Eric S. Raymond e...@thyrsus.com writes:
Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com:
I'm sympathetic to our comments regarding GCC vs. clang. But I'm not
sure I grasp your proposed solution. GCC does support plugins, and
has supported them for a few releases now.
Then I don't understand why David
Hi,
I noticed there is a regression of 4.8 against ancient 4.5 in vectorization on
our port. After a bit investigation, I found following code that prefer
even|odd version instead of lo|hi one. This is obviously the case for AltiVec
and maybe some other targets. But even|odd (expanding to a
On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 15:19 -0500, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
Therefore, I point out that FSF can no longer prevent proprietary
vendors from plugging into a free compiler to improve their tools.
[snip]
I also think it bears noticing that nobody outside of Microsoft seems
to particularly want to
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jan 2014, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
Souce of these warnings are typically calls to error() and friends.
In C and C++ front ends there are many calls of error (errmsg).
errmsg is in many cases,
Hi!
On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 03:54:31 +, Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jan 2014, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
x86 Hurd (32-bit, hard-float): /lib/ld.so (that is, GCC uses that name
with -dynamic-linker so in PT_INTERP; my understanding of
shlib-versions is that it
Hi Jakub,
I have 2 questions concerning OpenMP 4.0 specification.
1. Do I understand correctly that every declare target directive should be
closed with end declare target? E.g. in this example GCC marks both foo1 and
foo2 with omp declare target attribute:
#pragma omp declare target
int
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 07:51:51PM +0400, Ilya Verbin wrote:
I have 2 questions concerning OpenMP 4.0 specification.
1. Do I understand correctly that every declare target directive should be
closed with end declare target? E.g. in this example GCC marks both foo1
and
foo2 with omp
On Wed, 22 Jan 2014, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
Unfortunately, I am not clear on how to check for format specifiers in string.
Should I do it manually by checking the format string for specifiers
and call abort if found a no-argument specifier,
or is there a better way to do it ?
I'll leave
Hi,
a couple of tsan tests:
c-c++-common/tsan/simple_race.c
g++.dg/tsan/default_options.C
relatively often fail for me at various optimization levels (eg, in my
last run the former at -O2: no WARNING: ThreadSanitizer... thus the test
failed).
Is this a known issue? The machine I'm
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 07:05:23PM +0100, Paolo Carlini wrote:
a couple of tsan tests:
c-c++-common/tsan/simple_race.c
g++.dg/tsan/default_options.C
relatively often fail for me at various optimization levels (eg, in
my last run the former at -O2: no WARNING: ThreadSanitizer...
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 07:39:12PM +0100, Winfried Magerl wrote:
Hi,
since trunk revision 206525 I'm unable to bootstrap
gcc with '-O3' as optimisation. No problem until
revision 2065250.
From the diff-output it looks like this entry from
ChangeLog is the only candidate:
On 16/01/2014 03:45, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 16 January 2014 11:11, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
Hello,
On 17/11/2013 17:47, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 17 November 2013 15:40, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
For control reaches end of non-void function, I haven't activated by
default and I called the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44107
--- Comment #28 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Denis Excoffier from comment #27)
I (OP) suppose we can WONTFIX that one. Thanks.
Well, there is a fix - which is to update /usr/lib/libgcc_s.dylib to a
non-buggy
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #43 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
---
(In reply to Emil Styrke from comment #42)
Anyway, after manually fixing up the install it seems to work alright. If
this looks like a reasonable way forward,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59903
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=44107
--- Comment #29 from Denis Excoffier g...@denis-excoffier.org ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #28)
Well, there is a fix - which is to update
/usr/lib/libgcc_s.dylib to a non-buggy version.
I had understood that it was desirable not to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58960
Andrey Belevantsev abel at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51366
--- Comment #7 from Denis Excoffier g...@denis-excoffier.org ---
The bug is no longer present in GCC 4.8.2 (tested today under Cygwin 1.7.27 XP
32bits).
Please someone to update the WAITING field into RESOLVED (or WORKSFORME etc.).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58960
Andrey Belevantsev abel at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59561
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #0)
with -O2 and -O3, while 4.8 did not do that. Probably the warning is ok,
since the test case is supposed to trigger a runtime error (Index '5' of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59891
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14258
Elias Pipping pipping at exherbo dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pipping at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59903
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57316
Yury Gribov y.gribov at samsung dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||y.gribov at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53492
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burrows.labs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59901
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57316
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Yury Gribov from comment #11)
Created attachment 31916 [details]
More robust check
Does this look reasonable? Should also work for cross-builds.
1) these syscalls
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14258
--- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
That example's a bit misleading, because 'int' really isn't a class, namespace
or enumeration, but the error's wrong because there could be a specialization
of A, and the same error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14258
--- Comment #20 from fabien at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #19)
Fabien, the fix doesn't seem to work with nested-name-specifiers, do you
remember if there's another bug report about that case?
Yes, it's
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59656
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Thanks Paul. You mentioned a proposed patch, are you working on that? From a
quick look I didn't see how to fix it without adding a
_Sp_counted_base::_M_add_ref_lock_nothrow()
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57316
Yury Gribov y.gribov at samsung dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #31916|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14258
--- Comment #21 from Elias Pipping pipping at exherbo dot org ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #19)
That example's a bit misleading, because 'int' really isn't a class,
namespace or enumeration, but the error's wrong because there
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59904
Bug ID: 59904
Summary: [ARM] tls-reload-1.c fails
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14258
--- Comment #22 from Elias Pipping pipping at exherbo dot org ---
I guess my test case is a reduction/duplicate of PR37140.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56315
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57316
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I wouldn't call the conditional SYSCALL_SUPPORTED, but SANITIZER_SUPPORTED or
so.
In the future, the configure could have various other reasons why it should
give up on building any
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51980
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51980
--- Comment #9 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51980
--- Comment #10 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51980
--- Comment #11 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51980
--- Comment #12 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51980
--- Comment #13 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59905
Bug ID: 59905
Summary: Unfriendly abort when calling a fucntion via a
function pointer cast
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56645
Lode Leroy lode.leroy at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lode.leroy at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59594
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 31919
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31919action=edit
gcc49-pr59594.patch
Untested patch for discussion. The reason why we (incorrectly)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59656
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 31920
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31920action=edit
don't use _M_add_ref_lock() when exceptions are disabled
Here's a patch which fixes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59906
Bug ID: 59906
Summary: [4.7/4.8 Regression] error: size of variable
'anonymous' is too large
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57316
Yury Gribov y.gribov at samsung dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #31917|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59029
--- Comment #7 from Yury Gribov y.gribov at samsung dot com ---
Volker, could you close this bug if gcc trunk works for you?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59384
--- Comment #2 from Nick Tomlinson nick.tomlinson at arm dot com ---
I tried that patch against the latest CilkPlus branch, but could not apply it.
I also tried building GCC 4.9 from trunk, but could not use cilk_for. Please
could you let me know
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57316
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Sorry for not catching it earlier, I'm worried about -Wunused complaining about
the vars. Can you instead use something like
int x = syscall (__NR_gettid);
syscall (__NR_futex, x, 1,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57316
--- Comment #17 from Yury Gribov y.gribov at samsung dot com ---
Will do.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59906
Harald Anlauf anlauf at gmx dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.1.2
Known to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59811
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=59811
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
With -O2 -fno-automatic -ffixed-line-length-none --param
sccvn-max-alias-queries-per-access=1300 the combiner completely disappears out
of the picture, supposedly because then FRE/PRE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37140
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|joao.eiras at gmail dot com|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59384
Balaji V. Iyer bviyer at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bviyer at gmail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56315
--- Comment #4 from Joshua Conner josh.m.conner at gmail dot com ---
Excellent - thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59907
Bug ID: 59907
Summary: Ada 2012 Indefinite_Holders Reference_Type is not
implemented
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
URL:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43538
Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59908
Bug ID: 59908
Summary: Incorrect uninit warning with -fsanitize=address
caused by LIM
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59908
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59691
--- Comment #2 from Balaji V. Iyer bviyer at gmail dot com ---
Hello Bernd,
I don't have a pentium 2 machine readily available. Can you try this patch
and see if it works for you?
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
diff --git
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59691
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Balaji V. Iyer from comment #2)
Hello Bernd,
I don't have a pentium 2 machine readily available. Can you try this
patch and see if it works for you?
This is not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59691
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com ---
On 01/22/14 10:45, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59691
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59906
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=59909
Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59482
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Jan 22 18:08:01 2014
New Revision: 206933
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206933root=gccview=rev
Log:
/cp
2014-01-22 Ville Voutilainen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59909
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 31922
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31922action=edit
Proposed patch to fix the problem
Split quad-memory support into two options,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59909
Bug ID: 59909
Summary: Quad memory bootstrap issues on little endian
powerpc64 power8 systems
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59909
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 31923
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31923action=edit
Patch back ported to the ibm/gcc-4_8-branch
Back ported patch to ibm/gcc-4_8-branch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59379
--- Comment #21 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Wed Jan 22 18:28:30 2014
New Revision: 206934
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206934root=gccview=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2014-01-20 Uros Bizjak
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59880
--- Comment #11 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Wed Jan 22 18:28:30 2014
New Revision: 206934
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206934root=gccview=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2014-01-20 Uros Bizjak
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56779
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major |normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59379
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59482
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59886
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59656
--- Comment #7 from Paul Pluzhnikov ppluzhnikov at google dot com ---
Created attachment 31924
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31924action=edit
Alternate fix from Kyle Lippincott
Alternate patch, courtesy Kyle Lippincott
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59029
Volker Reichelt reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59477
--- Comment #8 from Vladimir Makarov vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Wed Jan 22 19:38:47 2014
New Revision: 206938
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206938root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-01-22 Vladimir Makarov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58764
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Jan 22 19:46:44 2014
New Revision: 206939
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206939root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/58764
* include/bits/stl_deque.h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44107
--- Comment #30 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Denis Excoffier from comment #29)
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #28)
Well, there is a fix - which is to update
/usr/lib/libgcc_s.dylib to a non-buggy version.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58764
--- Comment #10 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org ---
vector() _GLIBCXX_NOEXCEPT : _Base() { }
list() _GLIBCXX_NOEXCEPT
I think that's wrong, the default construction of the allocator may throw,
hence the conditional
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59880
--- Comment #12 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Wed Jan 22 19:57:30 2014
New Revision: 206940
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206940root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/59880
* config/i386/i386.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59880
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58764
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
OK, I'll make the noexcept conditional, which will mean losing it in C++03
mode.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59575
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=59910
Bug ID: 59910
Summary: ICE in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at
fortran/trans-array.c:5327
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59672
--- Comment #5 from David Woodhouse dwmw2 at infradead dot org ---
Note that LLVM/clang has a -m16 option now which does the same thing. Again,
not needing dirty hacks to ensure that asm(.code16gcc) really *is* the first
thing the assembler sees.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59477
Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59597
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law law at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: law
Date: Wed Jan 22 21:27:38 2014
New Revision: 206941
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206941root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/59597
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59597
Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59472
Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53252
Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59880
--- Comment #14 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Jan 22 22:01:00 2014
New Revision: 206942
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206942root=gccview=rev
Log:
Backport gcc.target/i386/pr59880.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59893
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #0)
It may be as easy as adding the flags to C(XX)FLAGS_FOR_TARGET
With a trivial fix for PR 43538, this works. However, we then hit PR 59472.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59891
--- Comment #10 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Jan 22 22:15:12 2014
New Revision: 206944
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206944root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c/59891
c/
* c-typeck.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59891
--- Comment #11 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Jan 22 22:20:14 2014
New Revision: 206945
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206945root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c/59891
c/
* c-typeck.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59891
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59672
--- Comment #6 from H. Peter Anvin hpa at zytor dot com ---
This could also be implemented in binutils as a --code16gcc option, in which
case gcc users would have to use -m32 -Wa,--code16gcc. Ugly but would work.
1 - 100 of 184 matches
Mail list logo
