https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65754
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
On 03/16/2015 04:12 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
Eyeballing the mult_by_coeff_cost function I think it has a typo/bug.
It's supposed to return the cost of multiplying by a constant 'coeff'.
It calculates that by taking the cost of a MULT rtx by that constant
and comparing it to the cost of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65754
Bug ID: 65754
Summary: [5 Regression] missing exports for fstream
constructors
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
On 04/13/2015 10:57 AM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
This tries to rewrite this paragraph to something I could have
understood without reading thrice. What do you think?
Gerald
2015-04-13 Gerald Pfeifer ger...@pfeifer.com
* doc/plugins.texi (Plugins): Rewrite first introductory paragraph.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65749
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor msebor at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Replacing the computation:
uptr pc = GetPreviousInstructionPc(trace[i]);
with the assignment:
uptr pc = trace[i];
makes the PC in active frame in the stack trace consistent
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
b.cc:5:25: warning: requested alignment 16 is larger than 8 [-Wattributes]
alignas (16) char x[16];
which is mysterious (where does the 8 come from?), until I grep
the error string and find
On 04/03/2015 07:48 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 03/20/2015 08:11 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
+ /* For class scoped static functions, the dumped early
+ version was the declaration, whereas the next time
+ around with a different context should be the
+
This fixes a regression I introduced by not exporting some of the
fstream constructors (the C2 base object ones) when using the new
std::string. Sorry for not finding this myself before the RC.
All the recently-updated baseline_symbols.txt files need updating. I
did this with sed and sort, and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64206
drepper.fsp+rhbz at gmail dot com drepper.fsp+rhbz at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com ---
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015, gcc at robbertkrebbers dot nl wrote:
NB 1: I do not think that DR #260 applies here
Why not? It seems clear enough that optimizations
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65753
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Monakov amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
For a simpler testcase:
void g(void (*f)(void))
{
f();
}
gcc/cc1 -fPIC -O2 -m32:
g:
subl$12, %esp
call*16(%esp)
addl$12, %esp
ret
Here %ebx
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65754
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Patch posted to https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg00605.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65754
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Apr 13 18:41:42 2015
New Revision: 222059
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222059root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/65754
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64206
--- Comment #10 from David Malcolm dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to drepper.fsp+r...@gmail.com from comment #9)
Created attachment 35307 [details]
Little hello world
Probably copied from the documentation, nothing special.
You
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64206
--- Comment #11 from David Malcolm dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #10)
You need something
something like, I meant to say
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65755
Bug ID: 65755
Summary: incorrect reflection of struct fields with gccgo
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65754
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Apr 13 19:25:53 2015
New Revision: 222060
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222060root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/65754
*
On 13/04/15 20:37 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 07:28:30PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
This fixes a regression I introduced by not exporting some of the
fstream constructors (the C2 base object ones) when using the new
std::string. Sorry for not finding this myself
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65479
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor msebor at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35308
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35308action=edit
Patch tested on powerp64*-*-*
This patch lets the affected tests pass on powerp64*-*-*
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 07:28:30PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
This fixes a regression I introduced by not exporting some of the
fstream constructors (the C2 base object ones) when using the new
std::string. Sorry for not finding this myself before the RC.
All the recently-updated
Kirill Yukhin kirill.yuk...@gmail.com writes:
Hello Rainer,
On 08 Apr 15:27, Rainer Orth wrote:
Ok for mainline?
Patch is ok, thanks!
Thanks. How about the gcc-5 branch? It would be good to avoid those
failures there, too.
Rainer
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64206
--- Comment #9 from drepper.fsp+rhbz at gmail dot com drepper.fsp+rhbz at
gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 35307
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35307action=edit
Little hello world
Probably copied from the documentation,
On 13 Apr 21:16, Rainer Orth wrote:
Kirill Yukhin kirill.yuk...@gmail.com writes:
Hello Rainer,
On 08 Apr 15:27, Rainer Orth wrote:
Ok for mainline?
Patch is ok, thanks!
Thanks. How about the gcc-5 branch? It would be good to avoid those
failures there, too.
Definetely! OK for
PR c++/61636
* g++.dg/cpp1y/pr61636.C: New test.
---
gcc/cp/parser.c | 16
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/pr61636.C | 19 +++
2 files changed, 35 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/pr61636.C
diff --git
Hi Jason,
I finally scraped some time together to look into these two generic
lambda default capture bugs and believe I have a solution. Still have
to run tests but I thought I'd get these out for your perusal whilst I
rebase onto origin/master and run the testsuite.
Cheers,
Adam
PR c++/64382
* g++.dg/cpp1y/pr64382.C: New test.
---
gcc/cp/cp-tree.h | 1 +
gcc/cp/parser.c | 21 +
gcc/cp/semantics.c | 8 +---
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/pr64382.C | 23 +++
On 04/13/2015 05:04 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 04/13/2015 02:01 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
...or perhaps we could change the condition to:
if ((is_cu_die (old_die-die_parent)
+ || old_die-die_parent-die_tag == DW_TAG_module
|| context_die == NULL
Does checking
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65754
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
On 04/13/2015 02:01 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
...or perhaps we could change the condition to:
if ((is_cu_die (old_die-die_parent)
+ || old_die-die_parent-die_tag == DW_TAG_module
|| context_die == NULL
Does checking context_die == old_die-die_parent work?
Jason
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
Hello,
just a simple pattern for match.pd. I am ignoring the issue of whether
isnan
is the same as isunordered, I am only combining
Kirill Yukhin kirill.yuk...@gmail.com writes:
On 13 Apr 21:16, Rainer Orth wrote:
Kirill Yukhin kirill.yuk...@gmail.com writes:
Hello Rainer,
On 08 Apr 15:27, Rainer Orth wrote:
Ok for mainline?
Patch is ok, thanks!
Thanks. How about the gcc-5 branch? It would be good to avoid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65755
--- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com ---
Thanks, here is a small test case.
package main
import (
reflect
)
type S1 struct{}
func (S1) Fix() string {
type s struct {
f int
}
return
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 3:43 AM, Ilya Enkovich enkovich@gmail.com wrote:
2015-03-23 22:27 GMT+03:00 H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.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
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65750
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abutcher at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65750
--- Comment #3 from Adam Butcher abutcher at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Agreed. Upon seeing the 'auto' in the parameter list, we'll synthesize a
template parameter for 'g'. I think Paolo added the diagnostic for virtual to
fix an ICE.
I'm not sure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65756
Bug ID: 65756
Summary: undefined reference to __atomic_store for odd-sized
std::atomicT
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65756
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
You need to link to libatomic for objects with sizes that aren't supported
natively by the CPU.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65757
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65758
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 5:26 AM, Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de wrote:
This fixes missed tracking of alignment of non-invariant addresses
in CCP.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, queued for GCC 6.
Richard.
2015-02-25 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58638
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
The patch applied cleanly - this is what I got as a result:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2015-04/msg01450.html
I hope this is useful.
ok, so the problem would seem to be graphite-scop-detection.c is
including front end specific headers. Can you put a #error in cp-tree.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752
--- Comment #3 from Robbert gcc at robbertkrebbers dot nl ---
(In reply to Robbert from comment #2)
* Writing the representation of a chunk of memory containing pointers to
memory.
to memory should be to disk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64296
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
Hi,
while looking on a testcase, i noticed that for simple code
if (param 6.0)
BB1;
else
BB2;
the inline predicates currectly determine (param 6.0) predicate
for BB1, but they give (true) predicate to BB2 unless -fno-trapping-math is
specified. This is because
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65758
Bug ID: 65758
Summary: [6 Regression] 191.fma3d in SPEC CPU 200 failed to
build
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65756
Martin Sebor msebor at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65757
Bug ID: 65757
Summary: gfortran gives incorrect result for anint with real*16
argument
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64382
Adam Butcher abutcher at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752
--- Comment #2 from Robbert gcc at robbertkrebbers dot nl ---
This example may seem academic, but there is a real problem underneath.
Of course, I do agree that optimizations based on pointer origins are useful,
but it is not an all or nothing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65756
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor msebor at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Interesting. For some programs and libraries, GCC too gives a diagnostic
that's more helpful than just: undefined reference to `foo'
/usr/bin/ld: /tmp/cccCqEak.o: undefined
Hello!
2015-04-14 Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com
* config/i386/predicates.md (any_QIreg_operand): Rename from
q_regs_operand. Do not process subregs.
(QIreg_operand): Use QI_REGNO_P predicate.
(ext_QIreg_operand): Ditto.
(ext_register_operand): Ditto.
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65760
Bug ID: 65760
Summary: invalid use of incomplete type with
std::is_convertibleC, C
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
On 03/26/2015 05:28 PM, Steve Ellcey wrote:
The issue that I am trying to address is MSA registers on MIPS. The O32
MIPS ABI specifies an 8 byte aligned stack but MSA registers should be 16
byte aligned when spilled to memory. I don't see anyway to do this unless
we can force the stack to be
Hi!
To be clear I only want to talk about gcc/**/*.c but *not* testsuite/
The Question of changing from .c to a more standard C++ file extension
has come up a couple times. I believe its reasonable accurate to say
the consensus is moderately in favor of doing this at some point. The
biggest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65759
Bug ID: 65759
Summary: atomic_is_lock_free inconsistency between C and C++
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
On 03/15/2015 02:30 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Ilya Enkovich enkovich@gmail.com writes:
This patch allows propagation of loop invariants for i386 if propagated
value is a constant to be used in address operand. Bootstrapped and
tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. OK for trunk or stage
On 01/30/2015 11:04 PM, Chen Gang S wrote:
The related warning (cross compile tile with --disable-threads):
../../../../gcc-tile-new/libgcc/libgcov-interface.c: In function
'__gcov_fork':
../../../../gcc-tile-new/libgcc/libgcov-interface.c:182:53: warning: suggest
braces around empty
On 01/28/2015 12:03 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
Hi,
Turns out that the above patch applies without conflicts to two
functions in rtlanal.c: get_base_term(), for which the patch is
intended, and get_index_term(), for which the patch is not.
Due to git rebases and patch updates, I have
On 04/13/2015 02:26 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 3:43 AM, Ilya Enkovich enkovich@gmail.com wrote:
2015-03-23 22:27 GMT+03:00 H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com:
Hi,
This patch adds bootstrap-mpx.mk so that we test mpx in gcc build by
configuring GCC with
--enable-libmpx
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65710
--- Comment #33 from Terry Guo terry.guo at arm dot com ---
(In reply to clyon from comment #32)
2015-04-13 Terry Guo terry@arm.com
PR target/65710
* gcc.target/arm/pr65710.c: New.
Terry, any particular reason
Hello Rainer,
On 08 Apr 15:27, Rainer Orth wrote:
Ok for mainline?
Patch is ok, thanks!
--
K
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 12:54 AM, Jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@charter.net wrote:
Hi all,
The attached patch fixes this bug. It also eliminates non-freed memory
whenever
a format error occurs. Particular important when the user has use IOSTAT
and generate_error does not exit, but returns to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65753
--- Comment #1 from Alexander Monakov amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Example testcase:
void *lookup_f(void);
void g()
{
void (*f)(void) = lookup_f();
f();
}
With -O2 -fPIC, on x86-64 GCC produces the desired tail call:
g:
subq$8,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63387
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com ---
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
I am not sure about signalling NAN issues, but doesn't it otherwise also apply
to code like the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65744
--- Comment #2 from Kirill Yukhin kyukhin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35306
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35306action=edit
Proposed patch.
Conversion of decls of masked built-ins to make
masking unsigned
Hi,
this is simple change I made when i was debugging the Firefox wrong code.
I suspected we made a bogus devirtualization to function with wrong parameter
count. Obviously we have nothing to prevent this from happening, so it is
better to check it.
Honza
* ipa-profie.c (ipa_profile):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65742
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=65737
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 10:34:06PM +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
...a Honza/Gerald co-production. :-) Applied.
Jakub, is this (and another one I should have in the next few
days) okay to backport even after RC1?
Yes, thanks.
2015-04-12 Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz
Gerald Pfeifer
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 6:48 AM, Alan Modra amo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:12:17PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 5:22 AM, Alan Modra amo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 01:28:41PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/14/2015 07:02 AM, Alan Modra
On 04/13/2015 12:03 PM, Yury Gribov wrote:
Hi all,
I've submitted a libsanitizer cherry-pick from LLVM to not require xdr.h
on systems where it's not available. Pre-approved by Jakub in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839 .
Forgot to attach patch. Commited in r222043.
commit
Hi all,
I've submitted a libsanitizer cherry-pick from LLVM to not require xdr.h
on systems where it's not available. Pre-approved by Jakub in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839 .
-Y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65751
Bug ID: 65751
Summary: Bogus L in error message
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
On Fri, 10 Apr 2015, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
htdocs/svn.html has four occurrences, and a few other pages also
have some. Though I don't think it's appropriate to adjust the
like of news.html, should I update svn.html?
Sure, go ahead.
Done
On Sun, 12 Apr 2015, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
Here is an attempt to adjust gcc_release for 5+ versioning scheme.
The second hunk hopefully will use the right branch version, the first hunk
(to be tested when -f will be invoked) should bump automatically BASE-VER
(e.g. from 5.0.1 to 5.1.0).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65745
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
On 13 April 2015 at 00:24, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
The patch is a bit large since it does the baseline_symbols regeneration
That has been done on the trunk now.
and other new-version api-dance.
Thanks, it'll have to wait until after 5.1 is released, as testing any
last minute fixes will be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65740
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Negative badness values are expected (it is really a negation of goodness).
Independently on that the inliner should skip inlining when it thinks code size
will grow:
Considering
Dear list,
we're considering in adding OMPT [1] into the GNU OpenMP runtime. In
brief, OMPT is a specification of an API for performance analysis
tools such as TAU, Extrae and HPCToolkit. It mainly consists of calls
that allow querying the state of the threads and callbacks to notify a
tool of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65750
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
--- Comment #7 from ygribov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ygribov
Date: Mon Apr 13 08:59:55 2015
New Revision: 222043
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222043root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-04-13 Yury Gribov y.gri...@samsung.com
PR
Status
==
The trunk has branched for the GCC 5 release and is now open
again for general development, stage 1. Please consider not
disrupting it too much during the RC phase of GCC 5 so it
is possible to test important fixes for 5.1 on it.
Quality Data
Priority #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65660
--- Comment #21 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Apr 13 07:33:51 2015
New Revision: 222040
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222040root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-04-13 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65660
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65699
--- Comment #4 from Goswin von Brederlow goswin-v-b at web dot de ---
Yes, a simple statement like that was exactly what I had in mind.
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 09:44:12AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
@@ -130,8 +130,20 @@ EOF
# Update gcc/DEV-PHASE.
-[ `cat ${SOURCE_DIRECTORY}/gcc/BASE-VER` = ${RELEASE} ] || \
-error Release number ${RELEASE} does not
Hi!
I've noticed there was no DATESTAMP bump this morning on gcc-5-branch,
hopefully fixed thusly.
2015-04-13 Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com
* update_version_svn: Update DATESTAMP also on
branches/gcc-[0-9]+-branch.
--- update_version_svn (revision 221957)
+++
Status
==
We have reached zero P1 regressions over the weekend (and 100 important
regressions) and the branches/gcc-5-branch has been created last night
and GCC 5.1-rc1 built and announced.
The branch is now frozen for blocking regressions and documentation
fixes only, all changes to the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65660
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
-Original Message-
From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Myers
Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2015 4:30 AM
To: Hale Wang
Cc: 'GCC Patches'
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [1/2] [ARM] [libgcc] Support RTABI half-precision
conversion
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 09:44:12AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
@@ -130,8 +130,20 @@ EOF
# Update gcc/DEV-PHASE.
-[ `cat ${SOURCE_DIRECTORY}/gcc/BASE-VER` = ${RELEASE} ] || \
-error Release number ${RELEASE} does not match BASE-VER
+if [ `cat
Gerald Pfeifer ger...@pfeifer.com writes:
On Thu, 5 Feb 2015, Matthew Fortune wrote:
Thanks Catherine. Good call to remove the markup while reviewing. I've
done one more pass on this to have the same phrasing used where
similar points are being made. I also added a comment about link
(check_cxx_fundamental_alignment_constraints is Dodji's, others
CC:ed were already in the thread)
Looking into those atomic things and running tests for cris-elf,
I get FAIL for
libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/65147.cc, specifically
struct S16 {
char c[16];
};
static_assert(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49551
prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Please consider backporting it to gcc-5-branch, but at this point only after
5.1 is released.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65510
Bernd Schmidt bernds at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Hi,
with multiple inheritance compiling the testcase bellow, the first call always
leads to call with offseted pointer, while the other call results in if
conditoinal testing if parameter is non-NULL.
This patch teach VRP that THIS pointers and
On 13/04/15 06:45 +0200, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
Ever since aligmnent was made sane-ish, 62259.cc has failed for
reasons obvious in the patch. Can I please commit this?
Yes, OK for trunk and the gcc-5-branch, thanks.
Hi,
this patch adds DSE to early optimizations and handles testuiste fallout.
As discussed in PR 65076 this reduces number of CLOBBER statements in tramp3d
to 50% (and those accounts 29% of all code previously). The pass also quite
often kills real stores reducing Firefox binary by over 2% due to
1 - 100 of 159 matches
Mail list logo
