||jiez at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution||INVALID
--- Comment #2 from Jie Zhang 2013-04-13 13:10:43 UTC
---
You need to add -lm to your command line. cos(0) is OK because gcc optimizes it
away when compiling.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56946
--- Comment #4 from Jie Zhang 2013-04-13 16:50:19 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > You need to add -lm to your command line.
> gcc -lm -Wall assignment.c
>
> This is right?But it can't compile neither
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44290
--- Comment #31 from Jie Zhang 2010-12-21 04:16:19
UTC ---
Patch for 4.5 was posted:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-12/msg01351.html
Waiting for approval.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47137
--- Comment #13 from Jie Zhang 2011-01-04 10:21:29
UTC ---
Author: jiez
Date: Tue Jan 4 10:21:27 2011
New Revision: 168459
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168459
Log:
PR driver/47137
* gcc.c (default_compilers[]):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42631
--- Comment #15 from Jie Zhang 2011-02-05 12:06:21
UTC ---
Author: jiez
Date: Sat Feb 5 12:06:18 2011
New Revision: 169851
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169851
Log:
PR debug/42631
* web.c (entry_register): Don't
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47622
Jie Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47622
--- Comment #5 from Jie Zhang 2011-02-09 16:04:53 UTC
---
I think my patch which causes this bug might be wrong after checking this test
case in details. I may work out a new patch following Jeff's suggestion.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42631
--- Comment #16 from Jie Zhang 2011-02-10 04:22:48
UTC ---
Author: jiez
Date: Thu Feb 10 04:22:44 2011
New Revision: 169997
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169997
Log:
PR testsuite/47622
Revert
2011-02-05 Jie Z
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47622
--- Comment #6 from Jie Zhang 2011-02-10 04:22:49 UTC
---
Author: jiez
Date: Thu Feb 10 04:22:44 2011
New Revision: 169997
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169997
Log:
PR testsuite/47622
Revert
2011-02-05 Jie Zh
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47622
Jie Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47763
Summary: Useless initialization of register
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo: unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47763
--- Comment #2 from Jie Zhang 2011-02-16 07:42:45 UTC
---
OK. From this point, it's not empty. But if it returns an uninitialized value,
why bother initialize r0 to 0.
Btw, the patch in reviewing:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-02/msg00
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47763
--- Comment #4 from Jie Zhang 2011-02-16 07:59:19 UTC
---
Yeah, normally we don't care about such cases. But this one comes from
dhrystone. If it can be fixed cleanly, why not do it?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47763
--- Comment #6 from Jie Zhang 2011-02-16 08:32:14 UTC
---
I think we all know that dhrystone is a bad benchmark. But some users don't.
Which is more difficult: educating all users about that vs apply a simple patch
in GCC to remove the useless in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47763
--- Comment #7 from Jie Zhang 2011-02-16 08:49:46 UTC
---
Sorry, in my last comment, I meant to say "4.4 does NOT have such
initialization".
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47763
--- Comment #9 from Jie Zhang 2011-02-16 11:29:50 UTC
---
The clobber is optimized away in 172r.cprop3 because the register renaming in
171r.web breaks the def-use relationship between the clobber and the use in the
following instruction when -fu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47763
--- Comment #11 from Jie Zhang 2011-02-23 00:25:38
UTC ---
Author: jiez
Date: Wed Feb 23 00:25:34 2011
New Revision: 170422
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170422
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/47763
* web.c (web_main): I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47763
Jie Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49862
--- Comment #2 from Jie Zhang 2012-03-09 05:54:30 UTC
---
Author: jiez
Date: Fri Mar 9 05:54:25 2012
New Revision: 185125
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=185125
Log:
PR target/49862
* config/bfin/bfin.c (hwloop_opt
||2012-03-09
CC||jiez at gcc dot gnu.org
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jiez at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Jie
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51201
Bug #: 51201
Summary: /bin/bash: gnatls: command not found
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51201
--- Comment #2 from Jie Zhang 2011-11-18 02:51:35 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> "../../git/configure" Can you try with an absolute path instead?
Yes. It has the same error. It happens when configured as a cross compiler, but
not as a nativ
||2011-12-17
CC||jiez at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Jie Zhang 2011-12-17 03:06:37 UTC
---
This was caused by r177218 for PR target/49864.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51552
--- Comment #2 from Jie Zhang 2011-12-21 04:35:19 UTC
---
(gdb) p insn
$23 = (rtx) 0x7701b180
(gdb) pr
(parallel [
(unspec [
(const_int -4 [0xfffc])
] 5)
(set/f (mem:SI (plus:SI (reg/f:S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86777
--- Comment #1 from Jie Zhang ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #0)
> The bfin port needs updating for this CVE. See the linked meta bug for
> details of possible actions required.
For Blackfin, the speculative load only happens wh
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45790
Jie Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jiez at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37360
Jie Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jiez at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #20 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37360
--- Comment #21 from Jie Zhang 2010-10-19 16:58:58
UTC ---
Another way to fix this bug:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-10/msg00281.html
David, are you still interested to try this patch on sb1?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37360
--- Comment #23 from Jie Zhang 2010-10-23 00:38:16
UTC ---
Author: jiez
Date: Sat Oct 23 00:38:13 2010
New Revision: 165880
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=165880
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/37360
* config/mips/mips.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46674
Summary: Weak alias was mistakenly optimized away
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46674
Jie Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|DUPLICATE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46674
--- Comment #3 from Jie Zhang 2010-11-29 10:56:37 UTC
---
If I revert this change, this bug will disappear.
@@ -416,7 +415,7 @@ cgraph_remove_unreachable_nodes (bool be
found = true;
/* If so, we need to keep node in the callg
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46674
--- Comment #4 from Jie Zhang 2010-11-30 10:00:05 UTC
---
Hah, I now know the root cause. It's "*__GI_memchr" that is added into the
visible point set since it's a user provided name. But GCC looks for
"__GI_memchr" later, which is not the same i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46674
--- Comment #5 from Jie Zhang 2010-11-30 11:17:47 UTC
---
Created attachment 22577
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22577
The patch
I'm testing this patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46674
--- Comment #6 from Jie Zhang 2010-11-30 23:58:54 UTC
---
The patch for review:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-11/msg02973.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46674
--- Comment #7 from Jie Zhang 2010-12-02 04:10:04 UTC
---
Author: jiez
Date: Thu Dec 2 04:09:58 2010
New Revision: 167365
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=167365
Log:
PR middle-end/46674
* varasm.c (compute_visible_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46667
Jie Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jiez at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46667
--- Comment #10 from Jie Zhang 2010-12-03 04:22:48
UTC ---
Chung-Lin Tang told me he had a patch for this:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-12/msg00137.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44290
--- Comment #29 from Jie Zhang 2010-12-16 03:05:53
UTC ---
Serge, yes. But GCC 4.5 branch is frozen now again.
39 matches
Mail list logo
