http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59662
Bug ID: 59662
Summary: [OOP] TBP subroutine call rejected in contained
subroutine
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59663
Bug ID: 59663
Summary: [4.9 Regression] config/darwin.c:3665:1: error:
control reaches end of non-void function
[-Werror=return-type]
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59654
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59662
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to bin.cheng from comment #7)
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
Created attachment 31562 [details]
gcc49-pr59519.patch
I wonder if this isn't just a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57125
Vladimír Čunát vcunat at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vcunat at gmail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59662
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
BTW, the patch can hardly regress anything, it only affects cases that ICEd
before the patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59630
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59630
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
Started with my r182761 but say:
_Bool foo (int x)
{
_Bool (*f)(int) = __builtin_abs;
return f(x);
}
ICEs at -O2 already since
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
--- Comment #10 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
BTW, the patch can hardly regress anything, it only affects cases that ICEd
before the patch.
Em, I am worried if vectorization can
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I've tried even:
struct S { int f0; } d;
int a[8] = { 0 }, b, c, e, f;
void
foo (void)
{
for (; e 1; e++)
{
for (b = 0; b 7; b++)
{
c |= (a[b + 1] !=
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58950
--- Comment #11 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #10)
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #7)
The __builtin_shuffle part of the patch seems fine.
Yes, that looks right. That fixes the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59651
--- Comment #7 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org ---
AArch64 regressions came back OK. Thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59303
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44959
--- Comment #44 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
--- Comment #43 from Hin-Tak Leung htl10 at users dot sourceforge.net ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #40)
Please try
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59165
--- Comment #6 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Jan 3 11:11:31 2014
New Revision: 206313
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206313root=gccview=rev
Log:
/cp
2014-01-03 Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59165
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59661
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59298
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59298
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Slightly reduced test case:
implicit none
type Plane
integer :: M(1,1)
end type
type(Plane), parameter :: planes(1) = [ Plane(1) ]
integer:: f(1,1)
f =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53822
--- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #6)
Probably depends on cases. Sometimes it is good to have the explanation
right next to the type, other times it takes up all the space
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59625
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jan 3 12:22:17 2014
New Revision: 206314
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206314root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/59625
* config/i386/i386.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59252
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59661
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri Jan 3 12:28:31 2014
New Revision: 206315
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206315root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR other/59661
* doc/extend.texi: Fix
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59661
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59252
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
-fdump-tree-orginial shows that some code for the initialization of the
component 'label' is inserted:
{
struct branch_plot_results_ppv_type branch_plot_results_ppv_type.0;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56791
--- Comment #10 from Bernd Schmidt bernds at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to John David Anglin from comment #9)
Any chance the candidate patch can be submitted?
I guess this means you've tested it and it works?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59625
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jan 3 12:59:42 2014
New Revision: 206316
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206316root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/59625
* config/i386/i386.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59625
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
--target_board=unix/-O3 testing showed no changes (except for the testcases in
the patch), on both x86_64-linux and i686-linux (on the former one including
ada testing).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59664
Bug ID: 59664
Summary: avx512f-ceil-sfix-vec-2.c and
avx512f-floor-sfix-vec-2.c FAIL on Solaris9/x86
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59664
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 31566
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31566action=edit
assembler output with as and -fverbose-asm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59664
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57773
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59665
Bug ID: 59665
Summary: User code can cause ambiguous references to std in
libstdc++
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59535
--- Comment #15 from Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Another testcase where the thumb1 code is poor is
gcc.c-torture/execute/pr28982b.c
With LRA we often get sequences such as:
mov r3, sp
ldr r2, .L8+16
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59651
--- Comment #8 from meibf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: meibf
Date: Fri Jan 3 15:40:57 2014
New Revision: 206319
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206319root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-01-03 Bingfeng Mei b...@broadcom.com
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56791
--- Comment #11 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 3-Jan-14, at 7:46 AM, bernds at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
I guess this means you've tested it and it works?
Yes, I have tested it and it works fine.
Dave
--
John David Anglin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59008
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org ---
IPA-CP is decrementing reference count of parameter 1 instead of
parameter 2. That happens because the variable param_index in
ipcp_discover_new_direct_edges has type bool instead
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59666
Bug ID: 59666
Summary: IBM long double arithmetic results invalid in
non-default rounding modes
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59609
Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: larsbj at gullik dot net
CC: dodji at gcc dot gnu.org, dvyukov at gcc dot gnu.org,
jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
This is with gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.9.0 20140103 (experimental
--build=hppa-linux-gnu
--enable-clocale=gnu --enable-java-gc=boehm
--enable-languages=c,c++,objc,fortran,obj-c++,java,ada,lto
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.8.3 20140103 (prerelease) [gcc-4_8-branch revision 206321] (GCC)
I see the following backtrace when the insn was emitted:
Breakpoint 1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59664
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58567
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Jan 3 20:24:50 2014
New Revision: 206322
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206322root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-01-03 Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de
--enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.9.0 20140103 (experimental) [trunk revision 206321] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -std=c99 -c small.c
$
$ gcc-trunk -O0 -c small.c
$ gcc-trunk -Os -c small.c
$
$ gcc-trunk -O1 -c small.c
In file included from /usr/include/string.h:637
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59668
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Well, that's a glibc issue, isn't it?
Btw, you need to provide the preprocessed code.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58950
--- Comment #12 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: glisse
Date: Fri Jan 3 21:12:48 2014
New Revision: 206325
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206325root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-01-03 Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr
model: posix
gcc version 4.9.0 20140103 (experimental) (GCC)
Tested revisions:
r206310 - crash
4.8 - ignoring #pragma omp declare
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58950
Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.9 Regression] Missing|Missing statement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59668
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58151
Patrick Kelly p-kell at live dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||p-kell at live dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59668
--- Comment #3 from Zhendong Su su at cs dot ucdavis.edu ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
Actually this is neither a bug in GCC or glibc. In C, strcmp can be defined
as a macro and that is what you are getting a macro.
Huh,
//configure --enable-checking=yes,rtl,df
--enable-languages=c,c++,lto,fortran
--prefix=/mnt/svn/gcc-trunk/binary-206310-lto-fortran-checking-yes-rtl-df/
--without-cloog --without-ppl
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.9.0 20140103 (experimental) (GCC)
Tested revisions:
r206310 - crash
4.8 - ignoring
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59671
Bug ID: 59671
Summary: Improper Ada behavior under -gnat2012
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
Priority: P3
Component: ada
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59668
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |DUPLICATE
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32449
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||su at cs dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59668
--- Comment #5 from Zhendong Su su at cs dot ucdavis.edu ---
Because glibc decides only to implement the macro at -O and above but not
when optimizing for size.
I see; thanks Andrew.
BTW, is strcmp the only one like this, or there are others?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59668
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Zhendong Su from comment #5)
BTW, is strcmp the only one like this, or there are others?
Almost (if not all) all standard C functions are like this.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59668
--- Comment #7 from Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org ---
7.1.3 Reserved identifiers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59672
Bug ID: 59672
Summary: Add -m16 support for x86
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59672
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Note GCC does not even support real 16bit code for x86. So pretending GCC's
output is 16bit code is a joke.
Why can't you just write the 16bit binary support in assembly for the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59672
--- Comment #2 from H. Peter Anvin hpa at zytor dot com ---
It is much cleaner to have it in C. We converted the assembly code to C back
in 2007 and it has been much easier to maintain ever since. It works fine,
thankyouverymuch; it isn't
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50180
Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50181
Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59673
Bug ID: 59673
Summary: wrong specialization used when a partial
specialization of a member template is explicitly
specialized
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36109
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14840
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59674
Bug ID: 59674
Summary: On m68k and vax variables stack variables with
MAX_STACK_ALIGNMENT make ssp fail
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59252
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
71 matches
Mail list logo
