https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61518
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61512
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61517
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61519
Bug ID: 61519
Summary: Seemingly incorrect vtable reference when libstdc++
built with RTTI
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61516
--- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Mon Jun 16 07:40:17 2014
New Revision: 211694
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211694&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR bootstrap/61516
* auto-inc-dec.c (merge_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61516
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61475
--- Comment #6 from Kostya Serebryany ---
So, clang trunk works and gcc trunk fails, right?
Could be a miscompile by GCC.
I'd suggest to find the guilty module somehow (e.g. build all modules w/ and
w/o asan and then mix them in different propor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45078
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jun 16 08:12:40 2014
New Revision: 211696
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211696&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR plugins/45078
* config.gcc (arm*-*-linux-*): Include vxworks-du
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61511
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45078
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jun 16 08:15:35 2014
New Revision: 211697
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211697&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR plugins/45078
* config.gcc (arm*-*-linux-*): Include vxworks-du
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61475
--- Comment #7 from Yury Gribov ---
Have you tried patch proposed in bug 61422?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61518
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61517
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61516
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61515
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||compile-time-hog,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61511
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61510
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.7.0 |4.10.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61509
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Still waiting for reporter to try a still supported compiler which would be
GCC 4.8.3 or 4.9.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61508
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61506
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*
Component|c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61482
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61388
Nagaraju Mekala changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nmekala at xilinx dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61517
--- Comment #2 from thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I already got a patch for that which is currently under test. I checked against
this particular testcase and it indeed solves the problem. I'll add the
testcase to the patch and hopefully post so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61430
--- Comment #4 from christophe.lyon at st dot com ---
Since commit 211625:
2014-06-13 Richard Biener
* tree-ssa-pre.c (eliminate_dom_walker::before_dom_children):
Rewrite to propagate the VN result into all uses where
p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61515
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
4.8 and 4.9 at -O0 take ~32s and ~2.4GB of ram (and IRA taking 28% of the time)
4.8 at -O1 takes ~15min and ~5.5GB of ram (RTL loop invariant motion taking 80%
of the time - ugh)
4.9 at -O1 takes ~5min and ~
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61515
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
4.9 at -Os takes 5min and ~2.2GB of ram (points-to takes 20%, DF 33%)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61430
jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61430
--- Comment #6 from Chung-Lin Tang ---
Author: cltang
Date: Mon Jun 16 09:58:34 2014
New Revision: 211701
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211701&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-06-16 Chung-Lin Tang
PR middle-end/61430
* lra-lives.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34500
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61408
--- Comment #11 from Georg Koppen ---
Working around was tricky, so I started bisecting LLVM/clang/compiler-rt. The
first bad revision there is r193602. Might be worth filing an upstream bug (I
don't have a Google account), I guess.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34500
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Since 4.9, the code is now rejected (though it's valid): ...
The change occurred between r199034 (ICE, 2013-05-17) and r199221 (error,
2013-05-22).
I suspect r199120 (pr48858 and pr55465), although
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61515
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61408
--- Comment #12 from Kostya Serebryany ---
I am not sure what does your bisection of LLVM/clang/compiler-rt mean
if you say that clang trunk works fine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61408
--- Comment #13 from Georg Koppen ---
(In reply to Kostya Serebryany from comment #12)
> I am not sure what does your bisection of LLVM/clang/compiler-rt mean
> if you say that clang trunk works fine.
There are two different issues here in this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61500
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Jun 16 11:45:37 2014
New Revision: 211703
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211703&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/61500
* tree.c (lvalue_kind): Handle MEMBER_REF and DOTSTAR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61488
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Jun 16 11:50:14 2014
New Revision: 211704
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211704&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/61488
* pt.c (check_valid_ptrmem_cst_expr): Fix for templat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60439
--- Comment #13 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Mon Jun 16 12:38:07 2014
New Revision: 211707
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211707&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/60439
* c.opt (Wswitch-bool): Add Var.
Modified:
tru
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61518
Yuri Rumyantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ysrumyan at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54555
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab ---
Introduced in r63426.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61520
Bug ID: 61520
Summary: False warning: array subscript is below array bounds
(-Warray-bounds -O -ftree-vrp -funroll-loops)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61512
--- Comment #5 from Rohit Sharma ---
Thank you Marc for the flag.
Compiling with that flag and running it, code "abort (core dumped)" - which I
take is reasonable behavior on a bad code.
bests.
-Rohit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61521
Bug ID: 61521
Summary: [4.10 regression] build broken after LRA patch
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61521
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build, ra
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61522
Bug ID: 61522
Summary: [4.10 regression] ICE while building libgcc in LRA
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61522
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61521
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61522
--- Comment #2 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Same failure also with
./cc1 -O2 -fPIC -march=armv7-a test.c
$> cat test.c
typedef int(__kernel_cmpxchg64_t)(const long long *oldval,
const long long *newval, lo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61522
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||christophe.lyon at st dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61522
--- Comment #3 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Appears to begin with
Commit 211655:
2014-06-13 Vladimir Makarov
* lra-assign.c (assign_by_spills): Add code to assign vector regs
to inheritance pseudos.
* config/i386/i3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61523
Bug ID: 61523
Summary: [4.10 regression] Commit 211600 appears to have caused
section type conflicts for ARM
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61523
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm-none-linux-gnueabihf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61522
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61522
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
if (lra_reg_info[regno].restore_regno < 0
|| ! bitmap_bit_p (&lra_inheritance_pseudos, regno)
|| (spill_class
= ((enum reg_class)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61482
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jun 16 14:21:53 2014
New Revision: 211709
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211709&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-06-16 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/61482
* tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61482
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48200
Roman Khimov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||khimov at altell dot ru
--- Comment #10 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61519
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Surely this is a target-specific bug in the dynamic_cast implementation, not
libstdc++?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61522
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61524
Bug ID: 61524
Summary: cgraph visibility aix bootstrap failure
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61524
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc-ibm-aix
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61525
Bug ID: 61525
Summary: [4.9 Regression] ipa visibility TLC 2/n failures on
AIX
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61526
Bug ID: 61526
Summary: relocation R_X86_64_PC32 in shared object with static
and extern
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61525
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc-ibm-aix
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61527
Bug ID: 61527
Summary: class/extends, multiple generic assignment, accept
invalid
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61522
--- Comment #5 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Mon Jun 16 15:55:03 2014
New Revision: 211711
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211711&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-06-16 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/61522
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61527
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Up to r200946 (2013-07-14, 4.9) gfortran gives an error
Error: Ambiguous interfaces 'disp2' and 'disp1' in generic interface 'disp' at
(1)
>From at least r201266 (2013-07-26) gfortran accepts the cod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61527
--- Comment #2 from mrestelli ---
I am no expert, but I think that the correct behaviour is that of the
older version: the two interfaces indeed are ambiguous, since a call
like
type(t2) :: b
call disp(b)
could call both disp1 and disp2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61512
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse ---
Really? With _GLIBCXX_DEBUG, your program is supposed to print the following
message (even with the old gcc-4.4 you reported this against):
/usr/include/c++/4.8/debug/safe_iterator.h:307:error: attempt to incr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61512
--- Comment #7 from Rohit Sharma ---
Yes, it did print that message clearly before core-dump.
thank you much.
-Rohit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61528
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
Yes, that's required by the standard, nothing we can do about it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61528
Bug ID: 61528
Summary: std::min std::max and RValue
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61528
--- Comment #2 from Lisp2D ---
Issue a warning would not hurt.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56785
Eelis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugzilla at contacts dot
eelis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61528
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
The warning is discussed in PR 60517.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61528
--- Comment #4 from Lisp2D ---
Likely error in the standard. The right set of functions must return a copy of
the data and return a the temporary link with real data.
Working version of it:
size_t const & min2(size_t const & x,size_t const &
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61528
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse ---
Feel free to post a message on
https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/forum/#!forum/std-proposals to suggest
this. https://isocpp.org/std gives information on making official proposals. In
gcc we only implement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61325
--- Comment #10 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Mon Jun 16 21:40:28 2014
New Revision: 211716
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211716&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-06-16 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/61325
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61325
--- Comment #9 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Mon Jun 16 21:39:42 2014
New Revision: 211715
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211715&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-06-16 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/61325
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56785
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Eelis from comment #2)
> Another manifestation of this is that
>
> sizeof(pair,pair>) == 4
>
> while
>
> sizeof(tuple,tuple>) == 5 (!!).
Oh noes, one byte more for a silly edge case!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56785
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The cause is that every N-tuple hierarchy ends with an empty _Tuple_impl
base, so when there are several of those in the same hierarchy they need to
have separate addresses.
It should be possible to fix by
--enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.10.0 20140616 (experimental) [trunk revision 211707] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -O2 small.c; a.out
$ gcc-4.9 -O3 small.c; a.out
$
$ gcc-trunk -O3 small.c
small.c: In function ‘fn1’:
small.c:4:1: internal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61519
--- Comment #2 from Matthew Iselin ---
Where would I start in identifying what about the target is causing the issue?
The best I can come up with is an issue with the vtable prefix and/or the math
to determine the deepest object, but can't (yet)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61423
--- Comment #12 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Tue Jun 17 05:00:52 2014
New Revision: 211723
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211723&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2014-06-06 Uros Bizjak
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61530
Bug ID: 61530
Summary: [4.10 Regression] segfault with asan
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: sanitizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61330
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|aarch64*-*-*, arm*-*-*, |aarch64*-*-*, arm*-*-*,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58945
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Steven, do you have any ETA for this fix?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61508
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61430
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
88 matches
Mail list logo
