http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60619
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Kleinsorge ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Well your option violates C promotion rules. Basically the warning is there
> as some folks don't understand how promotion works in C when it comes to
> co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60619
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Well your option violates C promotion rules. Basically the warning is there as
some folks don't understand how promotion works in C when it comes to comparing
unsigned and signed integers against each other.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60619
Bug ID: 60619
Summary: new -solve-sign-conflicts at -Wsign-compare cases
(easy work)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60604
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|mips*-*-* |mips*-*-* (o32/eabi32)
Summary
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60612
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Component|c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60604
Steve Ellcey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60604
--- Comment #1 from Steve Ellcey ---
Created attachment 32428
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32428&action=edit
New reduced test case
Here is a new reduced test case that calls no libm functions. I am pretty sure
that the bug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60148
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60148
--- Comment #15 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Mar 21 22:19:44 2014
New Revision: 208759
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208759&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-03-21 Jerry DeLisle
PR libfortran/60148
* io/transfer.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60148
--- Comment #14 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Mar 21 22:14:36 2014
New Revision: 208757
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208757&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-03-21 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/60148
* gfortran.texi:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60610
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Mar 21 21:24:31 2014
New Revision: 208756
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208756&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/60610
* config/i386/i386.h (TARGET_64BIT_P): If not TARGET
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60610
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60560
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60576
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60587
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60587
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Mar 21 18:54:06 2014
New Revision: 208755
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208755&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/60587
* include/debug/functions.h (_Is_contiguous_sequ
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60612
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
*Sigh* -- ignore that. After line 223 it jumps back to 216 then continues back
to 223 again with the right values in *dep. I thought I was debugging an
unoptimised libstdc++.so but apparently not.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60612
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
When I step through std::rethrow_exception() in gdb it goes from line 215 to
line 223, so skips over the call to get_terminate(), so dep->terminateHandler
is null and so is dep->unwindHeader.exception_cleanu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57272
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60520
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #32399|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60618
Bug ID: 60618
Summary: ICE when building openssh on hppa w/-ftrapv in gcse.c
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60610
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 32425
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32425&action=edit
gcc49-pr60610.patch
Completely untested patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60610
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60384
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60384
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Mar 21 16:35:26 2014
New Revision: 208752
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208752&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2014-03-21 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/60384
* name-look
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60617
Bug ID: 60617
Summary: [4.8 Regression]
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60610
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60616
Bug ID: 60616
Summary: bad location from -Wunused-parameter
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60615
Bug ID: 60615
Summary: bad location in error from initializer
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60612
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60611
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60612
tasptz at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42328
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Clang accepts the code in comment 0, but GCC 4.9 and icc 13.0.1 still give the
same errors as stated here in 2009
cc-32bit/build-i586-linux/gcc/cc1
-fpreprocessed efiemu.i -quiet -dumpbase efiemu.c -m64 -mcmodel=large
-mno-red-zone -mtune=generic -march=x86-64 -auxbase-strip efiemu64_c.o -O2
-Wall -version -o efiemu.s
GNU C (GCC) version 4.9.0 20140321 (experimental) (i586-linux)
compiled by GNU C version 4.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60612
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60598
--- Comment #7 from Richard Henderson ---
Author: rth
Date: Fri Mar 21 15:31:25 2014
New Revision: 208749
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208749&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/60598
* ifcvt.c (dead_or_predicable): Return FALSE if there
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60598
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60613
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 32423
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32423&action=edit
gcc49-pr60613.patch
Untested fix.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60600
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60614
Bug ID: 60614
Summary: -Wtype-limits fails to warn on unsigned bitfields
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56963
--- Comment #8 from Václav Zeman ---
BTW, the current version with which I have reduced the test case is this:
`--> g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-cygwin/4.8.2/lto-wrapper.exe
Target: i686-pc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56963
--- Comment #6 from Václav Zeman ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #5)
> This PR might have the same reason as PR60567.
>
> Namely, your GCC has not been compiled on a system with working linker
> plugin - and thus, lto1 is not invoked
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56963
--- Comment #7 from Václav Zeman ---
Created attachment 32422
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32422&action=edit
preprocessed source
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57715
--- Comment #5 from Václav Zeman ---
(In reply to Václav Zeman from comment #4)
> (In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #2)
> > This PR might have the same reason as PR60567.
> >
> > Namely, your GCC has not been compiled on a system with worki
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60600
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Or we might produce a call to __builtin_unreachable (we already do
that in ipa_get_indirect_edge_target_1 in similar cases) or
__builtin_abort. Tough decision, although I'll probably go for
__builtin_unreacha
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57715
--- Comment #4 from Václav Zeman ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #2)
> This PR might have the same reason as PR60567.
>
> Namely, your GCC has not been compiled on a system with working linker
> plugin - and thus, lto1 is not invoked
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57715
Václav Zeman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vhaisman at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60613
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60613
Bug ID: 60613
Summary: Invalid signed subtraction ubsan diagnostics
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priorit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60600
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
Well, this is ICE on code with undefined behavior. Function test
calls itself with a parameter which is a reference to an object of
type child2 and then static_casts it to a reference to child1. These
are no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60419
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE|[4.8 Regression] ICE
|S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60612
Bug ID: 60612
Summary: Throwing exception, catching and rethrowing
(std::exception_ptr) in destructor leads to segfault
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60611
Bug ID: 60611
Summary: friend function declaration rejected when the
namespace in which it is declared is not explicitely
specified in the declaration
Product: gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27354
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59626
--- Comment #19 from Richard Biener ---
Better patch - simply kill all bodies of extern always_inline functions before
LTO streaming... (we should be able to do that anyway)
Index: gcc/ipa.c
==
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60609
--- Comment #3 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Created attachment 32418
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32418&action=edit
Reduced testcase
Reduced testcase. Looks prima-facie like lengths are messed up somewhere which
needs care
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60610
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60610
Bug ID: 60610
Summary: [4.9 Regression] ICE in convert_regs_1, at
reg-stack.c:3064
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59626
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> But the function doesn't inline itself, that is why it uses the asm alias
> and GCC shouldn't be looking through that and merging the two decls because
> of that
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59176
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59176
--- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Mar 21 12:59:35 2014
New Revision: 208748
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208748&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-03-21 Martin Jambor
PR ipa/59176
* cgraph.h (symtab_node
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60603
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Version|unknown
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60601
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking
Target|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60600
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Component|c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60602
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton ---
> Hi Rainer,
>
> Given that the 2.9 target is deprecated, do we really care about this
> problem
> ?
Not too much. Given that is was a new fail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60419
--- Comment #18 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Mar 21 12:48:02 2014
New Revision: 208747
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208747&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-03-21 Martin Jambor
PR ipa/60419
* ipa.c (symtab_remove_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60609
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60602
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60609
--- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose ---
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/arm-linux-gnueabihf/4.8/lto-wrapper
Target: arm-linux-gnueabihf
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Debian 4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60609
Bug ID: 60609
Summary: [4.8/4.9 Regression] Error: value of 256 too large for
field of 1 bytes at 68242
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60608
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60577
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Mar 21 11:52:50 2014
New Revision: 208746
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208746&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-03-21 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/60577
* tree-c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60577
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.9.0
Summary|[4.7/4.8/4.9 Re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60608
Bug ID: 60608
Summary: Template argument problem
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58678
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60603
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
--- Comment #35 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #34 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
>> I ran the test on Solaris 9 and 11 and looked at the resulting .sum
>> files. Seeing the Unsupported rounding entries on Solaris 11 (a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60607
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
Status|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56775
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60567
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||miles at gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60567
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59626
--- Comment #17 from Richard Biener ---
Seems to happen quite often when building packages with LTO (see PR51744 for
another major annoyance there).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60606
--- Comment #2 from D.Salikhov ---
I suppose it is a bug as according to ARM Architecture Reference Manual,
A8.8.13 AND (immediate), pc is valid register for using in 'AND' instruction as
an input.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60606
Yury Gribov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||y.gribov at samsung dot com
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51744
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.7.3, 4.8.3, 4.9.0
Severity|n
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51744
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
It also (sadly) means this "works" with -fno-use-linker-plugin. It also means
that not outputting the UNDEF into the LTO symbol table for this case doesn't
work as the executable will not link (we optimize t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51744
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
typedef __SIZE_TYPE__ size_t;
extern void *memset (void *__s, int __c, size_t __n) __attribute__
((__nothrow__)) __attribute__ ((__nonnull__ (1)));
extern void __warn_memset_zero_len (void) __attribute__((__w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54051
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment #8 from Ramana Rad
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37436
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37436
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45932
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60607
Bug ID: 60607
Summary: Missing lto command line option handling causes build
failures
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
isable-libatomic --with-interwork --with-cpu=cortex-a9
--with-arch=armv7-a --with-mode=arm --with-tune=cortex-a9 --with-fpu=vfpv3
--with-float=softfp
Thread model: single
gcc version 4.8.3 20140321 (prerelease) (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60598
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 32413
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32413&action=edit
gcc49-pr60598.patch
I've bootstrapped/regtested this version of the patch (feel free to rewrite the
ChangeLog ent
94 matches
Mail list logo
