int *out, const int *lp, const int *hp, unsigned samples)
{
int x, target;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
--- Comment #14 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
>> What should we do about this test? Having it fail everywhere a current
>> binutils
>> version is used causes lots of noise in testsuit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60287
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52952
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||chengniansun at gmail dot com
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57896
--- Comment #26 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 32181
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32181&action=edit
gcc49-pr57896.patch
Corresponding 4.9 version, which is somewhat different due to my? changes not
to emit subreg
1 - 100 of 147 matches
Mail list logo
