https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65826
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vries
Date: Sun Apr 26 07:13:13 2015
New Revision: 222446
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222446&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Mark ifn_va_arg as ECF_LEAF
2015-04-26 Tom de Vries
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65826
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65824
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65824
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
minimal version of stdarg-1.c, returns 14 if correct, but 12 for current
failure, indicating that the the first and resultless va_arg has been ignored:
...
include
extern void exit (int);
int
f6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65824
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65818
--- Comment #13 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 65824 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65836
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65893
Bug ID: 65893
Summary: ifcombine not done anymore on expansion of va_arg
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: tr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65890
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This was changed by
http://open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#613
It was a defect in the original standard. What possible advantage is there in
rejecting it in C++03 mode but accepting it in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65890
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: juergen.reuter at desy dot de
Target Milestone: ---
Between the commits r222305 and r222439 a severe regression has been
introducing segfaults in our code:
http://whizard.hepforge.org/versions/unofficial/whizard-2.2.6_alpha-20150426
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894
--- Comment #1 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Ok, here is a bit shorter test case, untar the attached file,
do ./make.
This produces an executable seg_prod. With r222305 I get the desired result:
$ ./seg_prod
| ==
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894
--- Comment #2 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Created attachment 35401
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35401&action=edit
Code that triggers the segmentation fault.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65895
Bug ID: 65895
Summary: Segfault building cross GCC 5.1.0 for Target AVR on
Mac OSX 10.10.3 (using Apple LLVM version 6.1.0
(clang-602.0.49))
Product: gcc
Version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65896
Bug ID: 65896
Summary: Erroneous uninitialized variable access error in
constexpr function with temporary variables
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65892
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65892
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #4)
> Thanks for the pointer! I had looked for a related bug report but couldn't
> find it.
>
> There's an important difference between the test cases in pr14319 and t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65892
--- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor ---
I agree it's subtle and could be clearer but I believe the key phrase is "a
union contains several structures." Here, the term "union" refers to the type,
not the object. This is supported by the use of the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65897
Bug ID: 65897
Summary: GAS named variable of extended asm (::"m" or "g") is
in wrong code style, variable stays still in
".att_syntax" -32(%ebp) not ".intel_syntax noprefix"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65897
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65898
Bug ID: 65898
Summary: GCC puts auto generated code between two asm
volatile(".intel_syntax"); and asm
volatile(".att_syntax"); globally syntaxed rather than
not pu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65898
--- Comment #1 from stanley ---
You could see another bug there "mov eax,%eax" -> %eax is generated from named
value [val] "g" (val). I see there is my bug, to do such code without clobber
"eax" so GCC put's optimized local value into my asm inli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65898
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65896
David Stone changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||david at doublewise dot net
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65893
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to vries from comment #0)
> I observed the following when investigating the effect of the introduction
> of ifn_va_arg for aarch64 on stdarg-1.c.
That's ./gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/exec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64230
Mat Cross changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
27 matches
Mail list logo
