On 22 October 2010 20:17, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
Frederic Riss frederic.r...@gmail.com writes:
OK... what's the best way forward on this? Do we just leave it as it
is and wait until an official port needs complains about it? Should it
be filled in bugzilla?
Did you just
In my port I get to such a situation:
(insn 60 59 61 4 a.c:65 (set (subreg:SI (reg:HI 129 [ __prephitmp_4 ]) 0)
(zero_extract:SI (subreg:SI (reg/v:DI 138 [ v4hi1 ]) 4)
(const_int 16 [0x10])
(const_int 16 [0x10]))) 53 {extzv} (nil))
(insn 61 60 62 4 a.c:65 (set
Hi,
The constant propagation pass propagates constants into the
instructions that accept immediates. I'm trying to find if there's
some CSE pass in GCC that would be able to undo this effect when the
constant is used more than once in the function. I looked at the CSE
code (4.5 branch) and I
Paolo Bonzini schrieb:
On 10/22/2010 01:16 PM, Georg Lay wrote:
Then the first insn gets split after reload and before peephole2:
(insn 22 8 23 2 peep2.c:5 (set (reg:SI 15 d15)
(and:SI (reg:SI 4 d4 [ x ])
(const_int -98305 [0xfffe7fff]))) 143
Hi,
I meet a requirement to make all function calls to be indirect
function calling ( for I386 GCC compiler). I am not familiar with
frontend, so my first idea is
to hack it from backend, change the asm output for call and
call_value insn patterns, generate a related varible in data
section,
On 10/25/2010 11:35 AM, Georg Lay wrote:
(insn 22 8 23 2 peep2.c:5 (set (reg:SI 15 d15)
(and:SI (reg:SI 4 d4 [ x ])
(const_int -98305 [0xfffe7fff]))) 143
{*and3_zeroes.insert.{SI}.ic}
(nil))
(insn 23 22 21 2 peep2.c:5 (set (reg:SI 15 d15)
(xor:SI (reg:SI
On 10/25/2010 10:46 AM, Frederic Riss wrote:
Hi,
The constant propagation pass propagates constants into the
instructions that accept immediates. I'm trying to find if there's
some CSE pass in GCC that would be able to undo this effect when the
constant is used more than once in the function. I
redriver jiang jiang.redri...@gmail.com writes:
Hi,
I meet a requirement to make all function calls to be indirect
function calling ( for I386 GCC compiler). I am not familiar with
frontend, so my first idea is
For x86-64 using the large code model (-mcmodel=large) will result in
all
On 10/24/2010 10:52 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
It's hard for me to believe that BFD is the correct answer. It's poorly
designed for the kinds of things the compiler needs to do. Any program
which links against BFD effectively links in the GNU linker.
It sounded from your mail like all the
Question on movmemm:
Given
extern int *i, *j;
void foo (void) { memcpy (i, j, 10); }
I would expect to see argument 4 (the shared alignment) to be sizeof(int) since
both argument are pointers to int. What I get instead is 1. Why is that?
If I have
extern int i[10], j[10];
then I do get
Frederic Riss frederic.r...@gmail.com writes:
On 22 October 2010 20:17, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
Frederic Riss frederic.r...@gmail.com writes:
OK... what's the best way forward on this? Do we just leave it as it
is and wait until an official port needs complains about it?
Mark Mitchell m...@codesourcery.com writes:
On 10/24/2010 10:52 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
It's hard for me to believe that BFD is the correct answer. It's poorly
designed for the kinds of things the compiler needs to do. Any program
which links against BFD effectively links in the GNU
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
At least, that is how I see it.
Why not require libelf just like for LTO? That seems like a time to
reduce what we depend on. For an example if we compile with lto and
go, GCC will use two different elf libraries. This
Andrew Pinski pins...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
At least, that is how I see it.
Why not require libelf just like for LTO? That seems like a time to
reduce what we depend on. For an example if we compile with lto and
go, GCC
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010, James Miller wrote:
Our mirror address has been changed from
http://gcc.parentinginformed.com/
to
http://gcc.parentingamerica.com/
Please update your list to use the new URL.
Also please use new e-mail to contact me when necessary:
jmil...@parentingamerica.com.
roy rosen roy.1ro...@gmail.com writes:
In my port I get to such a situation:
(insn 60 59 61 4 a.c:65 (set (subreg:SI (reg:HI 129 [ __prephitmp_4 ]) 0)
(zero_extract:SI (subreg:SI (reg/v:DI 138 [ v4hi1 ]) 4)
(const_int 16 [0x10])
(const_int 16 [0x10]))) 53
redriver jiang jiang.redri...@gmail.com writes:
I meet a requirement to make all function calls to be indirect
function calling ( for I386 GCC compiler). I am not familiar with
frontend, so my first idea is
to hack it from backend, change the asm output for call and
call_value insn
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Paul Koning paul_kon...@dell.com wrote:
Question on movmemm:
Given
extern int *i, *j;
void foo (void) { memcpy (i, j, 10); }
I would expect to see argument 4 (the shared alignment) to be sizeof(int)
since both argument are pointers to int. What I get
Paul Koning paul_kon...@dell.com writes:
Working on the pdp11 target, I ran into something odd.
It defines REGNO_OK_FOR_BASE_P in a way that seems to match what gccint says
one should do in the strict case -- but does so all the time.
Specifically, it says:
#define
redriver jiang jiang.redri...@gmail.com writes:
I meet a requirement to make all function calls to be indirect
function calling ( for I386 GCC compiler). I am not familiar with
frontend, so my first idea is
to hack it from backend, change the asm output for call and
call_value insn
On 25/10/2010 19:43, Andi Kleen wrote:
Andrew Pinski pins...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
At least, that is how I see it.
Why not require libelf just like for LTO? That seems like a time to
reduce what we depend on. For an
On 10/25/2010 7:01 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
What would be even nicer would be if we could share the same code-reader
interface between lto and go (and the lto-plugin), thereby getting object
format independence equally everywhere for no extra cost.
That could be orthogonal to plugging
On Oct 25, 2010, at 3:44 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Paul Koning paul_kon...@dell.com wrote:
Question on movmemm:
Given
extern int *i, *j;
void foo (void) { memcpy (i, j, 10); }
I would expect to see argument 4 (the shared alignment) to be
On 26/10/2010 01:53, Paul Koning wrote:
On Oct 25, 2010, at 3:44 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Paul Koning paul_kon...@dell.com
wrote:
Question on movmemm:
Given
extern int *i, *j; void foo (void) { memcpy (i, j, 10); }
I would expect to see argument
On 25/10/2010 23:49, Mark Mitchell wrote:
On 10/25/2010 7:01 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
What would be even nicer would be if we could share the same code-reader
interface between lto and go (and the lto-plugin), thereby getting object
format independence equally everywhere for no extra cost.
On 10/25/2010 10:07 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
- integrate gccgo, with elfcpp
- then common out the file-reading stuff from gcc/lto/ up to gcc/ so that all
the FEs can share it
- then convert it to use elfcpp (with a bit of file I/O added) and stop using
libelf altogether
- then switch gccgo over
Dave Korn dave.korn.cyg...@gmail.com writes:
[...] From Ian's description, gccgo has the exact same requirements
as LTO: be able to parse an object file, get a list of sections, and
get raw binary access to the data contained within a named section.
This is a problem which we already have
On 10/25/2010 10:34 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
By the way, is there some necessity in accomplishing this by means of
a linked library, as opposed to via a spawned objcopy process?
Probably none in theory, but it certainly seems messy and likely to be
slow in practice. Is there a reason that
Hi -
By the way, is there some necessity in accomplishing this by means of
a linked library, as opposed to via a spawned objcopy process?
Probably none in theory, but it certainly seems messy and likely to
be slow in practice.
Yes, maybe.
Is there a reason that this would be desirable?
On 10/25/2010 10:39 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
It would seem to moot the present discussion about competing elf
consumer libraries. none of the above is a possible answer.
True. It seems that LTO and Go need a very simple interface; presumably
we can abstract that in the compiler and then
Hi,
I am trying to demonstrate my port capabilities.
I am writing an application which needs to use instructions like max
a,b,c,d,e,f where a,b,c are inputs and d,e,f are outputs.
Is that possible to write an intrinsic function for that?
I think not because that means that I need to pass d,e,f by
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46115
--- Comment #3 from Rob Staudinger robert.staudinger at gmail dot com
2010-10-25 07:31:59 UTC ---
For the record, this is already possible using bracketed expressions, but the
syntactical sugar of not having to pick a function name would be
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46163
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|Linux x86_64
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46163
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46164
Summary: Local variables in specified registers don't work
correctly with inline asm operands
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32820
--- Comment #8 from Siarhei Siamashka siarhei.siamashka at gmail dot com
2010-10-25 10:17:47 UTC ---
On the second thought, this bug was about global variables. But my problem is
related to the use of local variables. So I have submitted a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46164
--- Comment #1 from Siarhei Siamashka siarhei.siamashka at gmail dot com
2010-10-25 10:37:13 UTC ---
Created attachment 22144
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22144
proposed testcase for x86_64
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46164
Siarhei Siamashka siarhei.siamashka at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #22144|0 |1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46010
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-25
13:12:33 UTC ---
The patch in comment #7 works for the original test case but fails for the one
in comment #4. I have a revised patch that also works for comment #4 and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45967
Andreas Krebbel krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||krebbel at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46128
--- Comment #2 from Siarhei Siamashka siarhei.siamashka at gmail dot com
2010-10-25 14:43:52 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Note that there may be problems clobbering D registers. See bug 43440. I
don't think Richard Earnshaw's patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46140
--- Comment #7 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-25 16:07:37 UTC ---
Author: kargl
Date: Mon Oct 25 16:07:34 2010
New Revision: 165922
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=165922
Log:
2010-10-25 Steven G. Kargl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46140
--- Comment #8 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-25 16:09:51 UTC ---
Author: kargl
Date: Mon Oct 25 16:09:47 2010
New Revision: 165923
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=165923
Log:
2010-10-25 Steven G. Kargl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46140
--- Comment #9 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-25 16:12:05 UTC ---
Author: kargl
Date: Mon Oct 25 16:11:54 2010
New Revision: 165924
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=165924
Log:
2010-10-25 Steven G. Kargl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46140
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42647
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46165
Summary: ICE: verify_flow_info failed when casting-out
attribute noreturn with -fno-tree-ccp
-fno-tree-copy-prop -fno-tree-dce
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46166
Summary: optimization and/or removing an if(.false.) statement
leads to bad results
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46165
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46167
Summary: [4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE: SEIGSEGV in
flow_bb_inside_loop_p (cfgloop.c:776) with -O
-ftree-vectorize
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46166
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2010-10-25
18:45:18 UTC ---
1) Remove the Tabs from your source.
(2) Compile with -O2 -Wall -Wuninitialized -fcheck=all.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46166
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46168
Summary: ICE: verify_ssa failed: definition in block 6 does not
dominate use in block 5 with -ftree-loop-linear
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46163
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.4.6 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46169
Summary: ICE: internal compiler error: in convert_move, at
expr.c:371
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46165
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|hjl.tools at gmail dot com |amacleod at redhat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46169
--- Comment #1 from Eric Anholt eric at anholt dot net 2010-10-25 20:20:19
UTC ---
Created attachment 22150
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22150
gcc-fail.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46170
Summary: g++ wrongly rejects pointer-to-member in template
arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46168
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2010-10-25
20:50:24 UTC ---
0n x86_64-apple-darwin10, 4.5 revision 154654 crashes, but gcc version 4.5.0 is
OK (release checking).
On powerpc-apple-darwin9, gcc version 4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46171
Summary: [4.6 Regression] ICE: in gen_rtx_SUBREG, at
emit-rtl.c:774 with -fno-tree-dce -g
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46171
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46158
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46158
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46170
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46172
Summary: ICE: in expand_widen_pattern_expr, at optabs.c:522
with -ftree-vectorize -fno-tree-dce
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46169
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45736
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-25
21:31:15 UTC ---
Created attachment 22153
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22153
Patch I am testing.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46173
Summary: gcc/gencheck.c:30:24: error: all-tree.def: No such
file or directory
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.6
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46174
Summary: [OOP] ALLOCATE with SOURCE: Deep copy missing
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38942
Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38942
John Regehr regehr at cs dot utah.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35810
--- Comment #10 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-25
22:22:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Note in Fortran 2008 (cf. PR 41719),
polymorphic-variable = expr
is allowed iff the variable is allocatable.
And note further
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46175
Summary: ICE: in rtl_verify_flow_info_1, at cfgrtl.c:2037: flow
control insn inside a basic block with -O -fgcse
-fno-guess-branch-probability -freorder-blocks and asm
goto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46176
Summary: profile feedback causes 20% linux kernel binary growth
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46176
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-25
22:57:50 UTC ---
I think this is unrolling. -fprofile-generate/-fprofile-use turns on
unrolling.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46177
Summary: [4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE: in prop_phis, at
tree-loop-distribution.c:327 with -fno-tree-copy-prop
-ftree-loop-distribution
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46178
Summary: gcc.target/i386/(u)divmod-[58].c FAIL: ICE: in
dec_register_pressure, at ira-lives.c:215 with
-fira-algorithm=priority
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46154
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46150
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46130
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46123
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46120
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46101
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46099
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46171
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46156
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46095
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46036
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45913
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45876
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45702
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46010
--- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-26
01:37:04 UTC ---
Created attachment 22156
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22156
Patch to fix this.
I think my email service is out. I attach the patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46179
Summary: Codegen/TLS: invalid assembler syntax
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45875
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45870
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45865
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46053
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45991
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45971
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45934
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
