https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57742
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57742
--- Comment #19 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Joost VandeVondele from comment #17)
> Thanks Marc, I don't have write access, but I can try to dg-ify the testcase
> from comment #3.. however, first test, it still seems to contain a call to
> b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57742
--- Comment #20 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Joost VandeVondele from comment #18)
> The following now fails, so'll reopen this PR. It is at least related to
> zeroing pvec twice in a row, and doesn seem to happen if I manually inline
> the r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60947
--- Comment #13 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
OK, I compared generated assembly before/after revision 206552.
BEFORE)
@ frame_needed = 1, uses_anonymous_args = 0
movip, sp
stmfdsp!, {r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, r10, fp, ip, lr,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57742
--- Comment #21 from Marc Glisse ---
I am testing the following:
--- tree-ssa-strlen.c(revision 211967)
+++ tree-ssa-strlen.c(working copy)
@@ -1646,20 +1646,22 @@ handle_builtin_memset (gimple_stmt_itera
enum built_in_function code1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60947
--- Comment #14 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 33001
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33001&action=edit
Dump of cunroll/ivopt/ira/reload passes after revision 206552 for the
preprocessed file.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
Adrien Hamelin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #33000|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61602
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61598
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61595
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Hmm, does it work if you do
typedef int vint __attribute__((vector_size(16)));
and use vint in as the type for vr?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
Adrien Hamelin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #33002|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61560
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Jun 25 08:37:37 2014
New Revision: 211970
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211970&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-06-25 Richard Biener
PR testsuite/61560
* gcc.dg/tree-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61560
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61588
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58876
Bug 58876 depends on bug 61600, which changed state.
Bug 61600 Summary: #pragma GCC diagnostic pop leaves warnings enabled
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61600
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59304
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61600
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61601
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Thank you - that test case is much more useful
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61595
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #11)
> decltype(iter += i) is Iter& so you return a reference to a temporary which
> goes out of scope
Sorry, temporary is the wrong word - a reference to a local
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61603
Bug ID: 61603
Summary: ICE in gcc/gcc/toplev.c:337
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61558
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||larsbj at gullik dot net
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61603
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61164
Ilya Palachev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iliyapalachev at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61231
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61420
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61459
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60718
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.4
Summary|[4.8 / 4.9 / 4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61500
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.1
Summary|[C++11] [4.8/4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61488
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61499
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61500
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.1 |4.8.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61445
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |4.10.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61453
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61604
Bug ID: 61604
Summary: missing line numbers in a sanitizer backtrace from an
OMP region
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59193
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
--- Comment #13 from Adrien Hamelin ---
I'm sorry that i made you lose your time :-(
I thought that kind of code would trigger a warning though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61294
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61231
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61595
--- Comment #4 from Sebastian Meyer ---
Richard: The typdef gets optimized away very quickly, so I needed to trick
around a bit. But the array won't use the typedef anyway, the produced DWARF is
equal to what was produced before (DWARF3 keeps it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61605
Bug ID: 61605
Summary: Potential optimization: Keep unclobbered argument
registers live across function calls
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61606
Bug ID: 61606
Summary: About GCC install, testing step (mostly check...)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61607
Bug ID: 61607
Summary: DOM missed jump threading and destroyed loops
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization, wrong-code
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61595
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61542
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61607
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Optimizing block #5
1>>> COND 1 = i_1 ge_expr R_6(D)
1>>> COND 0 = i_1 lt_expr R_6(D)
LKUP STMT inter0p_13 = PHI
inter0p_13 = PHI
2>>> STMT inter0p_13 = PHI
inter0p_13 = PHI
LKUP STM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61566
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61607
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
With the propagation limitation removed we get
Registering jump thread: (2, 4) incoming edge; (4, 5) joiner; (5, 7)
normal;
Cancelling jump thread: (2, 4) incoming edge; (4, 5) joiner; (5, 7) normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61575
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, I can't convince gcc or clang to give a warning. Even address sanitizer
and undefined-behaviour sanitizer don't catch the problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57742
--- Comment #22 from Marc Glisse ---
Author: glisse
Date: Wed Jun 25 12:27:13 2014
New Revision: 211977
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211977&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-06-25 Marc Glisse
PR tree-optimization/57742
gcc/
* tree-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57742
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61542
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.8/4.9 Regression]|[4.8/4.9/trunk]
|vect-n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61607
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Like with
Index: gcc/tree-ssa-threadupdate.c
===
--- gcc/tree-ssa-threadupdate.c (revision 211969)
+++ gcc/tree-ssa-threadupdate.c (working co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61162
--- Comment #12 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Jun 25 12:43:05 2014
New Revision: 211978
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211978&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/61162
* c-parser.c (c_parser_statement_after_labels): Pas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61162
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61608
Bug ID: 61608
Summary: [4.10 regression] FAIL: gcc.target/arm/epilog-1.c
scan-assembler tests
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61433
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
--- Comment #15 from Marc Glisse ---
If you can reduce the testcase to a manageable size, I'll see why
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-06/msg01692.html is not enough (it
should be, with -fkeep-inline-functions, but is apparently missing a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61608
jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm*-none-*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61608
--- Comment #1 from Kai Tietz ---
Does this issue get fixed by adding the peephole2 also at old place too?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
--- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Marc:
struct Iter
{
Iter& operator+=(int) { return *this; }
int operator*() { return i; }
int i;
};
Iter& func(Iter iter, int n) {
return iter += n;
}
int main()
{
Iter iter = Iter();
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61595
--- Comment #6 from Sebastian Meyer ---
Ah, okay, thank you for the clarification, Jakub.
So this is indeed RESOLVED INVALID, sorry.
I am still sure I saw the example I gave, but can't seem to find it now.
Chances are good though it wasn't GCC,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61320
--- Comment #44 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #43 from thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> Thanks. In the stage before the one that fails, could you add
> -fdump-tree-all-details -fdump-rtl-all-details to the command lin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61608
--- Comment #2 from jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yes, it does.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61609
Bug ID: 61609
Summary: running libraries compiled with different gcc versions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
--- Comment #17 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #16)
> Marc:
>
> struct Iter
> {
> Iter& operator+=(int) { return *this; }
>
> int operator*() { return i; }
>
> int i;
> };
>
> Iter& func(Iter iter, int n)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61409
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61608
--- Comment #3 from Kai Tietz ---
Thanks for testing. I will sent a patch for it.
It seems after all that we need to run peephole2 pass twice.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61409
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think what is important that if the other conditions besides mini_p != 0 are
not met, then control flow goes to basic blocks from which there is no path to
the bb with the use (in this testcase just to the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61609
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61608
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Kai Tietz from comment #3)
> Thanks for testing. I will sent a patch for it.
> It seems after all that we need to run peephole2 pass twice.
Bad for compile-time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61608
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49132
--- Comment #8 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Jun 25 14:27:35 2014
New Revision: 211981
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211981&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2014-06-25 Paolo Carlini
DR 178
PR c++/49132
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49132
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
e06 execute
../../gcc/ira.c:5486
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
gcc version 4.10.0 20140625 (experimental) [trunk revision 211980]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61611
Bug ID: 61611
Summary: Incorrect exception rethrown from a function-try-catch
block when a nested try-catch executes
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61611
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60723
Dodji Seketeli changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61598
--- Comment #3 from tbsaunde at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: tbsaunde
Date: Wed Jun 25 16:02:04 2014
New Revision: 211985
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211985&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
fix checking=fold
gcc/
PR bootstrap/61598
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61612
Bug ID: 61612
Summary: trunk revision 211984 winnt.c ‘hash_table_c’ does not
name a type
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61612
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61610
--- Comment #1 from Sandra Loosemore ---
Hmmm, this looks like a bug in LRA exposed by the change to register alloc
order. In particular this comment in the code just above the assertion seems
to reflect an incorrect assumption:
/* We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61612
--- Comment #1 from tbsaunde at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: tbsaunde
Date: Wed Jun 25 16:36:49 2014
New Revision: 211986
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=211986&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
fix typo in winnt.c
gcc/
PR c/61612
* config/i38
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61597
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|2014-0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61240
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57233
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60249
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini ---
Ed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61534
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61612
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||timshen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61534
--- Comment #2 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #1)
> and then we could use from_macro_expansion_at and don't warn if it's true.
> But the problem is with -ftrack-macro-expansion=0, since
> from_macro_expansio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61601
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||timshen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61534
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
I don't think so, -ftrack-macro-expansion=2 is on by default and I don't see
-ftrack-macro-expansion=0 anywhere in the log of bootstrap. So maybe my
approach would be viable after all (and I could fix PR6108
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57939
Tom Tromey changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61598
tbsaunde at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58589
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
1 - 100 of 134 matches
Mail list logo
