http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58862
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56393
--- Comment #40 from Yury Gribov ---
>> Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> Previously ASAN would often work
>> even when binary wasn't linked with -fsanitize=address,
>> though sometimes it wouldn't
>
> Yury Gribov wrote:
> this patch may result in reduced f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58687
--- Comment #9 from Max TenEyck Woodbury ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #8)
> Thanks for working on this bug. http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html
> describes how to submit changes (including testcases etc.).
Thank you for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56393
--- Comment #41 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Yury Gribov from comment #40)
> >> Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >> Previously ASAN would often work
> >> even when binary wasn't linked with -fsanitize=address,
> >> though sometimes it wouldn't
> >
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56393
--- Comment #42 from Yury Gribov ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #41)
> It will work with LD_PRELOAD=libasan.so.0.
I was under the same impression. Unfortunately this seems to fail if executable
takes address of libc API (that's not a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56393
--- Comment #43 from Yury Gribov ---
(In reply to Yury Gribov from comment #42)
> asan's dlsym
> returning address of .plt entry in executable rather than libc symbol and
> .plt itself resolving to asan wrapper.
Causing segfault later.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56393
--- Comment #44 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Yury Gribov from comment #42)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #41)
> > It will work with LD_PRELOAD=libasan.so.0.
>
> I was under the same impression. Unfortunately this seems to fail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58851
--- Comment #6 from Andreas Schwab ---
unlimited_polymorphic_13.f90:43.15:
type is (complex(c2))
1
unlimited_polymorphic_13.f90:45.15:
type is (complex(c3))
2
Error: CASE label at (1) overlaps with CASE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56393
--- Comment #45 from Yury Gribov ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #44)
> How could dlsym (RTLD_NEXT, ...) from a shared library return address of
> .plt in the executable?
Ok, I'm an idiot. The problem I faced was caused by global `exp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58851
--- Comment #7 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
Oh damn! Tobias pointed this out to me and I didn't catch on to why
this could happen. I'll fix it tonight.
Sorry about that
Paul
On 30 October 2013 10:23, sch...@linux-m68k.org
wrot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 31110
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31110&action=edit
revised patch
Hmm, try this one.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58922
Bug ID: 58922
Summary: LTO undefined symbols with virtual destructor
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #4 from David Binderman ---
Crash seems to have gone away in the version of 20131030.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58887
--- Comment #11 from Max TenEyck Woodbury ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #10)
> On Mon, 28 Oct 2013, mtewoodbury at gmail dot com wrote:
>
>> (Stop the 'we'! Name or enumerate the group involved please.)
>
> Well-establis
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58920
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58921
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58920
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #3)
> > The TREE_THIS_NOTRAP macro came up in email the other day, and it seemed to
> > me that it would be useful to set on C++ references, since they are required
> >
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58918
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58915
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58920
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou ---
> As of pointer vs. reference types this shouldn't matter here as you
> annotate actualy tcc_reference trees, not types.
What Andrew meant is that one can think that it would be valid to set the flag
on tcc_r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58920
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #5)
> > As of pointer vs. reference types this shouldn't matter here as you
> > annotate actualy tcc_reference trees, not types.
>
> What Andrew meant is that one can
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58854
--- Comment #7 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Author: ramana
Date: Wed Oct 30 10:54:04 2013
New Revision: 204203
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204203&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR target/58854
2013-10-30 Ramana Radhakrishnan
PR targ
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57048
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58923
Bug ID: 58923
Summary: g++ does not use provided conversion function for
implicit conversion to another type
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10474
--- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Oct 30 12:01:46 2013
New Revision: 204205
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204205&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-30 Martin Jambor
PR rtl-optimization/10474
* ira.c (f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58924
Bug ID: 58924
Summary: Non-member invocation of overload of operator<< when
the first argument is a temporary of type
std::stringstream
Product: gcc
Version: unkno
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57100
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57193
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57218
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57221
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57293
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ra
Priority|P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57316
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57380
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57410
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57398
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57422
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58925
Bug ID: 58925
Summary: libtool: install: error: cannot install
`libcilkrts.la' to a directory not ending in
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/
Product: gcc
Version:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
--- Comment #41 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #40)
> What's the status on this?
I checked comment #34 and a number of the bugs marked as dup, and they all seem
to pass. I think this can be closed as fixed ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57446
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57447
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Depends on|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57457
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393
--- Comment #42 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #40)
> What's the status on this?
I'd hope r203979 (and earlier reassoc changes) fixed all this, perhaps we want
to add testcases from this to the testsuite?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57461
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #6 from Richard Bien
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57497
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57499
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57461
--- Comment #7 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> I can't reproduce it with the reduced testcase, so fixed?
Magically fixed, also the original ones.. maybe add the reduced testcase to the
testsuite ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57517
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57534
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57554
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57569
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57662
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57676
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57719
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57748
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57763
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58924
Fanael changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fanael4 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from Fan
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58862
Teresa Johnson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pmatos at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58923
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58924
--- Comment #2 from Fanael ---
Er, 'operator<<(basic_ostream& os, const charT* x)', without the
r-value ref, of course.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57904
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Component|fortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57945
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57955
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #6 from Richard Bien
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58862
Paulo J. Matos changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pa...@matos-sorge.com
--- Comment #8 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58026
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58028
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58048
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.9.0
Summary|[4.8/4.9 Regres
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58069
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58094
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58108
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58121
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
I suppose a stack limit is necessary, might be 8MB for Andreas(?)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58125
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Did you fix it?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58764
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
IMHO following the precise wording of the standard is a mistake, the P/R is
obviously correct and fixing it for 4.9 is necessary. Just IMHO though :)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58207
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58182
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58781
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58221
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58252
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58295
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58298
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58924
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler ---
(In reply to Fanael from comment #1)
I agree with Fanael: It is supposed to be that way in C++11 because of the
provided stream-rvalue support via
template
basic_ostream&
operator<<(basic_ostream&& os, cons
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58290
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58384
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58419
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58418
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
*** Bug 58419 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58477
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58912
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58924
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Component|c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58924
--- Comment #5 from Sarfaraz Nawaz ---
(In reply to Fanael from comment #1)
> That's expected behavior AFAIU. 'operator<<(basic_ostream&&
> os, const T& x)' is a better match for const char[K] than
> 'basic_ostream& basic_ostream::operator<<(const
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57100
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Oct 30 14:22:01 2013
New Revision: 204211
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204211&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-30 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/57100
* basic-block.h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865
--- Comment #16 from Bill Schmidt ---
Thanks, testing in progress.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57100
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58796
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29234
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|gcc-bugs at g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58848
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The initializer for ReferenceElement::v calls the function in
a constant expression, but G++ doesn't diagnose it unless you instantiate that
member.
You get an error if you do:
int main() {
return Refere
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58925
octoploid at yandex dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bviyer at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865
--- Comment #17 from Bill Schmidt ---
Initial news is not good -- I am seeing a lot of ICEs go by as the testing
proceeds, including in vect-96.c and vect-42.c.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58876
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58784
--- Comment #1 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Wed Oct 30 15:04:39 2013
New Revision: 204215
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204215&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-30 Vladimir Makarov
PR target/58784
* lra.c (check
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58875
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Like PR58876 this is another case where you need -Wsystem-headers to get
warnings from within library code.
1 - 100 of 161 matches
Mail list logo