Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
CC: davidxl at gcc dot gnu.org, iains at gcc dot gnu.org
Host: x86_64-apple-darwin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58326
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58139
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> New Revision: 202286
This seems to break bootstrap on *86*-*-*, see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/2013-09/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58139
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> FWIW, I was able to bootstrap subversion id 202295 on my x86_68 laptop
> running RHEL 6.4, building c, c++, fortran languages, and using
> --enable-lto --without-ppl --without-cloog.
The failure is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58139
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Boostrap with obj* completed successfully with r202295 reverted. I start again
with the patch in comment#9.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58269
--- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Yes, confirmed that on x86_64-linux r202286 is the culprit.
See pr58139 comments #6 to #11.
I have successfully bootstrapped r202312 on x86_64-apple-darwin10 with the
following patch:
--- /opt/gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58269
--- Comment #15 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #14)
> assuming that the patch above is applied to deal with pr58139,
Indeed!
> Are you saying that:
> - if (TARGET_MACHO)
> -{
> - if (SSE_REGNO_P (re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58351
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58340
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Also seen on x86_64-apple-darwin10.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58351
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56535
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I confirm that this PR has been "fixed" by revision 199409 (r199408 gives
ICEs).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44107
--- Comment #21 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
*** Bug 55956 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55956
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58366
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iains at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58366
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
On x86_64-apple-darwin10, if I compile the test with -std=c++11
-fsanitize=address (w/wo -pthread), I get
==60580== ERROR: AddressSanitizer: heap-use-after-free on address
0x60080001bfe8 at pc 0x12
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50909
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> I am trying to apply this patch on OSX Lion (10.8.5) to gcc 4.6.2,
> but the diff command on OSX doesn't accept the --git option,
> and am not sure how to rewrite the patch for Lion. Can you help?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58425
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Works for me:
[macbook] f90/bug% gfcc ~/test/Rouson/ssdSource/chapter05/hermetic/hermetic.F90
-c -Ofast
[macbook] f90/bug% gfcc ~/test/Rouson/ssdSource/chapter05/hermetic/vortex.F90
-c -Ofast
[macbook]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58356
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58436
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57697
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The test gfortran.dg/defined_assignment_11.f90 fails on x86_64-apple-darwin10:
Program received signal SIGSEGV: Segmentation fault - invalid memory reference.
Valgrind reports
==30916== Invalid read
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58473
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57697
--- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> What's the difference between defined_assignment_11_db.f90 and
> defined_assignment_11.f90?
In defined_assignment_11_db.f90 the print statements have been uncommented.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58456
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I have signaled the failure at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg01317.html
and got the following answer
Thanks for reporting, I think this can be fixed by patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57697
--- Comment #14 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #11)
> The test gfortran.dg/defined_assignment_11.f90 fails on
> x86_64-apple-darwin10:
This is due to some patch I have in my working tree: the test pas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58015
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Is this PR different from pr58113 beside the missing nextafterl on
hppa64-hp-hpux11.11?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58498
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58521
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I have a different boostrap failure on x86_64-apple-darwin10:
/opt/gcc/build_w/./prev-gcc/xg++ -B/opt/gcc/build_w/./prev-gcc/
-B/opt/gcc/gcc4.9w/x86_64-apple-darwin10.8.0/bin/ -nostdinc++
-B/opt/gcc/bu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50085
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iains at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50094
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-15
22:27:25 UTC ---
I have not reached this stage yet, but I see the following typo (shallolvnot):
gcc/fortran/resolve.c: gfc_error ("Function result '%s' at %L shallolvnot
be a coarray or ha
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50094
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50091
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-17
22:32:23 UTC ---
If I edit the assembly code to have
...
stw r0,-12284(r1)
mr r0,r1
stw r0,-12556(r1)
...
The code assembles, links and runs without further hiccup.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49987
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-19
09:40:18 UTC ---
> Would you be able to run a full bootstrap and
> regression test with it? I'll submit the patch if that succeeds.
I have done a clean bootstrap of revision 177878 with the p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50127
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-19
14:22:34 UTC ---
See pr50035 marked as a duplicate of bug 49972.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50129
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50130
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50137
Bug #: 50137
Summary: [4.7 Regression] ppc64/libstdc++-v3 is miscompiled on
powerpc-apple-darwin9 since revision 177691
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50145
Bug #: 50145
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr50067-*.c -O* execution test on
powerpc*-*-*
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49901
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-21
18:08:39 UTC ---
Could the patch in comment #3 be applied without waiting for an answer about
what to do with the -gno-strict-dwarf option on strict-dwarf platforms?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50145
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-21
20:21:04 UTC ---
> Can you please check why?
Using (note that I am C illiterate;-)
for (i = 0; i < 32; ++i)
printf("%hd ", * (&a[i]));
printf("\n");
before and after
for (i = 0; i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50143
--- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-08-21 20:56:00 UTC ---
> I don't know which browser you are using, but with Firefox 6 the documentation
> is definitely readable.
This is the same with Safari. Note that on both Safari and Firefox,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50149
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-22
13:51:46 UTC ---
> For instance, the following example works for me on Linux with no special
> options and with the options you used.
It works also for me on x86_64-apple-darwin10.8.0 with 4.4.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50163
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50178
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-24
18:20:01 UTC ---
The code compiles with gfortran 4.6.1 and -O3 -ffast-math.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50185
Bug #: 50185
Summary: [4.7 Regression] FAIL:
gcc.target/i386/avx2-vmovmskb-2.c scan-assembler
vmovmskb on x86_64-apple-darwin10
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50192
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50185
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-26
12:38:44 UTC ---
This pr is fixed by the updated patch. Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50210
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49987
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at redhat dot com,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50225
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-29
13:49:48 UTC ---
On x86_64-apple-darwin10 I don't need the option -fcheck=all to get the
run-timr error. However the error goes away with any optimization above -O1 (at
least all those I have tr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50137
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-29
17:34:02 UTC ---
Why setting this pr as unconfirmed?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-29
17:39:01 UTC ---
> Oops. Did I do this? Sorry, it was not intentional ...
Apparently this happens while changing the summary(?).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-29
18:17:50 UTC ---
> > (r171654?).
>
> Rather not. This one only concerns type-bound procedures (of which Andrew's
> test case has none):
Sorry to be such a nuisance, but it is: r171653 works, r1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227
--- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-08-30 17:24:31 UTC ---
> gfortran-4.7 -c module.f90
> gfortran-4.7 program.f90
What about
gfortran-4.7 program.f90 module.o?
AFAIK there is not "object" in the *.mod files.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50265
Bug #: 50265
Summary: [4.7 Regression] Bootstrap failure
"BufferedImage.java:336:0: internal compiler error:
Segmentation fault" on *-apple-darwin*
Classification: Unclassified
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50265
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mjambor at suse dot cz
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50265
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-02
11:28:03 UTC ---
> I'm sure it is.
At least on x86_64-apple-darwin10 it is fixed by the patch for pr50260 at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-09/msg00052.html .
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49972
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49972
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50023
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iains at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-04
19:18:00 UTC ---
I think I understand what's happening, although I don't know how to fix it:
(1) gfortran.dg/class_45a.f03 is compiled and generate g_nodes.mod,
(2) gfortran.dg/class_45b.f03 is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-04
20:35:36 UTC ---
> An evil trick would be the following, which causes a run once: ...
It works, but I think if this trick is used, it should be documented as in
gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/cray_p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50296
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i686-pc-linux-gnu, |i686-pc-linux-gnu,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49464
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50316
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-07
13:00:34 UTC ---
It looks like a duplicate of pr39856 fixed at revisions 147803/147804. You
should update your gfortran 4.5.3 or better 4.6.1.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50325
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-08
10:49:08 UTC ---
It looks as a duplicate of pr50137 (with less failures on ppc-darwin).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50331
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-08
15:18:30 UTC ---
It is likely a duplicate of pr34721.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50343
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50392
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50325
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-14
12:42:06 UTC ---
> Created attachment 25270 [details]
> Experimental fix
I'll test the patch on ppc-darwin9, but it will take some time on my slow
machine. Meanwhile do you understand why the t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47978
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-14
13:31:15 UTC ---
Janus,
I am worried about your fix as it seems to break at least the original tests of
pr41656 and pr41685:
pr41656.f90:68.13:
procedure, pass(a) :: s_scal => s_coo_scal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50137
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50325
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dominiq at lps dot e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50325
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50414
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|gfortran -Ofast SIGSEGV in |[4.7 Regression] gfortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50415
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|gfortran -Ofast SIGSEGV in |[4.7 Regression] gfortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50416
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-15
10:39:12 UTC ---
It works for me with -O1, -Ofast, and -m32 -Ofast. I used x86_64-apple-darwin10
with
GMP version 5.0.2, MPFR version 3.0.1, MPC version 0.9
Likely a MPFR (or its use) bug. I s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50411
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-15
10:55:19 UTC ---
Likely a duplicate of pr50343 fixed by revision 178775.
I use this pr for some general comments:
(1) follow the Mikael Morin's advice in pr50375 comment #4:
> Please paste t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50409
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50410
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50076
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iains at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50414
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-15
11:27:35 UTC ---
> This is a regression that occurred between revisions 173852 (OK) and 175707
> (ICE). If needed, I'll be able to narrow the range later today.
173817 is OK
173917 gives the IC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50415
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-15
11:30:14 UTC ---
> This is a regression that occurred in the same range as pr50414 (between
> revisions 173852 (OK) and 175707 (ICE)).
r174030 is OK
r174283 gives the ICE.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50415
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-15
11:33:16 UTC ---
'-O2 -ftree-vectorize' is OK, '-O3' gives the ICE.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50407
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-15
20:28:15 UTC ---
g95 fails with
In file pr50407.f90:10
print 2.ip.8 ! gfortran gets confused, expects a comma
1
Error: Syntax error in PRINT statement at (1)
print *
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50407
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-15
22:06:50 UTC ---
> So as Steve, I think the code is invalid.
My mistake: I did not parse the code well enough to realize that the result of
the operator was a valid format. Concerning the actua
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50426
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50426
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50433
Bug #: 50433
Summary: [4.7 Regression] acats tests FAIL: c460010 on
x86_64-apple-darwin10
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50435
Bug #: 50435
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-25.c (-flto)?
scan-tree-dump-times slp "basic block vectorized using
SLP" 1
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50325
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-16
14:41:19 UTC ---
I have done a clean bootstrap of powerpc-apple-darwin9 and
x86_64-apple-darwin10 with the patch in comment #5 with all languages except
go.
I have posted the results of the te
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34265
--- Comment #35 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-09-16 15:42:15 UTC ---
This pr (as well as pr49006) seems to have been fixed between revisions 176696
and 177649. I am closing
pr49006 as fixed and I'll use this pr to track the remaining issues.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49006
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50435
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-16
15:53:07 UTC ---
> I understand that the loop vectorization somehow worked, so could you please
> try the following patch to avoid it:
Sorry, but after the patch I still have
Running /opt/gcc/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50435
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-16
17:37:17 UTC ---
Created attachment 25307
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25307
slp dump attached
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50185
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34265
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||irar at gcc dot gnu.org,
1001 - 1100 of 7788 matches
Mail list logo
