http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60645
Bug ID: 60645
Summary: locale::facet::_S_get_c_locale does not handle
__gthread_once error codes.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60643
--- Comment #10 from hongxu jia ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> Works for me with an unmodified GCC 4.8.2.
>
> So please try removing all of the Open-embedded patches since one of them is
> causing this bug.
I have removed all
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60646
Bug ID: 60646
Summary: Investigate improved complex division algorithms
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Compo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45020
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60635
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60636
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
We should instead instrument ABS_EXPR (you can instrument that as u > 0 ? u :
-u of course).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60640
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60641
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
Status|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60644
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60331
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 25 09:30:10 2014
New Revision: 208806
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208806&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60331
* semantics.c (potential_constant_expression_1): Handle
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60331
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60645
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The only error code specified by POSIX is EINVAL which cannot happen here,
because the pthread_once_t is statically initialized and controlled entirely by
the library.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60645
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57703
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60647
Bug ID: 60647
Summary: [4.8 Regression] ICE in visit_ref_for_mod_analysis, at
ipa-prop.c:2112
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59176
--- Comment #20 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Mar 25 10:57:07 2014
New Revision: 208809
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208809&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-03-25 Martin Jambor
PR ipa/59176
* lto-cgraph.c (lto_out
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50025
__vic changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||d.v.a at ngs dot ru
--- Comment #23 from __vic -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50025
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
--- Comment #24 from Jonathan Wak
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60647
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60647
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60647
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Richard, this started with r207879.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60635
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Mar 25 11:43:03 2014
New Revision: 208811
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208811&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-03-25 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/60635
* gimplify-me.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60648
Bug ID: 60648
Summary: [4.8 Regression] ICE (segmentation fault) in
expand_binop
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60635
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60649
Bug ID: 60649
Summary: [ASAN] Bogus "'y' may be used uninitialized" warning
(affects bootstrap-asan)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: bu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60648
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60191
--- Comment #9 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Hmm,
I debugged a bit and found this:
the problem starts in gfc_get_function_type
it is first called on sym->name = "make_real",
and then recursively again on the same sym.
So this is a recursive_type.
The
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58013
--- Comment #4 from John David Anglin ---
Author: danglin
Date: Tue Mar 25 12:06:17 2014
New Revision: 208813
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208813&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR testsuite/58013
* g++.dg/opt/pr56999.C: Pop hidden visibili
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60647
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58013
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60191
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60647
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
It's even "wrong-code" it seems. IPA SRA is confused about the K&R style
functions and
static fn3 (dpy, winInfo, visrgn) struct _XDisplay *dpy;
{
int b = fn1 (0, winInfo);
fn4 (0, 0, visrgn);
}
winInfo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60650
Bug ID: 60650
Summary: [ARM] LRA ICE assign_by_spills
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60191
--- Comment #11 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #10)
> gfortran currently generates when it does not know the explicit interface
> something like:
>float funct(...)
note that:
float funct(...) // this syntax
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60650
--- Comment #1 from Yvan Roux ---
testcase is to big to be attached... reducing...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60651
Bug ID: 60651
Summary: Mode switching instructions are sometimes emitted in
the wrong order
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60648
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60651
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Created attachment 32447
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32447&action=edit
patch
The attached patch implements this aforementioned insertion at the end
of an (initially) empty bas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60648
--- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
We're getting non-canonical as part of the index computation in do_tablejump:
(gdb) p debug_rtx (index)
(plus:SI (mult:SI (const_int 0 [0])
(const_int 4 [0x4]))
(label_ref:SI 0))
Obviously mem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
--- Comment #38 from John David Anglin ---
gfortran.dg/fmt_en.f90 tests fail on hppa*-*-hpux11* (4.8 and 4.9):
(en15.0) 9.E+03 expected: 10.E+03
(en15.0) 9.E+03 expected: 10.E+03
(en15.1) 9.9E
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60648
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60640
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60653
Bug ID: 60653
Summary: [4.9 Regression] gfortran: ICE (segmentation fault) in
lra
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
--- Comment #39 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> gfortran.dg/fmt_en.f90 tests fail on hppa*-*-hpux11* (4.8 and 4.9):
> ...
After r208780 (for 4.9, not backported yet to 4.8)?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60653
--- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose ---
fails with -O1 and -O2, works with -O0. fails with both -marm/-mthumb
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60653
--- Comment #2 from Matthias Klose ---
seen with a build of the paw package in Debian/unstable and Ubuntu/trusty.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60650
--- Comment #2 from Yvan Roux ---
Created attachment 32449
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32449&action=edit
reduced testcase
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60644
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=60646
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60652
Bug ID: 60652
Summary: System.OS_Constants CRTSCTS
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
Assignee
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60654
Bug ID: 60654
Summary: format warnings don't work with PROGMEM/PSTR
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60655
Bug ID: 60655
Summary: [4.9 Regression] ICE: output_operand: invalid
expression as operand
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60656
Bug ID: 60656
Summary: [4.8/4.9 regression] x86 vectorization produces wrong
code
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60655
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60655
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37428
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60609
Charles Baylis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||charles.baylis at linaro dot
org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60655
--- Comment #2 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
The expression being put out is :
(const:SI (not:SI (symbol_ref:SI ("*.LANCHOR0") [flags 0x182])))
#0 0x003105033410 in exit () from /lib64/libc.so.6
#1 0x011c56b8 in diagnostic_action_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60655
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |debug
--- Comment #3 from Ramana R
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60655
--- Comment #4 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Command lines I was using to reproduce this with a cross compiler.
./cc1 -g -mthumb -fdata-sections -mfpu=vfpv3-d16 -mfloat-abi=hard -O2
-march=armv7-a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60650
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Stat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60191
--- Comment #12 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Created attachment 32448
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32448&action=edit
possible fix
Ok, the attached patch seems to fix at least the
dynamic_dispatch_X.f03 test cases on ARMv7 with f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28575
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60657
Bug ID: 60657
Summary: [4.9 Regression] ICE: error: insn does not satisfy its
constraints
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60657
--- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose ---
seen with every package using this boost header
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35449
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60653
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35449
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Tue Mar 25 16:50:54 2014
New Revision: 208815
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208815&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/35449
* doc/extend.texi (Example of asm with clobbered asm r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35449
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59121
--- Comment #17 from Mircea Namolaru ---
Yes, data dependencies computation is expensive in the polyehdral model
and it could take considerable time - but it is worrying that in too many
cases fails to provide (after a few hours left running, when
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60658
Bug ID: 60658
Summary: std::atomic is unexpectedly not lock-free
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstd
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60653
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59121
--- Comment #18 from Tobias Grosser ---
(In reply to Mircea Namolaru from comment #17)
> Yes, data dependencies computation is expensive in the polyehdral model
> and it could take considerable time - but it is worrying that in too many
> cases fa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60659
Bug ID: 60659
Summary: [4.9 Regression] ICE in get_polymorphic_call_info, at
ipa-devirt.c:1292
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60375
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Mar 25 18:00:37 2014
New Revision: 208817
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208817&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60375
* parser.c (cp_parser_lambda_expression): Don't parse t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60628
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Mar 25 18:00:30 2014
New Revision: 208816
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208816&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60628
* decl.c (create_array_type_for_decl): Complain about a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60653
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60656
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60657
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60600
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60600
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Mar 25 18:22:41 2014
New Revision: 208818
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208818&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-03-25 Martin Jambor
PR ipa/60600
* ipa-cp.c (ipa_get_indi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60465
--- Comment #6 from devurandom at gmx dot net ---
Did anyone figure out what's going on? Did the gdb log bring new insights?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60600
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60642
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60658
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60659
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60654
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60660
Bug ID: 60660
Summary: alloca function for inlines that allocates on caller
stack
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60659
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60660
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is much harder than you think really. since you have to move all the
arguments of the callee function
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60660
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
>without multiple evaluation of the variable arguments as a macro would.
You can use statement expressions with typeof extension to get around the issue
of multiple evaluation issue of macros already.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52190
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60658
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60658
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.6.3
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60375
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60658
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Mar 25 19:39:52 2014
New Revision: 208819
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208819&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/60658
* include/bits/atomic_base.h (__atomic_base<_PTp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60656
Cong Hou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||congh at google dot com
--- Comment #2 from Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60628
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.9.0
Summary|[4.7/4.8/4.9 Reg
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60646
--- Comment #2 from Steve Kargl ---
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 03:36:35PM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> Can you be a little more specific on what you want
> to investigate? AFAIK, the general handling of
> complex division is done be
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60646
--- Comment #3 from Steve Kargl ---
Created attachment 32455
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32455&action=edit
cdiv.f90
1 - 100 of 144 matches
Mail list logo
