https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65765
--- Comment #5 from Mike Hommey ---
I can confirm that building Firefox with -fno-ipa-icf "fixes" the issue as well
(that is, that the testcase is correctly related to the Firefox breakage)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65768
Bug ID: 65768
Summary: sub-optimimal code for constant Uses in loop
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65768
kugan at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |kugan at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65765
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 35316
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35316&action=edit
gcc5-pr65765.patch
Untested fix. The main bug has been a return true; for
GIMPLE_NOP/GIMPLE_PREDICT, that mean
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62077
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.8.4, 4.9.2, 5.1.0
--- Comment #57 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36043
--- Comment #24 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Wed Apr 15 07:29:01 2015
New Revision: 222115
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222115&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/65408
PR target/58744
PR middle-end/36043
* calls
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65408
--- Comment #7 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Wed Apr 15 07:29:01 2015
New Revision: 222115
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222115&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/65408
PR target/58744
PR middle-end/36043
* calls.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58744
--- Comment #4 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Wed Apr 15 07:29:01 2015
New Revision: 222115
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222115&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/65408
PR target/58744
PR middle-end/36043
* calls.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65686
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62077
vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65767
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Same cause though. See my comment there, can you prepare and verify a patch?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65765
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Looks good to me, though the "obvious" part alone would be fine for 5.1 as well
(even obvious - heh).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65764
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65763
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
$ ./configure --prefix=/opt/gcc-5.1 --enable-languages=c,c++ --enable-lto
please do not configure in the source directory but use a separate build
directory.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65701
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65763
--- Comment #2 from __vic ---
Will it help? OK, I'll try.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62077
--- Comment #59 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 15 Apr 2015, vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62077
>
> vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64231
--- Comment #20 from clyon at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: clyon
Date: Wed Apr 15 08:11:56 2015
New Revision: 222119
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222119&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-04-15 Christophe Lyon
Backport from trunk r220348.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65769
Bug ID: 65769
Summary: [UBSAN] qt-4.6 and qt-4.7 applications using
qobject_cast may crash
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65528
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65527
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65765
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62077
--- Comment #60 from Richard Biener ---
Workaround confirmed for GCC 5 (--enable-stage1-checking=release).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65765
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka ---
GIMPLE_PREDICT at this time is already converted to the profile (just to
explain). If we start to do tail merging in early opts, matching gimple
predict before profile is built is probably good idea.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65765
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I can certainly change that hunk to just do break; for GIMPLE_PREDICT (except
for the already bootstrapped and in progress tested patch, which I'd have to
redo).
Richard suggested that perhaps for 5.1 it wou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65657
--- Comment #5 from Senthil Kumar Selvaraj ---
This tentative patch (pending regression tests) makes the problem go away
diff --git gcc/config/avr/avr.c gcc/config/avr/avr.c
index 68d5ddc..46ff7e1 100644
--- gcc/config/avr/avr.c
+++ gcc/config/av
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44685
--- Comment #4 from David Binderman ---
Created attachment 35317
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35317&action=edit
C source code
Source code from the linux kernel, which demonstrates the
problem when cross compiled on AMD fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65763
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Apr 15 09:23:59 2015
New Revision: 222121
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222121&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/65763
* Makefile.am (gcc_build_dir): Remove $(host_su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65677
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65763
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Apr 15 09:33:32 2015
New Revision: 222122
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222122&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/65763
* Makefile.am (gcc_build_dir): Remove $(host_su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65763
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64099
--- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The timing increase disappears if the code is compiled with
-fno-tree-dominator-opts.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65769
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Well, guarding the UBSAN_VPTR check for non-NULL is certainly possible, but in
the common case where the pointer isn't a compile time constant nor an obvious
non-NULL value doing so would slow the sanitizatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65767
--- Comment #2 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Same cause though. See my comment there, can you prepare and verify a patch?
Yeah. Will do that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65548
--- Comment #13 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35318
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35318&action=edit
Follow-up patch fixing latest regression.
The attached patch fixes the ICE.
Juergen, please check
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65763
--- Comment #6 from __vic ---
(In reply to __vic from comment #2)
> Will it help? OK, I'll try.
Yes. Has been built successfully.
Thanks!
P.S. I've read doc about building in a separate directory but all previous
versions in practice used to be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65697
Andrew Haley changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aph at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #13 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65770
Bug ID: 65770
Summary: [AArch64] vst2_lane broken on bigendian
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65697
--- Comment #14 from mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andrew Haley from comment #13)
> There's surely a documentation problem here.
>
> GCC defines this:
>
> `__ATOMIC_SEQ_CST'
> Full barrier in both directions and synchronizes wi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65769
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
I think this is a missed diagnostic in the C++ frontend if it doesn't warn
about this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64099
--- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Created attachment 35319
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35319&action=edit
Reduced version with most I/Os removed.
Run time can be tuned by changing the value of number_of_sample
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60936
--- Comment #6 from __vic ---
5.1-RC (gcc-5.1.0-RC-20150412) - the same problem. Suppose in GCC 6 too?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60936
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, because nothing has changed in this regard.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60936
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65765
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Apr 15 11:47:44 2015
New Revision: 222123
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222123&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/65765
* ipa-icf-gimple.c (func_checker::compare_bb): For G
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65697
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to mwahab from comment #14)
> The LDAXR/STLXR sequences rely on the C11/C++11 prohibition of data races.
> That the __atomic builtins assume this restriction is implied by the
> references to C11/C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65760
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65765
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Apr 15 12:09:56 2015
New Revision: 222124
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222124&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/65765
* ipa-icf-gimple.c (func_checker::compare_bb): For G
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65765
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42522
--- Comment #18 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Wed Apr 15 12:24:28 2015
New Revision: 222125
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222125&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/42522
* cse.c (fold_rtx): Try to simpl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42522
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65697
--- Comment #16 from Andrew Haley ---
(In reply to mwahab from comment #14)
> (In reply to Andrew Haley from comment #13)
> > But LDAXR/STLXR doesn't do that, and there's no write barrier at all when
> > the compare fails. If the intention real
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65548
--- Comment #14 from Jürgen Reuter ---
(In reply to vehre from comment #13)
> Created attachment 35318 [details]
> Follow-up patch fixing latest regression.
>
> The attached patch fixes the ICE.
>
> Juergen, please check and report back, to pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65548
--- Comment #15 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
That patch is relative to current trunk, meaning 6.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65697
--- Comment #17 from mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org ---
According to the GCC documentation, __atomic_compare_exchange(ptr, exp, des,
..) is: if (*ptr == *exp) *ptr = *exp; else *exp = *ptr;
On Aarch64 the else (*ptr != *exp) branch is a store rather t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65548
--- Comment #16 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> That patch is relative to current trunk, meaning 6.0.
I think it should not matter: the patch should apply on 5.0.1 or 6.0.
Applied on a patched 6.0 tree it works as advertised.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65729
Yvan Roux changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64099
--- Comment #14 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Created attachment 35320
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35320&action=edit
Reduced version with most I/Os removed and generalized_hookes_law inlined
manually.
The subroutine perd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64527
ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65771
Bug ID: 65771
Summary: [5 Regression] ICE (in loc_list_from_tree, at
dwarf2out.c:14964) on arm-linux-gnueabihf
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65771
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65637
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #6 from vrie
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65771
--- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The loc tree that ends up hitting the gcc_unreachable is:
unit size
align 32 symtab -151568224 alias set 1 canonical type 0x77035690
precision 32 min max
pointer_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65771
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60936
--- Comment #9 from __vic ---
For 4.9 this change was enough for me:
--- libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/functexcept.cc2014-01-03 02:30:10.0
+0400
+++ libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/functexcept.cc2014-11-06 18:40:20.0
+0300
@@ -89,6 +89,7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65771
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #2)
> The loc tree that ends up hitting the gcc_unreachable is:
> type public SI
> size
> unit size
> align 32 symtab -15156822
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65771
--- Comment #4 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> The switch statement in loc_list_from_tree
> doesn't handle DEBUG_EXPR_DECL which is why it ICEs.
> However, I'm not familiar with the code.
> Should it handle DEBUG_EXPR_DECL (just return 0)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65697
--- Comment #18 from Andrew Haley ---
(In reply to mwahab from comment #17)
>
> int cas(int* barf, int* expected, int* desired)
> {
> return __atomic_compare_exchange_n(barf, expected, desired, 0,
>__AT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65742
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
This PR is fixed by the patch at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg00667.html.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65697
--- Comment #19 from mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andrew Haley from comment #18)
> (In reply to mwahab from comment #17)
>
> >
> > int cas(int* barf, int* expected, int* desired)
> > {
> > return __atomic_compare_exchange_n(b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60936
--- Comment #10 from __vic ---
What brings new dependences on locales?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65697
--- Comment #20 from Andrew Haley ---
(In reply to mwahab from comment #19)
> (In reply to Andrew Haley from comment #18)
>
> It looks inconsistent with C11 S7.17.7.4-2 (C++11 S29.6.4-21) "Further, if
> the comparison is true, memory is affected
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65771
--- Comment #5 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The code around the gcc_unreachable is:
#ifdef ENABLE_CHECKING
/* Otherwise this is a generic code; we should just lists all of
these explicitly. We forgot one. */
gcc_unre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65772
Bug ID: 65772
Summary: With multiple return values including a function with
side effects, incorrect value is returned
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65772
--- Comment #1 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
Created attachment 35321
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35321&action=edit
testcase for bad return values
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65773
Bug ID: 65773
Summary: [5.1 regression] GCC 5.1 miscompiles LLVM function
AArch64InstrInfo::loadRegFromStackSlot()
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65773
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65773
--- Comment #1 from Bill Schmidt ---
Well, I screwed up, the "good" code is calling a different function. In the
good code this function call was apparently inlined, so I can't point to it.
But still, the load of r3 with zero is a bad thing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65772
--- Comment #2 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
When running the attached testcase on a platform with gccgo (ppc64le, x86_64),
the test fails due to incorrect return values from the function getList. The
source line for the return looks like this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65773
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt ---
Found it...the "real" good code is:
106a8d6c: 78 fb e3 7f mr r3,r31
106a8d70: 78 db 64 7f mr r4,r27
106a8d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65697
--- Comment #21 from torvald at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andrew Haley from comment #20)
> (In reply to mwahab from comment #19)
> > (In reply to Andrew Haley from comment #18)
> >
> > It looks inconsistent with C11 S7.17.7.4-2 (C++11 S29.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65772
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65774
Bug ID: 65774
Summary: [6.0 regression] FAIL:
gcc.dg/builtin-arith-overflow-1.c (internal compiler
error)
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65775
Bug ID: 65775
Summary: Late-specified return type bypasses return type checks
(qualified, function, array)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65775
--- Comment #1 from Ed Catmur ---
Credit to FISOCPP (http://stackoverflow.com/q/29628571/567292) for finding this
bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65773
--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt ---
Created attachment 35322
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35322&action=edit
Unreduced save-temps file AArch64InstrInfo.ii.gz
Attaching the (unreduced and compressed) preprocessed source.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65103
--- Comment #1 from Ilya Enkovich ---
Author: ienkovich
Date: Thu Mar 12 09:53:36 2015
New Revision: 221380
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221380&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/65103
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_address_cost)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58586
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #4 from ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65775
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid, diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65487
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vries
Date: Wed Apr 15 18:43:32 2015
New Revision: 222129
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222129&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix fdump-passes
2015-04-15 Tom de Vries
PR other/65487
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65487
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47679
--- Comment #18 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Wed Apr 15 18:51:49 2015
New Revision: 222130
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222130&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/47679
* tree-ssa-dom.c (build_and_record_new_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65697
--- Comment #22 from torvald at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to James Greenhalgh from comment #12)
> There are two problems here, one of which concerns me more in the real
> world, and both of which rely on races if you are in the C/C++11 model -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65776
Bug ID: 65776
Summary: ICE in varpool_node::get_constructor() during chromium
build on arm-linux-gnueabihf with LTO
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65697
--- Comment #23 from James Greenhalgh ---
(In reply to torvald from comment #22)
> (In reply to James Greenhalgh from comment #12)
> > There are two problems here, one of which concerns me more in the real
> > world, and both of which rely on rac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65777
Bug ID: 65777
Summary: SPECOMP component 362.fma3d fails with error
"SIGSEGV, segmentation fault occurred"
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65727
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Apr 15 21:17:03 2015
New Revision: 222132
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222132&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/65727
* lambda.c (lambda_expr_this_capture): In unevaluated
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65778
Bug ID: 65778
Summary: v8 build fails with assembly error with LTO enabled on
arm-linux-gnueabihf
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65779
Bug ID: 65779
Summary: undefined local symbol on powerpc
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65777
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
Target Milestone|---
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
