https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65003
--- Comment #8 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
*** Bug 65031 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65031
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65030
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65003
--- Comment #7 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
*** Bug 65030 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65003
--- Comment #6 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
*** Bug 65035 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65035
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65003
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65036
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65035
--- Comment #2 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Works with r220637 - may well be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65036
--- Comment #2 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
May well be - works with r220637
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65030
--- Comment #2 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Works with r220637 - may well be a dup of PR65003. Checking.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65031
--- Comment #2 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Appears to work with r220637. Checking if dup of PR65003.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64942
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-debug
Status|UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64921
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Summary|ira.c update_equiv_regs |[5.0 regression] ira.c
|patch causes|update_equiv_regs patch
|gcc/testsuite
||2015-01-28
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #6 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to kugan from comment #5)
> Is this sort of multiple-use potential candidate for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64810
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62173
--- Comment #19 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #18)
> It's probably not correct to simply transfer range info from *idx to
> iv->base.
> Instead SCEV analysis needs to track the range of CHREC_LEFT when it
||arm*
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2015-01-26
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Summary|gcc assign wrong register |Document print modifiers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62286
--- Comment #3 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #2)
> (In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #1)
> > Because the Cortex-M3 doesn't have those instructions ? It's a testism
> > probably fixed by an appropria
||2015-01-23
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail||4.9.0, 5.0
--- Comment #1 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
If it worked in 4.6 then this is a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57462
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|arm |arm, aarch64
Status|U
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64231
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64735
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|libstdc++ |c++
--- Comment #4 from Ramana Ra
||2015-01-23
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
||2015-01-23
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Timo Teräs from comment #2)
> I got this fixed. It seems genautomata does
||2015-01-23
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail||4.9.0, 4.9.1, 4.9.2, 5.0
--- Comment #1 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Confirmed with -march
|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ramana at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #6 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Mine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64532
--- Comment #11 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to baoshan from comment #10)
> I have a second thought:
> As the 'y' is declared as float, should GCC infer the register is a single
> float register even the constraint is 'w' ?
I don't kn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64532
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64532
--- Comment #8 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Author: ramana
Date: Mon Jan 19 14:55:28 2015
New Revision: 219847
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219847&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Improve documentation of register constraints.
While looking at P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64532
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ra |documentation
Component|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57748
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.9.0
Known to fail|4.9.0
|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2015-01-16
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
Ever confirmed|0 |1
||2015-01-16
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Joseph S. Myers from comment #1)
> Author: jsm28
> Date: Tue Sep 23 00:48:4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63607
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57748
--- Comment #57 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #56)
> GCC 4.8.4 has been released.
If it's too late to backport this to 4.8 we might as well close this off
targeting it for 4.9.
Ramana
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60162
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63740
--- Comment #11 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
*** Bug 63771 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #4 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Marking as duplicate in the absence of any other information.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 63740 ***
|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2015-01-16
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
--- Comment #3 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
There is very little here to help reproduce this issue especially as I see
others building 4.8.x based compilers on gcc-testresults even today
||2015-01-16
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Huh, what arch options ?
.arm
.syntax divided
.file"ldr.c"
||2015-01-16
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail||4.9.0, 4.9.1, 4.9.2, 5.0
--- Comment #1 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Hmmm, I'm not su
||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
--- Comment #2 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Fixed presumably.
||2015-01-16
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64600
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
Known to fail|
||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
--- Comment #11 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
This is almost gone now. I can't reproduce it with trunk probably because
arm-elf is now dead and long gone, as everything is now EABI centric.
Target|ARMv4 |arm
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2015-01-15
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2015-01-15
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64179
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
||2015-01-15
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Fix is not to disable vectorization in big endian but essentially correct the
backend and the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64310
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64600
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
--- Comment #1 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
This bug can't be fixed as this refers to the old pre-ABI linux target. Wont
fix.
|UNCONFIRMED |SUSPENDED
Last reconfirmed||2015-01-15
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Cilkplus isn't supported o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61578
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #1 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
If you use -mlong-calls in these particular cases, you should be able to work
around the problem.
The documentation for this feature states the
-15 00:00:00 |2015-01-15
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to work||5.0
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail||4.9.2
--- Comment #6 from Ramana
,
|arm-none-eabi |arm-none-eabi,arm-none-linu
||x-gnueabihf
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org,
||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #12
||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64310
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
--- Comment #3 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Bruce Dale from comment #2)
> gcc -v reports:
>
> Using built-in specs.
> COLLECT_GCC=gcc
> COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/
||2015-01-15
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Please follow instructions on reporting bugs on the gcc website and provide a
self contained
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed||2015-01-15
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64448
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ktkachov at gcc dot
gnu.or
||2015-01-15
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Summary|[5 Regression] internal |[4.9, 5 Regression]
|compiler error: Max. number |internal compiler error:
|of generated reload insns
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61523
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57518
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64379
--- Comment #14 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Donn Seeley from comment #13)
> BTW, this issue cropped up in Wind River Linux testing, not VxWorks. I have
> no idea whether the VxWorks folks are using -mapcs-frame. WR Linux will
> r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64379
--- Comment #10 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #9)
> > Uggh - these ancient options in the backend. mapcs-frame is quite ancient
> > and isn't really something that's tested very often, no wonder it's rottin
|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2015-01-13
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #8 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Donn Seeley from comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64231
--- Comment #11 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #10)
> What host compiler are you using? I am running into a similar issue (though
> I have not reproduced it myself; only in an automated build) with the host
||2015-01-13
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #4 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
I think there are patches for this one.
||2015-01-13
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #9 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Waiting on this one - no one seems to be able to reproduce this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64240
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60691
--- Comment #8 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Fabian Vogt from comment #6)
> If sjlj exceptions are not supported for ARM, shouldn't the configure option
> be invalid for ARM or at least print a warning?
> If an option does exist and
||2014-12-12
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
missing testcase
||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
--- Comment #5 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Fabian Vogt from comment #4)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> > (In reply to Fabian Vogt from comment #2)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61373
--- Comment #3 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to John Breitenbach from comment #2)
> Created attachment 33301 [details]
> siphash24.i
>
> sorry for forgetting this attachment in the original report.
mapcs-frame comes from a time when N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61578
--- Comment #12 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Fredrik Hederstierna from comment #9)
> Created attachment 33866 [details]
> Simple patch to exclude use of ip
>
> Simple patch that make it possible to optionally exclude use of ip for
,
||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Useful to CC the original author :)
||2014-12-12
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58623
--- Comment #4 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to bin.cheng from comment #3)
> Patch sent at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg02209.html
> On latest trunk, the patch generates below assembly for the example:
>
> .cpu g
||2014-12-11
CC||fyang at gcc dot gnu.org,
||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Please assign this to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63870
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNC
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2014-11-27
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail||5.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2014-11-27
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail||5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62178
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
||2014-11-27
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |renlin.li at arm dot com
Ever confirmed|0 |1
||2014-11-27
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to work||4.8.3
Version|5.0 |4.9.0
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |renlin.li at arm dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59593
--- Comment #4 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Author: ramana
Date: Thu Nov 20 08:38:34 2014
New Revision: 217826
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217826&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix missing output formatter.
2014-11-20 Ramana Radhakrishnan
||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #12 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Fixed presumably.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60882
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Seems to have gone latent again with latest 4.9 tip of tree . the testcase
doesn't build with tip of trunk ?
||2014-11-18
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Summary|ICE:|[5.0 regression] ICE:
|libstdc++-v3/include/chrono |libstdc++-v3/include/chrono
|:725:66: internal compiler
||2014-11-17
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63724
--- Comment #3 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Author: ramana
Revision: 217546
Modified property: svn:log
Modified: svn:log at Fri Nov 14 11:03:00 2014
--
--- svn:log (ori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63724
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
501 - 600 of 1217 matches
Mail list logo
