http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57526
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31798
Rich Felker changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bugdal at aerifal dot cx
--- Comment #2 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57043
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57852
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57858
Bug ID: 57858
Summary: AVX2: ymm used for div, not for sqrt
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimiza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57859
Bug ID: 57859
Summary: -ftrapv does not trap on signed overflows for struct
fields (32-bit mode)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57860
Bug ID: 57860
Summary: wrong code for bitwise ops with long long literal on
x86_64-linux (32-bit mode)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57850
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Ponomarenko ---
Please do not remove this option!
I know that it's private option for debugging GCC only, but it's used in the
ABI Compliance Checker tool:
http://ispras.linuxbase.org/index.php/ABI_compliance_checker
T
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57861
Bug ID: 57861
Summary: wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu in 32-bit mode
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57850
--- Comment #4 from Andrey Ponomarenko ---
It's also used for maintaining binary compatibility of glibc:
http://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Testing/ABI_checker
and by the API Sanity Checker tool for generating unit tests for C/C++
libraries: http:/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47409
Francesco Zappa Nardelli changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||francesco.zappa.nardelli@gm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57851
--- Comment #2 from Petr.Salinger at seznam dot cz ---
Posted in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-07/msg00304.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602
--- Comment #6 from Igor Zamyatin ---
Jan, have you had a chance to look at the problem?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57862
Bug ID: 57862
Summary: invalid read struct uint32_t member (ARMV5)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
Component: c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57856
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gang.chen at asianux dot com
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51786
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54366
Bug 54366 depends on bug 51786, which changed state.
Bug 51786 Summary: [c++0x] Invalid declaration with decltype accepted
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51786
What|Removed |Added
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57854
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57854
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Thiago Macieira from comment #0)
>
> It should be in -Weffc++.
Not unless a new C++11 edition of Effective C++ recommends using override on
all overriding functions, and not unless we update -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57858
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57854
--- Comment #3 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> (In reply to Thiago Macieira from comment #0)
> >
> > It should be in -Weffc++.
>
> Not unless a new C++11 edition of Effective C++ recommends using over
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57862
--- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson ---
This has all the indications of a mis-aligned memory access. Since you're on
Linux, please make sure that the 'User faults' field in /proc/cpu/alignment
shows a value of 2 (fixup) or 3 (fixup+warn). You
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57862
--- Comment #2 from Gaetano Mendola ---
I had 0. Putting 2 or 3 fixed the problem. Now my question is: who is faulty?
Kernel configuration on this platform, the architecture, the compiler or even
me ?
BTW, compiling that code with clang even with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57853
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32354
Mark R. Bannister changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||chapter34 at yahoo dot com
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57863
Bug ID: 57863
Summary: std::vector<>::emplace_back() internal compiler error
when passing wrong number of arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57863
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57086
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||maxim.yegorushkin at gmail dot
com
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57862
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson ---
(In reply to Gaetano Mendola from comment #2)
> who is faulty?
> Kernel configuration on this platform, the architecture, the compiler or
> even me ?
All of the above. The architecture for getting mis-a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57848
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57864
Bug ID: 57864
Summary: [4.7 Regression] ICE in bitmap_set_replace_value, at
tree-ssa-pre.c:862
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57865
Bug ID: 57865
Summary: Broken _save64gpr and _rest64gpr usage
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53525
--- Comment #18 from Mathias Gaunard ---
I'm not competent enough to make my own builds of GCC with patches, and I
unfortunately do not have much time to contribute to this either.
If someone can give me binaries for debian x86-64 I can do some t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57866
Bug ID: 57866
Summary: Erroneous constant folding of SSE intrinsics
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57858
--- Comment #2 from vincenzo Innocente ---
actually the code for div and sqr is different already for standard SSE
c++ -std=c++11 -Ofast -S avx2sqrt.cc -ftree-vectorizer-verbose=1 -Wall ; cat
avx2sqrt.s
.L2:
movdqa%xmm0, %xmm1
addl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57867
Bug ID: 57867
Summary: SIGSEGV on libgomp into a GDB session
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgomp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57868
Bug ID: 57868
Summary: misleading location for invalid variadic template
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57866
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
There is no constant folding going on, the compiler simply sees the addition as
dead code. To work around it, you would need to introduce a use of result,
which would disable this tree optimization, but then you
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57858
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
-fno-tree-pre lets it vectorize sqr as well. PRE creates a jump to the middle
of the loop body, which is nice but prevents vectorization.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57484
--- Comment #9 from Charles L. Wilcox ---
So, given a month has gone by, should I expect any response or action on this
bug-report?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53094
--- Comment #15 from Marc Glisse ---
r200822 | glisse | 2013-07-09 17:58:36 +0200 (Tue, 09 Jul 2013) | 11 lines
2013-07-09 Marc Glisse
PR c++/53094
gcc/cp/
* semantics.c (cxx_eval_bit_field_ref): Handle VECTOR_CST.
gcc/testsu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53000
--- Comment #25 from Marc Glisse ---
(not a complete fix)
r200821 | glisse | 2013-07-09 17:55:49 +0200 (Tue, 09 Jul 2013) | 9 lines
2013-07-09 Marc Glisse
PR c++/53000
gcc/cp/
* call.c (build_conditional_expr_1): Preserve xva
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53094
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57484
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57864
--- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson ---
Created attachment 30486
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30486&action=edit
slightly reduced test case in plain C
Doesn't depend on C++, this plain C version also ICEs 4.7.3.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57484
--- Comment #11 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #10)
> Maybe Uros can help.
On an x86 target using the legacy x87 instructions and the 80-bit registers, a
load of a 64-bit or 32-bit value in memory into the 80-bit reg
Hi,
I'm getting a seg-fault running this code.
#include
#include
#include
#include
void print_2_64_bit_ints(const char * label, __m128i m64_r)
{
int *val = (int *) &m64_r;
printf("%s: %d %d\n", label, val[0], val[1]);
}
int main()
{
__m128i HADDQinput = _mm_set_epi8(4, 3, 2, 1, 8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57831
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57751
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57545
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57532
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57526
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57437
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 57437, which changed state.
Bug 57437 Summary: [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] C++11: mutable lambdas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57437
What|Removed |Added
-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57484
--- Comment #12 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #11)
> (In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #10)
> > Maybe Uros can help.
>
> On an x86 target using the legacy x87 instructions and the 80-bit registers,
> a load of a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57658
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 57658, which changed state.
Bug 57658 Summary: [4.9 Regression] ICE in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:12213
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57658
What|Removed |Added
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57415
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57751
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini ---
Thanks! Jason, 4.8.1 is already out, I guess you mean 4.8.2.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57484
--- Comment #13 from Paolo Carlini ---
Thanks Uros, you are providing plenty of detaild which I largely ignored. Thus,
realistically, do you think this issue is largely unfixable?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57471
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57389
Janis Johnson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janis at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56801
--- Comment #3 from Mike Spear ---
Patrick,
I just tried again, with gcc --version: gcc (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.7.3-1ubuntu1)
4.7.3
Result:
$ gcc -std=gnu11 -g -O2 -fgnu-tm -pthread -c testcase.c -o testcase.o
testcase.c: In function 'slabs_adjust_me
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57869
Bug ID: 57869
Summary: [C++11] Casting a object pointer to a function pointer
should not warn about a forbidden conversion
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57864
--- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson ---
The ICE on 4.7 branch started with the PR55107 backport in r195755.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57870
Bug ID: 57870
Summary: Internal compiler error in use of emplace
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57484
--- Comment #14 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #13)
> Thanks Uros, you are providing plenty of detaild which I largely ignored.
> Thus, realistically, do you think this issue is largely unfixable?
This issue is unfor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57870
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57086
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eyakubovich at gmail dot com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57484
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57484
Charles L. Wilcox changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #30239|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57484
--- Comment #17 from Charles L. Wilcox ---
Okay... so why not avoid the x87 restriction and use aliasing to load the
correct value?
I've updated my example to show how I was doing exactly this for some unit-test
code I created.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57484
--- Comment #18 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Charles L. Wilcox from comment #17)
> Okay... so why not avoid the x87 restriction and use aliasing to load the
> correct value?
Load to x87 stack? The very moment sNaN gets loaded (using fldl or
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57471
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57869
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57871
Bug ID: 57871
Summary: gfortran -freal-4-real-16 gives wrong result for
selected_real_kind(1)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57856
Chen Gang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|DUPLICATE |FIXED
--- Comment #7 from Chen Gang ---
(In
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501
--- Comment #64 from Chen Gang ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez)
>
Firstly, thank you very much for keeping tracing this bug almost 10 years, and
provided your suggestions as much as possible.
What you have done is valuable to developers (a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57402
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12081
--- Comment #24 from Stefan Kristiansson ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #23)
> (In reply to Mikael Pettersson from comment #22)
> > FWIW, the updated patch for gcc 4.9 bootstraps and regtests cleanly on
> > several hosts (x86_64, sparc6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57766
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54170
James Y Knight changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||foom at fuhm dot net
--- Comment #13 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57872
Bug ID: 57872
Summary: ICE occurs for cross-compile of PPC target with e500v2
core
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57848
--- Comment #6 from Dongsheng Song ---
Linux gcc 4.4.5 (Debian GNU/Linux 6.0), gcc 4.4.7 (Red Hat Enterprise Linux
Server release 6.4) failed too.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54170
--- Comment #14 from Jason Merrill ---
The patch does seem safe enough for 4.7, even though I usually prefer not to
backport C++11 fixes to older release series.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54170
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.8.0 |4.7.4
--- Comment #15 from Jason Merrill
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57715
Tom Vijlbrief changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tvijlbrief at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56963
Tom Vijlbrief changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tvijlbrief at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57858
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Actually, it isn't vectorized at all, because PRE attempts to be smart, figures
out that for the first iteration of the loop it can avoid computing the sqrt
because the result will be one, and moves thus the s
91 matches
Mail list logo
