http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51758
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23383
--- Comment #19 from rguenther at suse dot de
2012-01-05 08:39:57 UTC ---
On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, xinliangli at gmail dot com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23383
>
> --- Comment #18 from davidxl 2012-01-04
> 17:11:26 UTC --
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51755
--- Comment #2 from James Kanze 2012-01-05
08:45:22 UTC ---
I'd miss PR 51294. My report is almost certainly a duplicate of this one.
It's a minor bug, in that it only affects warnings, but it does make
-Wconversion unusable in certain contexts
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51755
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51648
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-05
09:32:56 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 5 09:32:52 2012
New Revision: 182902
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182902
Log:
PR bootstrap/51648
* tree-cfg.c (need_fake
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51759
Bug #: 51759
Summary: miscompile writes past end of bitfield
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51759
--- Comment #1 from nobled at dreamwidth dot org 2012-01-05 09:35:51 UTC ---
Created attachment 26244
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26244
output of `gcc -v -save-temps`
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51759
--- Comment #2 from nobled at dreamwidth dot org 2012-01-05 09:38:45 UTC ---
Created attachment 26245
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26245
pre-processed file (gzip-compressed)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51757
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50127
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51759
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51757
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51757
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-01-05
10:42:56 UTC ---
Also, if there's no definition, why would it link when -fkeep-inline-functions
is used? My guess would be that the call in main doesn't mark the inline
function as used, so it is no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51638
--- Comment #6 from Sebastien Bardeau 2012-01-05
10:43:52 UTC ---
Dear all,
(In reply to comment #4)
> Your
> Fortran code is invalid. We have a clear diagnostic.
> The bug is in your code not the Fortran compiler.
This code is like it is sinc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51760
Bug #: 51760
Summary: [4.7 Regression] ICE in set_lattice_value, at
tree-ssa-ccp.c:456
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51760
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-05
10:54:42 UTC ---
Created attachment 26246
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26246
preprocessed source
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51760
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51761
Bug #: 51761
Summary: [4.7 Regression] ICE in verify_gimple_stmt, at
tree-cfg.c:4241
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51761
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51762
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51762
Bug #: 51762
Summary: [4.7 Regression] ICE in maybe_record_trace_start, at
dwarf2cfi.c:2231
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51761
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51760
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||markus at trippelsdorf dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51761
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51760
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51760
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-05
11:41:56 UTC ---
Reduced testcase:
extern inline __attribute__ ((always_inline)) void *
memmove (void *dest, const void *src, __SIZE_TYPE__ len)
{
return __builtin___memmove_chk (dest, src, len, __b
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51760
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-05
11:48:28 UTC ---
This is because likely_value says VARYING for __builtin___memmove_chk (&a, b_1,
0, D.1724_7) if b_1 is not already CONSTANT. But we evaluate it with
/* These builtins
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51760
--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-05
11:49:06 UTC ---
Or simply return CONSTANT for all builtins.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51761
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51760
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51763
Bug #: 51763
Summary: SEVERE ERROR: Symbol C_BSTAT
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 3.3.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51762
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51763
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51762
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-05
12:58:11 UTC ---
Seems cross-jumping during csa pass cross-jumps the two noret calls, eventhough
they have different args size depths.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41576
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-05
13:28:37 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 5 13:28:34 2012
New Revision: 182907
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182907
Log:
2012-01-05 Richard Guenther
PR lto/415
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41576
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51472
--- Comment #9 from Aldy Hernandez 2012-01-05
13:36:37 UTC ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Thu Jan 5 13:36:32 2012
New Revision: 182908
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182908
Log:
PR middle-end/51472
* trans-mem.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41227
--- Comment #9 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-05
13:37:09 UTC ---
This is still not fixed (at least by design -
bind_c_coms.f90/bind_c_coms_driver.c
passes with -flto now). Can somebody produce a reduced testcase pair that
just has a bind-C named
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51472
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51759
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51760
--- Comment #8 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-05
13:41:38 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 5 13:41:34 2012
New Revision: 182909
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182909
Log:
2012-01-05 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51685
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51760
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51472
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51764
Bug #: 51764
Summary: mudflap does not work with LTO
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29615
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.4.6
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51761
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill 2012-01-05 14:03:22
UTC ---
OK.
Jason
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51755
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill 2012-01-05
14:11:19 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> At the moment I'm confused, however, because I don't understand if the
> patch linked by Manuel in PR51294 (maybe we can consolidate these two issues)
> was
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51171
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez 2012-01-05
14:14:34 UTC ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Thu Jan 5 14:14:29 2012
New Revision: 182911
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182911
Log:
PR other/51171
* testsuite/libitm.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51171
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51638
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus 2012-01-05
14:26:25 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> > Fortran code is invalid.
> This code is like it is since its first commit on 11-Jun-93
This does not mean that was and/or is valid. Newer compilers tend t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51752
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez 2012-01-05
14:30:15 UTC ---
Ok, I'm a complete neophyte on this, but that seems very restrictive. Does
that mean that basically we can't hoist any loads inside a transaction...ever?
__transaction_atomic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50981
--- Comment #10 from Mikael Morin 2012-01-05
14:50:38 UTC ---
Created attachment 26250
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26250
Another failing variant, with allocatables
This is not fixed by the patch above.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50981
--- Comment #11 from Mikael Morin 2012-01-05
14:51:26 UTC ---
Created attachment 26252
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26252
Another failing variant, with pointers
This is not fixed by the patch above.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51765
Bug #: 51765
Summary: Testsuite ICEs with -flto
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50490
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51766
Bug #: 51766
Summary: [4.7 regression] sync_fetch_and_xxx atomicity
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51766
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51764
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-05
15:08:47 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 5 15:08:42 2012
New Revision: 182913
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182913
Log:
2012-01-05 Richard Guenther
PR middle-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51764
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51761
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-05
15:10:36 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 5 15:10:26 2012
New Revision: 182914
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182914
Log:
PR middle-end/51761
* gimple.h (struct gimp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51765
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51761
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51767
Bug #: 51767
Summary: [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE with degenerated asm goto
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51767
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51755
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51294
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||james.kanze at gmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42283
Matt Hargett changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50490
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-05
15:44:01 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 5 15:43:54 2012
New Revision: 182917
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182917
Log:
2012-01-05 Richard Guenther
PR lto/504
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51767
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51768
Bug #: 51768
Summary: [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE with invalid asm goto
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51768
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16168
--- Comment #4 from Frederick Roth 2012-01-05
15:55:30 UTC ---
this still happens with version 4.6.2. Can someone reconfirm this?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51768
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51769
Bug #: 51769
Summary: bootstrap fails when using -O2 -funswitch-loops
-floop-flatten
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51769
--- Comment #1 from Matt Hargett 2012-01-05 16:03:06 UTC
---
Created attachment 26255
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26255
pre-processed source of the file that triggers the ICE
commandline to trigger the ICE with the attach
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51737
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor 2012-01-05
16:16:29 UTC ---
I can reproduce the segfault when compiling both the testcase from
comment #8 and the original unreduced test case on the 4.6 branch but
not on my trunk checkout (revision 182785). I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51541
--- Comment #1 from dodji at seketeli dot org
2012-01-05 16:58:29 UTC ---
A candidate fix has been posted to
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-01/msg00256.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48680
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16168
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2005-06-28 01:34:16 |2012-01-05
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22395
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-01-05
17:13:02 UTC ---
private inheritance doesn't mean the destructor can't be called with the wrong
static type
class Foo {
public:
~Foo() {}
virtual void f() { }
};
class Bar : private Foo {
p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41881
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Summa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51648
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49936
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48668
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Summa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50127
--- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-01-05 17:16:21 UTC ---
> --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-05
> 09:41:13 UTC ---
> Can't reproduce on x86_64-linux, nor with cross from that to
> i686-sun-solaris2.11 with -m64
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49936
--- Comment #10 from Sandra Loosemore
2012-01-05 17:31:39 UTC ---
My notes are that the unnecessary register moves in the loop have been present
since at least GCC 4.3, so it is not a 4.6->4.7 regression, at least.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50012
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-05
17:41:47 UTC ---
Ian, ping?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47333
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #21
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48308
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-05
17:48:11 UTC ---
Ramana (or some other ARM maintainer), could you please try to implement this?
Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23383
--- Comment #20 from davidxl 2012-01-05 18:11:18
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, xinliangli at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23383
> >
> > --- Comment #18 from davidxl 2012-01-04
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41090
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milesto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23383
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #21
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23383
--- Comment #22 from davidxl 2012-01-05 18:54:51
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #21)
> But can't a valid code also compare the result from realloc with the old
> pointer, and if they are equal, do something, otherwise do something else?
> I think i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49710
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka 2012-01-05
19:25:19 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Jan 5 19:25:14 2012
New Revision: 182919
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182919
Log:
PR middle-end/49710
* cfgloopmanip.c (remov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49710
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44777
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka 2012-01-05
19:34:08 UTC ---
OK, so the problem is separating the actual two builtins, not that profiling
would choke on the multiple returns now?
In that case I think the patch is OK (otherwise I would be concerned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44777
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-05
19:54:21 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 5 19:54:16 2012
New Revision: 182920
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182920
Log:
PR middle-end/44777
* profile.c (branch_pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51770
Bug #: 51770
Summary: dump gimple lineno when dumping bb
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44777
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7|[4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression]
1 - 100 of 139 matches
Mail list logo
