when compiled with
-std=c++14;
// -std=c++11 compiles fine.
// g++ -std=c++14 test.cpp
// Tested with:
// g++ (GCC) 5.0.0 20150308 (experimental)
// g++ (GCC) 5.0.0 20150323 (experimental)
struct A
{
int x;
char y; // Actually, short and bool (types smaller than int?) trigger this
ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60408
Jim Wilson wilson at tuliptree dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilson at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60408
--- Comment #3 from Jim Wilson wilson at tuliptree dot org ---
Even if we could fix the vec_extract constraints, we still end up with 3
instructions, as the optimizer can't do anything interesting with the
vec_extract RTL.
For a 32-bit SFmode
Hello Vladimir:
Did you get a chance to look at the below patch.
Thanks Regards
Ajit
-Original Message-
From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On
Behalf Of Ajit Kumar Agarwal
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 11:25 AM
To: vmaka...@redhat.com; Jeff
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64967
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65147
--- Comment #3 from Alexey Lapshin alexey.lapshin at oracle dot com ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #2)
This does seem like a bug.
What is a proper behavior for G++ in this case ?
should it always align std::atomic object of size 8
Hi!
Since recent gimplifier changes, memcpy at least on some architectures might
not be folded already during gimplification, so we need to wait until ccp1.
Regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, tested with hppa-linux
cross-compiler too, ok for trunk?
2015-03-23 Jakub Jelinek
On March 23, 2015 8:56:32 PM GMT+01:00, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi!
Since recent gimplifier changes, memcpy at least on some architectures
might
not be folded already during gimplification, so we need to wait until
ccp1.
Regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, tested with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64967
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Mar 23 16:47:18 2015
New Revision: 221600
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221600root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/64967
* acinclude.m4: Disable
This restores bootstrap for --enable-symvers=gnu-versioned-namespace
by disabling the new std::string ABI.
After GCC 5.1 (probably for GCC 6, rather than 5.2) I will make
another attempt to make gnu-versioned-namespace use the new
std::string only (and bump the soname from libstdc++.so.7 to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65515
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This is from:
644 else if (TREE_CODE (expr) == FUNCTION_TYPE
645 || TREE_CODE (expr) == METHOD_TYPE)
646DFS_follow_tree_edge (TYPE_ARG_TYPES (expr));
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65528
Bug ID: 65528
Summary: [mpx] internal compiler error: in
expand_expr_addr_expr_1, at expr.c:7761
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65530
Bug ID: 65530
Summary: [meta-bug] -mmpx -fcheck-pointer-bounds failures
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 14:45:55 +, Julian Brown wrote:
On Fri, 6 Mar 2015 17:01:13 +0300
Ilya Verbin iver...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 20:25:11 +0300, Ilya Verbin wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:36:08 +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Julian Brown
Hi!
On the following testcase we ICE, because we don't verify we have the
ERF_RETURNS_ARG argument, on non-verified builtins that is possible.
Other uses of ERF_RETURNS_ARG seem to verify it.
Also, there was an unneeded extra gimple_call_return_flags call,
the condition has already checked that
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:39 AM, Andrew Pinski pins...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Shawn Landden shawnland...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Andrew Pinski pins...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Shawn Landden shawnland...@gmail.com
Hi,
This patch adds bootstrap-mpx.mk so that we test mpx in gcc build by
configuring GCC with
--enable-libmpx --with-build-config=bootstrap-mpx
OK to install?
H.J.
---
2015-03-23 H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com
* bootstrap-mpx.mk: New file.
diff --git a/config/bootstrap-mpx.mk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59256
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65523
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Mar 23 20:03:50 2015
New Revision: 221606
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221606root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/65523
* tree-chkp.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65506
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Mar 23 20:04:43 2015
New Revision: 221607
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221607root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-03-23 Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65506
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65523
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65505
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 10:10 PM, Oleg Endo oleg.e...@t-online.de wrote:
The PBQP approach is indeed very tempting, but there
are a lot more things to it than just the solver. To get good
improvements of the generated code, the optimization also has to be able
to reorder memory accesses and
Le 23/03/2015 16:49, Andre Vehreschild a écrit :
I see your point. Currently I am bootstraping and regtesting some patches for
commit. While this is running, my machine is nearly unusable. I will look into
this as soon, as my machine allows, but probably not before tomorrow.
There is no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65529
Bug ID: 65529
Summary: [5 Regression][SH] gcc.dg/pr29215.c failing
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65475
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Mar 23 19:51:51 2015
New Revision: 221605
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221605root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR ipa/65475
* g++.dg/lto/pr65475_0.C: Use
On March 23, 2015 8:54:54 PM GMT+01:00, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi!
On the following testcase we ICE, because we don't verify we have the
ERF_RETURNS_ARG argument, on non-verified builtins that is possible.
Other uses of ERF_RETURNS_ARG seem to verify it.
Also, there was an unneeded
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65521
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35104
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35104action=edit
testcase for x86_64
Also happens on x86_64:
% gcc -c -fcompare-debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65521
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64952
--- Comment #6 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com paul.richard.thomas
at gmail dot com ---
Dear Mikael,
The pureness is also confused by the C pure, which is whiter than
white pure. I agree with your last remark about the standards
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65521
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
struct socket {
int sk;
};
selinux_task_getioprio(struct task_struct *p) {
return current_has_perm(p, 256UL);
}
selinux_task_getscheduler(struct task_struct *p) {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65519
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
On Fri, 20 Mar 2015, David Malcolm wrote:
On Thu, 2015-03-12 at 14:20 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
After noticing tree-parloop.c passing crap to split_block (a tree
rather than a gimple or an rtx) I noticed those CFG functions simply
take void * pointers. The following patch fixes that
Hi,
I'd like to ping for this patch, which I hope can still go in the gcc-5 release:
See https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-03/msg00817.html for the
patch files.
Thanks,
Bernd.
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 11:53:00 +0100
Hi,
when looking at the m68k I realized the following, which is
a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63587
--- Comment #16 from Yvan Roux yroux at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: yroux
Date: Mon Mar 23 09:50:33 2015
New Revision: 221589
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221589root=gccview=rev
Log:
gcc/
2015-03-23 Yvan Roux yvan.r...@linaro.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64952
--- Comment #5 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mikael
Date: Mon Mar 23 07:53:31 2015
New Revision: 221586
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221586root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-03-23 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz writes:
* ipa-devirt.c: Include demangle.h
This breaks ada.
../libiberty/libiberty.a(cplus-dem.o): In function `ada_demangle':
/usr/local/gcc/gcc-20150323/Build/libiberty/../../libiberty/cplus-dem.c:895:
multiple definition of `ada_demangle'
ada/adadecode.o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65504
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64813
--- Comment #23 from Yvan Roux yroux at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: yroux
Date: Mon Mar 23 09:55:34 2015
New Revision: 221590
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221590root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-03-23 Yvan Roux yvan.r...@linaro.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65520
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65521
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #35105|0 |1
is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65238
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 9:38 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 08:00:33PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
2015-03-18 Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com
PR rtl-optimization/60851
* recog.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65521
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8270
--- Comment #57 from Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to doug mcilroy from comment #56)
(In reply to Kai Tietz from comment #55)
Comment #55 overlooks the Standard's translation phase 1, which replaces an
implementation-defined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65515
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=65494
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
Hi,
May this patch go into trunk at this point? It is very important for
dynamic MPX codes.
Thanks,
Ilya
2015-03-18 14:56 GMT+03:00 Ilya Enkovich enkovich@gmail.com:
Hi,
This patch fixes PR target/65444 by passing '-z bndplt' to linker when
appropriate. Bootstrapped and tested on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65516
--- Comment #8 from David Kredba nheghathivhistha at gmail dot com ---
Svn revision 221590 fails bootstrap in gnat1 so I cannot test your patch.
../libiberty/libiberty.a(cplus-dem.o): In function `ada_demangle':
cplus-dem.c:(.text+0xdb8):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65238
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Mar 23 08:02:39 2015
New Revision: 221587
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221587root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR preprocessor/65238
* internal.h
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 02:07:28PM +0530, Umesh Kalappa wrote:
Hi All ,
GCC 4.8.3 ,pop up with below error
/home/i16382/an.c:13:18: error: duplicate member 'bOriginator'
unsigned bOriginator;
^
for the case
union
{
struct
{
unsigned
Hi Joern,
I have a small patch for ARC backend that fixes the value of instruction
length attribute when the instruction is predicated. Ok to apply?
Why would the arc_bdr_iscond test have any effect?
arc_predicate_delay_insns should render the issue moot.
I need to double check the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65513
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65513
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
Hi Paul,
thanks for the reviews. Let me ask one questions before I do something wrong.
You have reviewed and approved (with changes) the patches:
- vtab_access_rework1_v1.patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2015-03/msg00074.html
- vtab_access_rework2_v1.patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65508
ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65499
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
Dear Andre,
I am persuaded by the arguments of Jerry and Dominique that this is
good for trunk. Please commit as early as possible in order that any
regressions can be caught, if possible, before release.
Thanks
Paul
On 21 March 2015 at 15:11, Paul Richard Thomas
paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65521
Bug ID: 65521
Summary: [5 Regression] nondeterministic -fcompare-debug
failures
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65521
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35102
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35102action=edit
unreduced testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65443
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #35092|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65518
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65522
Bug ID: 65522
Summary: Svn revision 221590 fails bootstrap -
../libiberty/libiberty.a(cplus-dem.o): In function
`ada_demangle': cplus-dem.c:(.text+0xdb8): multiple
I resent change causes ada no longer to bootstrap
multiple definition of ada_demangle
/usr/local/src/gcc4.3/src/libiberty/cplus-dem.c:895: multiple definition
of `ada_demangle'
ada/adadecode.o:/usr/local/src/gcc4.3/src/gcc/ada/adadecode.c:374: first
defined here
graham
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65517
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65506
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65505
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65168
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65473
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Louis Dionne from comment #0)
One would expect that including _any_ header from the standard library
defines the relevant detection macros.
That's not true for most
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65521
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Though, judging from the fact that we print symtab_node::order into the
-fdump-final-insns= dumps:
;; Function selinux_ops (selinux_ops, funcdef_no=4, cgraph_uid=4,
symbol_order=4)
it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65498
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65519
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
On 2015-03-23 12:35 PM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
Hello All:
Did you get a chance to look at the below patch.
Thanks Regards
Ajit
-Original Message-
From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On
Behalf Of Ajit Kumar Agarwal
Sent: Wednesday,
A first draft of TS 18661-5 (Floating-point extensions for C:
Supplementary attributes) is now available. Note that this does yet not
include alternate exception handling, which is likely to be the most
problematic area for this part.
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1919.pdf
FWIW, you have to be very careful depending on REG_POINTER. I believe
Ada can still set REG_POINTER on things that are not pointers (via
virtual origins) and cross jumping can cause problems too where one arm
has x + y with X as the pointer and the other arm has x + y with Y as
the pointer.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65529
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65506
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olegendo at gcc
Sorry, for postponing it. I was going to do this when stage1 starts.
After reading this today I have some comments. I believe the copy
frequency should be not changed. If you want coalesce copies according
the frequency of loop back edges on which the allocno involved in given
copy lives
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62051
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
Yes, though I think for such a class we probably want to consider all virtual
methods unreachable unless they have explicit default visibility; in the
testcase the main program isn't
Hello All:
Did you get a chance to look at the below patch.
Thanks Regards
Ajit
-Original Message-
From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On
Behalf Of Ajit Kumar Agarwal
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 3:57 PM
To: vmaka...@redhat.com; GCC Patches
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 04:07:10PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 11:11:24PM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
--- testsuite/g++.dg/lto/pr65475b_0.C (revision 0)
+++ testsuite/g++.dg/lto/pr65475b_0.C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65147
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I think std::atomicT should increase the alignment of its T member. That will
have the advantage of being layout-compatible with _Atomic T.
The patch below fixes a failure of the test on powerpc64.
The test looks for the lxv (Load VSX Vector) instruction
which is emitted on powerpc64le but on powerpc64 gcc emits
an lvx (Load Vector Indexed). Both are correct here.
Is this okay to commit to trunk?
Martin
diff --git
Martin Sebor mse...@redhat.com writes:
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler \t\(lxv|lvsr|stxv\) } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler \t\(lvx|lxv|lvsr|stxv\) } } */
You might want to remove the backslashes before the parens, which are
ignored anyway.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65515
--- Comment #5 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2015-03-23 12:39 PM, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Doesn't seem to be specific to hppa, on x86_64-linux I can reproduce it as
well, and need ulimit -s 46000 to pass.
The Fedora default
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63175
--- Comment #38 from Martin Sebor msebor at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: msebor
Date: Mon Mar 23 17:37:25 2015
New Revision: 221601
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221601root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-03-23 Martin Sebor mse...@redhat.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65515
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|hppa64-hp-hpux11.11 |
The patch below fixes a failure of the test on powerpc64.
The test looks for the lxv (Load VSX Vector) instruction
which is emitted on powerpc64le but on powerpc64 gcc emits
an lvx (Load Vector Indexed). Both are correct here.
Is this okay to commit to trunk?
+ PR testsuite/63175
+ *
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65526
Bug ID: 65526
Summary: testsuite checks for arm vectorization support on
non-arm targets
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
GCC can be compiled for aarch64 target with busybox sed except for
the geniterators.sh script which uses nonstandard basic regex.
I explicitly set LC_ALL=C too because the regex depends on collation
order.
I tested that the script gives the same result on iterators.md.
Ok?
gcc/Changelog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65524
--- Comment #2 from yuta tomino demoonlit at panathenaia dot halfmoon.jp ---
Created attachment 35115
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35115action=edit
example
I found the way of reproducing.
A tiny change of a-tags.ads is
In any case, for compatibility, this patch just changes the guard so that
adadecode.c's ada_demangle is compiled only into libgnat*.{a,so} and not
into gnat1, which can then successfully link against libiberty
cplus-dem.o.
The ipa-devirt.c change is obvious IMHO, the same header is
On 03/23/2015 09:07 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
As expand_set_or_movmem_prologue_epilogue_by_misaligned_moves uses
src = src - (adjusted_dest - dest)
without proper REG_POINTER flags the aliasing code is very easily confused
on what is really a pointer and what is not - as REG_POINTER was
Hi,
On 23 March 2015 at 17:08, Ramana Radhakrishnan
ramana@googlemail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Yvan Roux yvan.r...@linaro.org wrote:
Hi,
This is a fix for PR64208 where LRA loops when dealing with
iwmmxt_arm_movdi insn. As explain in the PR, the issue was introduced
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62051
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #5)
I suppose we could make C++ FE to track if a type has methods with
visibility default declared (I can't track that from symbol table as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65296
--- Comment #7 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: gjl
Date: Mon Mar 23 18:19:01 2015
New Revision: 221602
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221602root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/65296
* config/avr/driver-avr.c
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Andrew Pinski pins...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Shawn Landden shawnland...@gmail.com wrote:
direct-declarator:
( type-qualifier[opt] type-specifier *[opt] identifier[opt] ) .
function-definition
call like so:
type.foo(baz);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65516
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
this was also my bug. Sorry for that. It is fixed on current mainlie.
__alignof__ (max_align_t) appears to be stuck at 16, even though some
AVX512 operations require 512 byte alignment.
Is this intentional? There are arguments for (more ABI compatibility)
and against (max_align_t is misleading) this behavior.
--
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security
101 - 200 of 230 matches
Mail list logo
