http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54528
--- Comment #5 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-09-27
07:06:51 UTC ---
The bug is still present in gcc-4.8-20120923.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54688
--- Comment #10 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-09-27 07:57:04 UTC ---
> --- Comment #9 from Bernd Schmidt 2012-09-26
> 14:13:31 UTC ---
> Created attachment 28283
> --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28283
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54143
wbrana changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54710
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|WAITING
Resolution|IN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54709
--- Comment #12 from Richard Guenther 2012-09-27
09:11:23 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Sep 27 09:11:18 2012
New Revision: 191798
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191798
Log:
2012-09-27 Richard Guenther
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54709
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54717
--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther 2012-09-27
09:28:04 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> The slowdown is mostly hidden by -fno-tree-loop-if-convert.
I would say this means we have more vectorization opportunities after the
patch. O
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54427
--- Comment #8 from Marc Glisse 2012-09-27 10:06:29
UTC ---
Author: glisse
Date: Thu Sep 27 10:06:23 2012
New Revision: 191800
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191800
Log:
2012-09-27 Marc Glisse
PR c/530
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53024
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse 2012-09-27 10:06:29
UTC ---
Author: glisse
Date: Thu Sep 27 10:06:23 2012
New Revision: 191800
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191800
Log:
2012-09-27 Marc Glisse
PR c/530
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53024
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54717
--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther 2012-09-27
10:43:00 UTC ---
I can reproduce the slowdown. Code differences appear first in early FRE,
good ones like:
- _84 = &*a_56(D)[_83];
+ _84 = _75;
which was the intention of the patch (
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54703
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-09-27
10:48:14 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Sep 27 10:48:07 2012
New Revision: 191801
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191801
Log:
PR target/54703
* simplify-rtx.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54703
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-09-27
10:53:47 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Sep 27 10:53:42 2012
New Revision: 191802
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191802
Log:
PR target/54703
* simplify-rtx.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54703
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.3, 4.8.0
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54726
Bug #: 54726
Summary: libbacktrace segfaults on gcc_asserts with stripped
gcc
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54727
Bug #: 54727
Summary: [4.8 Regression] error: declaration of ‘UINT64_C’ must
be available
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRME
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54726
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54528
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: dim...@gmail.com
gcc version 4.8.0 20120927 (experimental) [trunk revision 191799] (GCC)
$ cat fun1.cpp
#include
#include
void
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54683
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54727
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini 2012-09-27
12:02:09 UTC ---
Could be a manifestation of PR52764. Please try to figure out whether
is also included before .
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52764
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54727
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54728
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54728
--- Comment #2 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko 2012-09-27
12:27:33 UTC ---
for reduced test case:
$ cp fun1.ii fun2.ii
$ g++...
$ cat fun1.ii
class G;
template < typename, typename = G > class A;
class B
{
};
class G:B
{
};
template
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52764
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini 2012-09-27
12:38:48 UTC ---
I guess we should simply implement in stdint-wrap.h and stdint-gcc.h what
Joseph recommended. It seems safer to me to conditionalize the change on C++11.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54095
--- Comment #11 from Richard Guenther 2012-09-27
12:46:08 UTC ---
Created attachment 28290
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28290
no-op patch
This tries to only delay renaming all statics, not avoid any renaming. Pas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54727
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-09-27 12:53:53 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Sep 27 12:53:46 2012
New Revision: 191806
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191806
Log:
2012-09-27 Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54727
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf
2012-09-27 12:56:21 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Could be a manifestation of PR52764. Please try to figure out whether
> is also included before .
Yes. From nsMemoryReporterManager.ii:
3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54727
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54727
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf
2012-09-27 12:59:37 UTC ---
Created attachment 28291
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28291
preprocessed testfile
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54688
--- Comment #11 from Bernd Schmidt 2012-09-27
13:28:12 UTC ---
Hmm, strange. What if you just make a change like this:
@@ -4600,8 +4600,7 @@ parse_add_or_inc (struct mem_inc_info *m
if (!REG_P (SET_DEST (pat)))
return false;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53266
--- Comment #10 from Daniel Richard G. 2012-09-27
14:02:03 UTC ---
Okay, I grabbed a copy of gcc-4.8-20120923, and started bootstrapping using an
older 4.5.2 (since the 4.7.0 C++ compiler isn't working correctly; am I correct
in observing
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54710
--- Comment #8 from Larry Evans 2012-09-27
14:03:25 UTC ---
Created attachment 28292
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28292
with optimization set to -O1 for both gcc and clang
Shows much larger user (and elapsed) time
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54710
--- Comment #9 from Larry Evans 2012-09-27
14:12:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Can you provide absolute compile-times
The .out files show output of unix time command.
Is that not what you mean by "absolute compile-times"?
If not,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52764
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Component|libs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54725
Mike Frysinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54726
--- Comment #2 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-09-27 15:36:30
UTC ---
The segfault is a bug I will fix, but the fact that the backtrace doesn't work
doesn't matter. We didn't have the backtrace information before, and we won't
have it in this
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54726
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf
2012-09-27 15:45:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> The segfault is a bug I will fix, but the fact that the backtrace doesn't work
> doesn't matter. We didn't have the backtrace information befor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54688
--- Comment #12 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-09-27 15:59:38 UTC ---
> --- Comment #11 from Bernd Schmidt 2012-09-27
> 13:28:12 UTC ---
> Hmm, strange. What if you just make a change like this:
>
> @@ -4600,8 +4600,7 @@ pa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54713
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #28280|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54729
Bug #: 54729
Summary: __compare_and_swap does not return on all paths
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54314
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54729
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-09-27
17:34:01 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> I had wrongly used the __compare_and_swap with a "volatile bool" variable and
> without the _GLIBCXX_DEBUG and _GLIBCXX_PARALLEL being defined.
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34106
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-09-27
17:37:46 UTC ---
The compatibility.h header is still a complete mess with code we don't need,
can I take this bug and clean it up?
(In reply to comment #4)
> Note: I don't think we should r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34106
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54228
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2012-09-27
17:41:43 UTC ---
H.J. please either backport or close this. Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34106
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|un
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53135
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|arm-oe-linux-gnueabi|arm-*-linux-gnueabi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54710
Larry Evans changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #28292|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54726
--- Comment #4 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-27
19:20:53 UTC ---
Author: ian
Date: Thu Sep 27 19:20:49 2012
New Revision: 191811
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191811
Log:
PR other/54726
* elf.c (
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54726
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54228
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54228
--- Comment #4 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-27
21:00:24 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Sep 27 21:00:14 2012
New Revision: 191812
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191812
Log:
Add test for "C" locale, add sani
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54228
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54730
Bug #: 54730
Summary: ICE in gfc_typenode_for_spec, at
fortran/trans-types.c:1066
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54730
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53922
David Fang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fang at csl dot cornell.edu
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54083
David Fang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fang at csl dot cornell.edu
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54083
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-09-27
21:33:32 UTC ---
The patch in comment #5 should fix it.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54705
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|ebotcazou
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54730
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres 2012-09-27
21:43:23 UTC ---
The ICE occurs at
tree
gfc_typenode_for_spec (gfc_typespec * spec)
{
tree basetype;
switch (spec->type)
{
case BT_UNKNOWN:
gcc_unreachable ();
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54731
Bug #: 54731
Summary: arm-elf/arm-eabisim crosses fails in make-check due to
undefined LFE refrences
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54732
Bug #: 54732
Summary: [4.8 regression] Installation failure: libbacktrace
rebuilds upon install when built with "make
bootstrap-lean"
Classification: Unclassified
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54732
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54732
--- Comment #2 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-28
06:13:07 UTC ---
Author: ian
Date: Fri Sep 28 06:13:00 2012
New Revision: 191819
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=191819
Log:
PR bootstrap/54732
* con
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54732
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
67 matches
Mail list logo
