hread model: posix
gcc version 4.7.0 20110426 (experimental) [trunk revision 172980] (GCC)
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-v' '-O0' '-flto' '-shared-libgcc' '-mtune=generic'
'-march=x86-64'
/data03/vondele/gnu/gcc_trunk/install/libexec/gcc/x86_64-u
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45586
--- Comment #56 from Joost VandeVondele
2011-04-26 18:19:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #54)
> (In reply to comment #53)
> > reduced testcase for 4.7
>
> Does not fail here - can you still reproduce it? (It might have been fixed by
> the patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48750
--- Comment #11 from Paolo Carlini 2011-04-26
18:38:26 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Yes, this certainly fixes my segfault.
For me, it only fixes the segfault, also avoids all valgrind and glibc errors
messages at runtime and drastically i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48750
--- Comment #12 from Paolo Carlini 2011-04-26
18:40:17 UTC ---
Forgot: my numbers, etc, are all about the exaxt testcase in PR48751.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48776
Summary: ICE(segfault) after -std=f95 diagnostic error
involving PROCEDURE
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: error-recovery, ice-on-invalid-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48279
--- Comment #12 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-26
18:46:15 UTC ---
Created attachment 24106
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24106
Draft patch for the main issue and for the -std=f2003/f2008 diagnostic
The regression is caused by:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48777
Summary: duplicate pointers to empty structs passed as
arguments to function
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48777
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-04-26
19:20:31 UTC ---
Considering empty structs are a GNU extension, this could be considered
correct.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48258
--- Comment #3 from Michael Meissner 2011-04-26
19:25:45 UTC ---
Author: meissner
Date: Tue Apr 26 19:25:41 2011
New Revision: 172984
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172984
Log:
PR target/48258, improve vector reduction on
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48530
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill 2011-04-26
19:28:32 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Apr 26 19:28:25 2011
New Revision: 172985
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172985
Log:
PR c++/48530
* decl.c (cxx_maybe_build_clea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45586
--- Comment #57 from Thomas Koenig 2011-04-26
19:37:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #54)
> (In reply to comment #53)
> > reduced testcase for 4.7
>
> Does not fail here - can you still reproduce it? (It might have been fixed by
> the patch for P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48778
Summary: gcc 4.6 -Waddress adds unhelpful new warning case
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48777
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-04-26 19:48:53 UTC ---
Indeed, empty structs in GNU C (as opposed to C++) are expected to take up
no space, and so possibly not have unique addresses.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47995
Maksim Rayskiy changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||maksim.rayskiy at gmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43341
Arthur O'Dwyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arthur.j.odwyer at gmail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47995
--- Comment #4 from Jian Peng 2011-04-26 19:58:08
UTC ---
Hi, Maksim,
I did not dig into this, but my past experience is that it is related to recent
rework of SSa in FCC since it did not show up in old gcc-4.3
Thanks,
Jian
On Apr 26, 2011, a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48770
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48754
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski 2011-04-26
20:05:54 UTC ---
Most likely a BRANCH_COST issue.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43341
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski 2011-04-26
20:04:39 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> gcc -fpack-struct=4 -fprofile-generate test.c
-fpack-struct changes the ABI so it is not fully a bug there.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48765
William J. Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||richard.sandiford at linaro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43341
--- Comment #6 from Arthur O'Dwyer
2011-04-26 20:18:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > gcc -fpack-struct=4 -fprofile-generate test.c
>
> -fpack-struct changes the ABI so it is not fully a bug there.
It's a gray a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43341
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski 2011-04-26
20:24:21 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > (In reply to comment #4)
> > > gcc -fpack-struct=4 -fprofile-generate test.c
> >
> > -fpack-struct changes the ABI so it is not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48779
Summary: -Wunused-but-set-variable does not report unread
unit-static variables
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48780
Summary: [C++0x] scoped enumerations and va_arg (default
argument promotions)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40975
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48600
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48766
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-04-26 21:18:56 UTC ---
The combination -fwrapv -ftrapv is not particularly meaningful; it ought
to act exactly the same as -ftrapv (i.e. -ftrapv should override any
previous -fwrapv, and vi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48530
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48726
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48781
Summary: gcc generate movdqa instructions on unaligned memory
address when using -mtune=native -march=native
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48781
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-04-26
22:10:59 UTC ---
The alignment of __uint128_t is 16byte. I think you are invoking undefined
behavior by using a data type which increases the alignment.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48781
--- Comment #2 from Zhangxi Tan 2011-04-26
22:25:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> The alignment of __uint128_t is 16byte. I think you are invoking undefined
> behavior by using a data type which increases the alignment.
_uint128_t does not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48781
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48782
Summary: unused-but-set static variables are not optimized out
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48726
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill 2011-04-26
23:42:53 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Apr 26 23:42:50 2011
New Revision: 172993
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172993
Log:
PR c++/48726
* call.c (convert_like_real):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48783
Summary: ARM: kernel compiled at -O2 has a unused reference to
__aeabi_uldivmod
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48726
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48760
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #18
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42687
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48750
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48750
--- Comment #13 from Paolo Carlini 2011-04-27
01:05:36 UTC ---
Created attachment 24108
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24108
Draft patch
This is my work ìn progress patch. I'm for example seeing very good to perfect
improvem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48784
Summary: #pragma pack(1) + -fstrict-volatile-bitfields = bad
codegen
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48760
--- Comment #19 from Paolo Carlini 2011-04-27
01:26:43 UTC ---
Thus, if I understand correctly Gaby and Jason, we want to be able to
initialize a __complex__ float type *exactly* like an array of two floats?
Thus:
struct C
{
//float data[2];
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48767
--- Comment #2 from Nobuhiro Iwamatsu 2011-04-27
02:37:37 UTC ---
Hi,
Thanks for your work.
(In reply to comment #1)
> This is a target problem. The patch below will fix it.
I confirm fix on gcc-4.4, 4,5 and 4.6.
Thanks!
> BTW, I'm not sure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48771
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill 2011-04-27
03:58:16 UTC ---
Looks fine, but also remove the REFERENCE_TYPE check in
valid_type_in_constexpr_fundecl_p.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48760
--- Comment #20 from Jason Merrill 2011-04-27
03:55:27 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> : data{ r, i } { }
Yes.
> In my opinion, at this point at least, it would be safer and simpler to
> restrict the syntax to C++1x
What is this C++1x yo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42687
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill 2011-04-27
05:20:10 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 27 05:20:06 2011
New Revision: 173008
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173008
Log:
PR c++/42687
* parser.c (cp_parser_primary_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42687
--- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill 2011-04-27
05:20:50 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 27 05:20:46 2011
New Revision: 173010
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173010
Log:
PR c++/42687
* parser.c (cp_parser_primary_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42687
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42687
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill 2011-04-27
05:20:38 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 27 05:20:33 2011
New Revision: 173009
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173009
Log:
PR c++/42687
* parser.c (cp_parser_primary_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42687
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill 2011-04-27
05:17:26 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 27 05:17:20 2011
New Revision: 173007
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173007
Log:
PR c++/42687
* parser.c (cp_parser_primary_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48746
jpr at csc dot fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jpr at csc dot fi
--- Comment #1 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48785
Summary: BOZ editing of real numbers not working with
-std=f2008
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48746
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
101 - 154 of 154 matches
Mail list logo
