https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
--- Comment #7 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Well, the default assumption, when someone posts a 77000 line preprocessed
program with strange runtime behavior, is that the program is buggy.
You have to convince us that the error is on the compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
--- Comment #6 from Adrien Hamelin ---
I also wanted to say, my code may be not optimal or may be done in an easier
way or else (and if you have comments on it i'm ok with that), but what i think
what is the most important here is that it seems t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57742
--- Comment #17 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #16)
> Done. Joost, feel free to add your testcase from comment #3 if you want to
> (I can't write a "hello world" in fortran so I will avoid adding such
> testcas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org |
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60947
--- Comment #12 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Emm, sorry it slipped away somehow. I will look into it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559
thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60009
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from TC ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61320
--- Comment #43 from thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Thanks. In the stage before the one that fails, could you add
-fdump-tree-all-details -fdump-rtl-all-details to the command line when
compiling that jcf-parse.c file and send me an archive with
-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.10.0 20140624 (experimental) [trunk revision 211926] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -O1 small.c; a.out
$ gcc-4.9.0 -flto -O1 small.c; a.out
$
$ gcc-trunk -flto -O1 small.c
lto1: internal compiler error: in ipa_single_use, at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61600
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61601
Bug ID: 61601
Summary: C11 regex resource exhaustion
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
--- Comment #2 from Maksymilian A ---
Sorry for mistake.
Could you check this again ?
cx@cx:~/REstd11/kozak5$ ~/gcc49/bin/g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/home/cx/gcc49/bin/g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/home/cx/gcc49/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unkno
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61543
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler ---
(In reply to Vaughn Cato from comment #2)
> I'm not sure it is related to bug 49171.
I agree and withdraw my previous comparison. I didn't notice that the result of
the conversion is not used within a conte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61543
--- Comment #2 from Vaughn Cato ---
I'm not sure it is related to bug 49171. It seems to be something about enum
values specifically. For example, if you change the enum_value to an integer
constant, like 5, then you get an error.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61537
Adam Butcher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |abutcher at gcc dot
gnu.org
Tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61598
Trevor Saunders changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tsaunders at mozilla dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57742
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57742
--- Comment #15 from Marc Glisse ---
Author: glisse
Date: Tue Jun 24 18:50:00 2014
New Revision: 211956
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211956&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-06-24 Marc Glisse
PR tree-optimization/57742
gcc/
* tree-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61600
Bug ID: 61600
Summary: #pragma GCC diagnostic pop leaves warnings enabled
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
--- Comment #5 from Adrien Hamelin ---
It's a type i created to be able to store data that does not fit in ram, with
some streaming with the hard drive.
But i removed most of it to simplify the problem search for you, even if i did
not think of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49132
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jason at redhat dot com|
Assignee|fabien at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61543
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61586
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Henderson from comment #3)
> (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #2)
> > (I also wonder why we have to break the loop for naked USEs and CLOBBERs. We
> > should just skip the problematic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Also what is this Memory::Array thing? A std::array works as expected.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61528
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61586
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #2)
> (I also wonder why we have to break the loop for naked USEs and CLOBBERs. We
> should just skip the problematic insn and continue - as proposed in the
> above p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
--- Comment #2 from Adrien Hamelin ---
Created attachment 33000
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33000&action=edit
Preprocessed file compressed in 7z
I compressed the file to match the 1000KB criteria, but this is the
preproc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12333
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|paolo.carlini at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61598
--- Comment #1 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko ---
r211937 FAIL
r211936 PASS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61586
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #1)
> (In reply to Michael Cree from comment #0)
>
> > I wonder if this ICE is related in any way to bug 56858.
>
> No, this one is different. The function trips on (barr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61586
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61599
Bug ID: 61599
Summary: [x86_64] With -mcmodel=medium, extern global arrays
without size are not treated conservatively.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61598
Bug ID: 61598
Summary: [4.10 regression] fold-const.c:14755:37: error: no
matching function for call to
'hash_table >::find_slot
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
Bug ID: 61597
Summary: Unexpected behavior at runtime
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61320
--- Comment #42 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #41 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
>> --- Comment #40 from thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
>> Alright, change commited (r211778). Can you tr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61268
--- Comment #7 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
>> --- Comment #5 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org > gnu.org> ---
> [...]
>> The patch passed bootstrap on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61596
Bug ID: 61596
Summary: -Wunused-local-typedefs warns incorrectly on a typedef
that's referenced indirectly
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59472
--- Comment #5 from Paul Scruby ---
Is there a patch to fix or suppress the warnings when link-time optimizing to
libstdc++.a ? I'm using gcc4.8.2, but I'm happy to upgrade to gcc4.9 if this
release is more likely to get fixed first?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61493
wmi at google dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61595
--- Comment #1 from Sebastian Meyer ---
Created attachment 32999
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32999&action=edit
Example source, produced DWARF information and memory dump
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61595
Bug ID: 61595
Summary: Inconsistent DWARF information for arrays of vector
types
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61594
Bug ID: 61594
Summary: ICE (assertion failure) in trans-mem.c
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libitm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61592
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61593
Bug ID: 61593
Summary: Support '#pragma mark - foo' (by simply ignoring it
without warning)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61592
Bug ID: 61592
Summary: ICE with large array with initialization
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61570
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jun 24 15:13:32 2014
New Revision: 211948
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211948&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/61570
* config/i386/driver-i386.c (host_detect_local_cpu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61570
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jun 24 15:06:40 2014
New Revision: 211947
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211947&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/61570
* config/i386/driver-i386.c (host_detect_local_cpu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50871
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|redi at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61570
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jun 24 14:58:19 2014
New Revision: 211945
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211945&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/61570
* config/i386/driver-i386.c (host_detect_local_cpu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33972
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33972
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Jun 24 14:47:42 2014
New Revision: 211944
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211944&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2014-06-24 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/33972
* decl.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61570
--- Comment #5 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Tue Jun 24 14:46:18 2014
New Revision: 211943
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211943&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Revert the last change on driver-i386.c
PR target/61570
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60449
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33972
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|gcc-bugs at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61396
--- Comment #3 from Iain Sandoe ---
notes that Dominique added to the dup:
Revision r209530 is OK, r210534 is not, likely a wide-int fallout.
(of course, it could be latent-revealed-by, but would be good for a wide-int
person to take a look)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61591
Bug ID: 61591
Summary: Undefined behavior sanitizer does not catch
builtin_unreachable's from impossible devirtualization
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39494
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|gcc-bugs at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48732
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61537
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|paolo.carlini at oracle dot com|
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61532
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56286
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Note the ??? is now moved to tree-vectorizer.c:
if (num_vectorized_loops > 0)
{
/* If we vectorized any loop only virtual SSA form needs to be updated.
??? Also while we try hard to up
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61590
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Version|new-ra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61532
--- Comment #10 from ramana.radhakrishnan at arm dot com ---
>
> On 23/06/14 21:31, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61532
>>
>> --- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
>> The tests should be fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61537
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abutcher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61537
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
r208106
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61572
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61572
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jun 24 10:35:30 2014
New Revision: 211933
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211933&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-06-24 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/61572
* tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61590
Bug ID: 61590
Summary: Test for assign bug ...
Product: gcc
Version: new-ra
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: libgcc
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48992
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|hvdieren at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61572
--- Comment #11 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
See comment in arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h:144.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61572
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
static inline __attribute__((no_instrument_function)) int
autofs4_compat_get_set_timeout(struct autofs_sb_info *sbi,
compat_ulong_t *p)
{
int rv;
unsigned long ntimeout;
if ((rv = ({ int __ret_gu;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61537
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61556
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61475
--- Comment #8 from Georg Koppen ---
(In reply to Yury Gribov from comment #7)
> Have you tried patch proposed in bug 61422?
No, as it is not applying cleanly anymore.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61572
--- Comment #9 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Created attachment 32995
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32995&action=edit
unreduced testcase
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> Btw, can't find the source of that asm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61572
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Btw, can't find the source of that asm in autofs4 souce - can you provide
preprocessed source of the original testcase?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61572
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
I also note that the testcase no longer does what it tries to do after
fn1 is inlined. It seems to try making rdx available for the asm by
loading p1 into b. But after inlining completed rdx will contain g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61572
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> The question of course is why rdx is live from function entry to its first
> use.
> My patch will only continue to paper over this issue.
Because of
/* Set th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61548
jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #32986|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61572
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bonzini at gnu dot org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61587
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61572
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Component|rtl-optimiz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31782
--- Comment #10 from Raphaël JAKSE ---
So, a long term solution would be to allow quoted function names with the call
instruction in gas?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61510
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
86 matches
Mail list logo
