https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64570
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61047
--- Comment #14 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Should I post it again?
No, PR 63288 is the reduced testcase of PR 60452 compiled with a random set of
RTL optimization options so nothing has changed since the suspension.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64219
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jan 13 08:23:31 2015
New Revision: 219519
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219519&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libgcj/64219
* Makefile.am (install-data-local): Use just the m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62060
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64568
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64568
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jan 13 08:32:13 2015
New Revision: 219520
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219520&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-01-13 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/64568
* tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61047
--- Comment #15 from Zdenek Sojka ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #9)
> Not worth fixing until we have a bug report for real-life software.
So do you prefer leaving the bug in until it hits a real-life software?
Is this a common opin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64578
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64578
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The backtrace for the ICE is:
print *,associated(return_pointer(f)) ! ICE
1
internal compiler error: in fold_convert_loc, bei fold-const.c:2345
0x80c725 fold_convert_loc(unsigned int, tree_no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61047
--- Comment #16 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Well, it is at least not my opinion.
I see this bug as a security risk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61997
--- Comment #7 from Yvan Roux ---
Author: yroux
Date: Tue Jan 13 08:52:55 2015
New Revision: 219522
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219522&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-13 Michael Collison
Backport from trunk r217394.
2014-11-1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64219
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64478
--- Comment #18 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Hi Eric,
if I use kill -11, I would be really surprised to see
the process freeze.
It would be good to look at siginfo->si_code
and _not_ continue the normal exception handling
when the si_code is SI_USER
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64307
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61047
--- Comment #17 from Eric Botcazou ---
> So do you prefer leaving the bug in until it hits a real-life software?
> Is this a common opinion among the GCC dev team, or does it apply only to
> this particular case?
Only this particular case of cou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64478
--- Comment #19 from Eric Botcazou ---
> if I use kill -11, I would be really surprised to see
> the process freeze.
>
> It would be good to look at siginfo->si_code
> and _not_ continue the normal exception handling
> when the si_code is SI_USE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64355
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64404
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Ok, this also shows the (known :/) wrong-code issue we have with the same-dr
and mixed SLP / loop vectorization. The vectorizer is fed
:
# d_16 = PHI
# ivtmp_15 = PHI
_4 = X[d_16].l;
_5 = X[d_1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64570
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Component|tr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63288
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot
de
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64572
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Confirmed that the proposed patch eliminates both the bootstrap failure
> on x86_64-apple-darwin14 and the libffi testsuite failures at both -m32 and
> -m64.
When running
make -k -j8 check RUNTEST
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64307
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
This doesn't ICE starting with r218860, but it isn't clear to me if it just
didn't make the issue latent.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64286
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64282
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64300
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64307
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64313
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64317
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ra
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64348
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64349
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Looks like only a warning?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64349
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Looks like only a warning?
Nope:
...
ld: warning: can't add line info to anonymous symbol __const@0 from s-arit64.o
Undefined symbols:
"_environ", referenced from:
___gnat_environ in env.o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64578
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I don't see the segmentation fault on x86_64-apple-darwin14 and 4.9.(2|3) or
trunk (5.0 with or without patches). However I get the ICE if I remove the
comment. Note that with 4.8.(4|5) I get the follo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64349
--- Comment #9 from Iain Sandoe ---
although it says "warning" when it encounters the unexpected case, it finally
causes a linkage failure.
Note that this is present on darwin* (it's not really specific to darwin <= 10)
- it's just hidden by the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64373
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64348
--- Comment #4 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Fixed(?)
Yes, thanks!
I forgot to close it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64578
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Reduced test case for the ICE:
print *, associated(return_pointer()) ! ICE
contains
function return_pointer()
class(*), pointer :: return_pointer(:)
end function
end
ICEs with 4.8, 4.9,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64374
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64378
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64404
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64406
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64415
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58739
Tejas Belagod changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64436
--- Comment #1 from thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: thopre01
Date: Tue Jan 13 11:23:01 2015
New Revision: 219525
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219525&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-13 Thomas Preud'homme
gcc/
PR tree-opt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64434
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Priority|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64435
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64467
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64473
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64580
Bug ID: 64580
Summary: very high rs6000_stack_info() usage during LTO Firefox
build on ppc64
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64477
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization, ra
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64481
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64485
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63908
--- Comment #9 from leimaohui ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #8)
> Olivier Hainque referred to having a 4.9 version of his patch, I suggest
> you ask him.
Will these patches be backported to gcc 4.9.3 ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64487
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64493
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64493
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64581
Bug ID: 64581
Summary: libffi/testsuite/libffi.special/special.exp doesn't
use newly built GCC
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64493
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
I tried to make a runtime testcase that tests for proper vectorization but
all vectorized code ends up being dead. Nevertheless the following fixes
the ICE:
Index: gcc/tree-vect-loop.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64495
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64498
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64404
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P3
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64404
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jan 13 12:35:27 2015
New Revision: 219527
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219527&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-13 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/64404
* tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64511
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64520
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64521
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64528
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Indeed:
/* In a VAR_DECL, PARM_DECL or FIELD_DECL, or any kind of ..._REF node,
nonzero means it may not be the lhs of an assignment.
Nonzero in a FUNCTION_DECL means this function should be treated
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64538
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64571
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64550
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63637
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64415
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64391
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64406
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jan 13 13:41:46 2015
New Revision: 219528
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219528&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-13 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/64406
* tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64406
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63974
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jan 13 13:44:06 2015
New Revision: 219529
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219529&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/63974
* cfgexpand.c (expand_computed_goto): Don't ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64578
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
In fact also a normal class pointer is sufficient to trigger the ICE. It
doesn't need to be unlimited, but it needs to be an array:
type foo
end type
print *, associated(return_pointer()) !
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64582
Bug ID: 64582
Summary: [5 Regression] internal compiler error: in
inline_small_functions, at ipa-inline.c:1664
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64391
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
So e.g.
diff --git a/gcc/trans-mem.c b/gcc/trans-mem.c
index b449760..21fa497 100644
--- a/gcc/trans-mem.c
+++ b/gcc/trans-mem.c
@@ -183,6 +183,9 @@ static void *expand_regions (struct tm_region *,
static t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64582
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64373
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||5.0
Summary|[4.9/5 regressio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64373
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jan 13 13:57:27 2015
New Revision: 219531
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219531&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-01-13 Richard Biener
PR lto/64373
* lto-streamer-out.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64582
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64565
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64582
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64565
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Severity|nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64377
--- Comment #10 from Sandra Loosemore ---
Test results do not look good with the new patch; over 7000 new failures on
-flto tests in the gcc testsuite alone. :-( I see a lot of
lto1: internal compiler error: in operator[], at vec.h:736
0x884ab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63974
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64240
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64231
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64149
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64015
--- Comment #8 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
zhenqiang.chen no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64015
--- Comment #9 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
zhenqiang.chen no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64015
--- Comment #10 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
zhenqiang.chen no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64015
--- Comment #11 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
zhenqiang.chen no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64231
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build, ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64015
--- Comment #12 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
zhenqiang.chen no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64015
--- Comment #13 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
zhenqiang.chen no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64015
--- Comment #14 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
zhenqiang.chen no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64015
--- Comment #15 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
zhenqiang.chen no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64356
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64297
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Jan 13 14:49:04 2015
New Revision: 219534
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219534&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/64297
* typeck.c (apply_memfn_quals): Correct wrong TYPE_CA
1 - 100 of 215 matches
Mail list logo
