I am trying to access the virtual table.
My pass is hooked after pass_ipa_pta.
Consider Class A which contains virtual function.
An object created as :
A a;
is translated in GIMPLE as
struct A a;
From variable a we can get its type which is struct A.
I tried to see how the
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:17 PM, Jeff Prothero jprot...@altera.com wrote:
Hi, I'm having trouble based on available docs like
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/LTO.html
in understanding just what the gcc LTO framework is
intended to be architecturally capable of.
As a concrete
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
Hi,
I went through excercise of running LTO bootstrap with ODR verification on.
There are some typename clashes
I guess we want to fix. I wonder what approach is preferred, do we want to
introduce anonymous
namespaces for
a newer patch (v8) I'll send soon
attached with updated changelog. Compared to the previously posted v6, only the
libstdc++-v3/testsuite/Makefile.am has been refined to split a little more the
e*/* pattern, and two quickly running goal have been merged, in addition to
fixing the pre-exisiting
On 12/09/14 09:47 +, VandeVondele Joost wrote:
a newer patch (v8) I'll send soon
attached with updated changelog. Compared to the previously posted v6, only the
libstdc++-v3/testsuite/Makefile.am has been refined to split a little more the
e*/* pattern, and two quickly running goal have
On Friday 12 September 2014 12:14 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
I am trying to access the virtual table.
My pass is hooked after pass_ipa_pta.
Consider Class A which contains virtual function.
An object created as :
A a;
is translated in GIMPLE as
struct A a;
From variable a we can get its
Hi Maxim,
Many thanks for your leadership and hard work administering this.
I would be interested in reading about the results of the projects and
evaluations. Please student (and mentors), could you provide some
details?
Maxim, would it be possible to add this year projects to
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 09:47:00AM +, VandeVondele Joost wrote:
Obviously, if Jakub's patch can be made to work around the testsuite
special cases, I believe it should be superior. If not, the attached
patch is working as far as I can tell, and provides a significant
improvement over
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 06:32:41PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
Oh, forgot to say, PR56408 isn't fixed by this patch, but given the
higher granularity (10 tests instead of 1) we don't happen to trigger it
right now.
Jakub
Regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
Oh, forgot to say, PR56408 isn't fixed by this patch, but given the
higher granularity (10 tests instead of 1) we don't happen to trigger it
right now.
which means that any commit to that dir could trigger it, right ?
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 04:36:05PM +, VandeVondele Joost wrote:
Regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
Oh, forgot to say, PR56408 isn't fixed by this patch, but given the
higher granularity (10 tests instead of 1) we don't happen to trigger it
right now.
which means that any
On Sep 12, 2014, at 9:32 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
Here is my latest version of the patch.
With this patch I get identical test_summary output on make -k check
(completely serial testing) and make -j48 -k check from toplevel directory.
Major changes since last version:
1)
So, I’d love to see the numbers for 5 and 20 to double check that 10 is the
right number to pick. This sort of refinement is trivial post checkin.
So, some timings with the patch, I think this is great.
Doing the testing you suggest, changing the variable doesn't influence things
much (at
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 10:16:12AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
Hi,
I went through excercise of running LTO bootstrap with ODR verification on.
There are some typename clashes
I guess we want to fix. I wonder what
On Sep 12, 2014, at 9:32 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
Here is my latest version of the patch.
I did a timing test:
Before:
real0m57.198s
user1m24.736s
sys 0m19.816s
after:
real0m28.224s
user1m27.823s
sys 0m22.374s
This is a -j70 run on a 64 core power7
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 04:42:25PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
curious, when I run atomic.exp=stdatom\*.c:
gcc.dg/atomic/atomic.exp completed in 30 seconds.
atomic.exp=c\*.c takes 522 seconds with 3, 2, 5 and 4 being the worst
offenders.
That's the
@if [ -z $(filter-out
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63235
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Maybe this is why bootstrap is even more important :).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63224
--- Comment #7 from Sebastian Huber sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de ---
I reduced the test case using the delta tool to:
void foo(void);
void bar(int s, int *a)
{
int i;
int c;
for (i = 0; s != 0 (c = a[i]); ++i) {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63237
Bug ID: 63237
Summary: [5 Regression] error: invalid operand in unary
operation
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63224
--- Comment #8 from Sebastian Huber sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de ---
Actually the for loop is not necessary.
int bar(int s, int *a)
{
int c;
int r;
r = s != 0 (c = a[s]);
if (s == 2 c == 0) {
} else if (s != 0) {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63237
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63237
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63229
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63220
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to davidxl from comment #2)
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
First of all you should mark the functions 'inline' as well.
This does not help.
Then
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63172
--- Comment #4 from Dominik Vogt vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---
On s390x, the option -fcx-limited-range fixes the deviation in the C test
program (tried with -O0 and -O3), but it has no effect for the Go test program.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56974
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63238
Bug ID: 63238
Summary: DWARF does not represent _Alignas
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62631
--- Comment #9 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I think that's easiest for Eric to say.
Not really, I guess you want to debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63239
Bug ID: 63239
Summary: DWARF does not represent C++ deleted methods
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63237
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Sep 12 11:06:49 2014
New Revision: 215212
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215212root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-09-12 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63237
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63240
Bug ID: 63240
Summary: DWARF does not represent C++ defaulted methods
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16063
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59603
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jörg Richter from comment #2)
Seems like we have hit this bug too. It happens not only in debug mode. We
have a testcase that triggers valgrind errors in non-debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16063
Mark Wielaard mark at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63241
Bug ID: 63241
Summary: Internal error in gimplify_init_constructor when using
constexr and multidimensional arrays
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62631
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63242
Bug ID: 63242
Summary: memory starvation caused by flatten attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59603
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Sep 12 13:30:35 2014
New Revision: 215219
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215219root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/59603
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59603
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Fixed on trunk so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63243
Bug ID: 63243
Summary: [meta-bug] RH GDB project tracker
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63224
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56654
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59500
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57832
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63239
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dodji at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62084
Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||addr-space,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63201
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Sep 12 14:39:25 2014
New Revision: 215226
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215226root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/63201
* decl.c (start_decl): Handle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63226
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 33478
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33478action=edit
Second test file pair (1/2): one37.ii
namespace std {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63226
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 33479
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33479action=edit
Second test file pair (1/2): two22.ii
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61848
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63201
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63226
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #5)
Created attachment 33478 [details]
Second test file pair (1/2): one37.ii
Mixed up the fields ... That should have been the attachment -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63242
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63242
--- Comment #2 from wbrana wbrana at gmail dot com ---
How I can create such testcase?
I can reproduce it on Gentoo by adding -flto to /etc/portage/make.conf
and running: emerge xf86-video-intel
but can't reproduce from command-line
gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62265
Teresa Johnson tejohnson at google dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tejohnson at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63243
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63205
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63244
Bug ID: 63244
Summary: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-g++: internal compiler error:
Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
--enable-lto --with-cloog
--disable-isl-version-check
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.9.2-alpha20140911 20140912 (prerelease) [gcc-4_9-branch revision
215199] (Gentoo 4.9.2_alpha20140911)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63244
--- Comment #2 from David Kredba nheghathivhistha at gmail dot com ---
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-g++ -m32 -std=c++11 -fvisibility=hidden -flto=4
-fuse-linker-plugin -O2 -ggdb -pipe -march=core2 -mtune=core2 -mno-3dnow
-mno-sse4.2 -mno-avx -mno-xop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63245
Bug ID: 63245
Summary: renderMemorySnippet shouldn't show more bytes than the
underlying type
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61654
--- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri Sep 12 16:52:24 2014
New Revision: 215228
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215228root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-09-12 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61654
Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63244
--- Comment #3 from David Kredba nheghathivhistha at gmail dot com ---
C-Reduce in progress.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61142
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I've tried the above test case with LRA on (sh-lra branch, not fully working
yet) and it produces the following code:
mov r5,r0
mov.b @(r0,r4),r0
cmp/eq
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63244
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63246
Bug ID: 63246
Summary: OpenMP target: gimplifier produces unsuitable implicit
map clauses if inside a data region
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63235
--- Comment #5 from Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org ---
Created attachment 33482
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33482action=edit
use ifdef instead of builtin_cpu_supports
This patch fixes the problem for me.
Just
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63247
Bug ID: 63247
Summary: fortran array alignment in omp target map
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50751
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||55212
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63235
--- Comment #6 from Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org ---
Created attachment 33483
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33483action=edit
Preprocessed file from the cilk runtime library
I'm not sure it'll help you because
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59400
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||55212
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63248
Bug ID: 63248
Summary: Crash when OpenMP target's array section handling is
used with templates
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openmp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60894
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|4.10.0 |5.0
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63244
--- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(gdb) bt
#0 analyze_functions () at ../../gcc/gcc/cgraphunit.c:1042
#1 0x006e03f0 in finalize_compilation_unit () at
../../gcc/gcc/cgraphunit.c:2326
#2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63244
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.3 |4.9.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34777
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||55212
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63249
Bug ID: 63249
Summary: [OpenMP] Spurious »set but not used« warnings when
actually used in OpenMP target's array section's
lower-bound and length
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63235
--- Comment #7 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andi Kleen from comment #6)
Created attachment 33483 [details]
Preprocessed file from the cilk runtime library
I'm not sure it'll help you because you would
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63247
Thomas Schwinge tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openmp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63244
--- Comment #6 from David Kredba nheghathivhistha at gmail dot com ---
For the record only, git version of c-reduce returned
namespace std {
template typename struct less;
template typename struct add_rvalue_reference;
template typename _Tp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63244
--- Comment #7 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
When one uses a naive test script one arrives at the testcase
from comment 4. Using a differential script (-O2 vs. -flto -O2 -g)
one gets:
markus@x4 /tmp % cat context2.ii
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59500
--- Comment #3 from Andy Lutomirski luto at mit dot edu ---
Created attachment 33484
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33484action=edit
Headerless reproducer (c++ only)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59500
--- Comment #4 from Andy Lutomirski luto at mit dot edu ---
Created attachment 33485
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33485action=edit
Output from g++ -O2 -Wall -fdump-tree-all-all-lineno pr59500.cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63246
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61909
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54316
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56193
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62052
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63235
--- Comment #8 from Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org ---
Yes it doesn't happen when compiling with 4.8 branch tip. So has been fixed.
Anyways i'm still going to submit the patch to make the opensuse 13.1 build
work again. I don't think
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63235
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Andi Kleen from comment #8)
Yes it doesn't happen when compiling with 4.8 branch tip. So has been fixed.
Anyways i'm still going to submit the patch to make the opensuse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63235
--- Comment #10 from Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org ---
Ok fair enough.
Can do the runtime check in the else of the ifdef then.
Then at least x86_64 or 32bit with SSE would work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63250
Bug ID: 63250
Summary: Complex fp16 arithmetic uses nonexistent libgcc
functions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59500
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63251
Bug ID: 63251
Summary: tsan: corrupted shadow stack
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: sanitizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63252
Bug ID: 63252
Summary: [5 Regression] tree_class_check_failed
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63253
Bug ID: 63253
Summary: boot strap failure due to ODR warnings
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63253
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2014-09/msg00161.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61848
--- Comment #11 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com ---
It boots
Linux version 3.17.0-rc4-00222-gc73f6fd-dirty (anton@tul181p1) (gcc version
5.0.0 20140912 (experimental) (GCC) ) #23 SMP Fri Sep 12 21:19:06 UTC 2014
1 - 100 of 193 matches
Mail list logo
