https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65673
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 11:11 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi!
As mentioned in the PR, on the following testcase we ICE, because for
# DEBUG D#2 = b
# DEBUG D#1 = a[D#2].t
# DEBUG c = D#1
during expansion we get the a[D#2].t added as MEM_EXPR of a MEM, and because
we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65788
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 6:38 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote:
From: Trevor Saunders tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org
Hi,
Last stage 1 I introduced a second form of hash_table that stored elements of
value_type in addition to the old form that stored elements of type value_type
*. That lead
Hi all,
This patch adds an optional support for sanitizing user-defined
sections. Usually this is a bad idea because ASan changes relative
position of variables in section thus breaking user assumptions. But
this is a desired feature for kernel which (ab)uses sections for various
reasons
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65779
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #4)
Created attachment 35342 [details]
prototype patch
This seems to cure the testcase. I haven't bootstrapped it, and it probably
isn't
On 01/22/2015 11:33 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2015, Christian Bruel wrote:
Hi Richard,
I thought one of my current issue would be solved by this patch, but it is
not
: I have some inlining failures with the attribute target on ARM. (e.g
inline-3.c) where obvious early
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65771
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Apr 17 07:45:46 2015
New Revision: 222167
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222167root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR debug/65771
* dwarf2out.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65549
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
When doing LTO early-debug work I stumbled over one reason we can crash here
which I fixed with
Index: dwarf2out.c
See:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2015-04/msg01975.html
Comparing stages 2 and 3
warning: gcc/cc1-checksum.o differs
warning: gcc/cc1obj-checksum.o differs
warning: gcc/cc1plus-checksum.o differs
Bootstrap comparison failure!
gcc/tree-ssa-uninit.o differs
gcc/tree-switch-conversion.o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65788
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65549
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65549
--- Comment #26 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35343
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35343action=edit
patch
Patch I am testing.
Hi!
I'd like to ping
PR target/65689 - P2 - http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg00358.html
patch (perhaps with the code[?] == ' ' - ISSPACE (code[?]) changes or
strstr, as discussed in the following thread).
At this point of course for trunk only, and perhaps after a while for 5.2.
For PR65549 the issue is that the force_decl_die DW_TAG_GNU_call_site
resolve_addr does can end up creating DIEs for types we won't emit
(it re-populates the limbo DIE list for the testcase). For the
particular testcase this happens because the context of the function
called (a lambda type)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64950
--- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2015-04/msg00371.html :
Author: vries
Date: Fri Apr 17 09:26:59 2015
New Revision: 222173
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222173root=gccview=rev
Log:
Postpone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64950
--- Comment #6 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2015-04/msg00372.html :
Author: vries
Date: Fri Apr 17 09:27:08 2015
New Revision: 222174
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222174root=gccview=rev
Log:
Set
Hi,
I think the rtl dump in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64916
is not jump2 phase rtl dump.
Because jump2 is after ira, the register number should be hardware
register number.
the jump2 rtl dump should as follow
...
31: NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK 5
32: [r6:SI]=r4:SI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61547
Yury Gribov y.gribov at samsung dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65771
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6 Regression] ICE (in|ICE (in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65791
Bug ID: 65791
Summary: Postpone expand_ifn_va_arg till after
optimize_va_list_gpr_fpr_size
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
On 04/17/2015 10:33 AM, Yury Gribov wrote:
Hi all,
This patch adds an optional support for sanitizing user-defined
sections. Usually this is a bad idea because ASan changes relative
position of variables in section thus breaking user assumptions. But
this is a desired feature for kernel which
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote:
On Apr 14, 2015, at 8:07 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
I can confirm that the most current patch bootstraps on
x86_64-apple-darwin14 and that all of the new tests show up as
unsupported in the test suite.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Ilya Tocar tocarip.in...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
There were some discussion about x constraints being too conservative
for some patterns in i386.md.
Patch below fixes it. This is probably stage1 material.
ChangeLog:
gcc/
2015-03-19 Ilya Tocar
On 15 Apr 14:07, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
2015-04-14 8:22 GMT+03:00 Jeff Law l...@redhat.com:
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
I allowed me to CC Vladimir; maybe he can propose how the backend can describe
an efficient, constraint-based solution. The problem is about expanders
producing insns with non-fixed hard-regs as in/out operands or clobbers. This
includes move insn from non-generic address spaces which require
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64950
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51153
Bug 51153 depends on bug 64950, which changed state.
Bug 64950 Summary: postpone expanding va_arg till pass_stdarg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64950
What|Removed |Added
On 20-03-15 12:38, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 19-03-15 12:05, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 18-03-15 18:22, Tom de Vries wrote:
Hi,
this patch fixes PR65460.
The patch marks offloaded functions as parallelized, which means the parloops
pass no longer attempts to modify that function.
Updated patch to
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 10:37:50AM +0300, Yury Gribov wrote:
commit 97c141d9be45b29fb7e281dc2b7cd904e93c2813
Author: Yury Gribov y.gri...@samsung.com
Date: Mon Feb 2 14:33:17 2015 +0300
2015-04-17 Yury Gribov y.gri...@samsung.com
gcc/
* asan.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65790
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65549
--- Comment #27 from Avi Kivity a...@cloudius-systems.com ---
Patch fixes the problem for me (though the linker still fails)
On Tue, 14 Apr 2015 15:15:02 +0100
Julian Brown jul...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Wed, 8 Apr 2015 17:58:56 +0300
Ilya Verbin iver...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 15:31:42 +0100, Julian Brown wrote:
This version is mostly the same as the last posted version but
has a tweak
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 06:47:26PM +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
Am 04/16/2015 um 11:28 AM schrieb Senthil Kumar Selvaraj:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 11:02:05AM +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
Am 04/16/2015 um 08:43 AM schrieb Senthil Kumar Selvaraj:
This patch fixes PR 65657.
The following
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64741
Yury Gribov y.gribov at samsung dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65549
--- Comment #24 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Which means that -gstrict-dwarf should be a workaround for this and the dups.
Thanks for your quick feedback :)
2015-04-16 10:41 GMT+02:00 Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com:
- Do you have a copyright assignment on file? (Not sure if it's needed for
this particular patch.)
No I don't. Do you think I need one for this patch?
- We'll need testcases. You should e.g.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65771
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Apr 17 07:44:30 2015
New Revision: 222166
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222166root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR debug/65771
* dwarf2out.c
20150417 (experimental)
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Toon Moene t...@moene.org wrote:
See:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2015-04/msg01975.html
Comparing stages 2 and 3
warning: gcc/cc1-checksum.o differs
warning: gcc/cc1obj-checksum.o differs
warning: gcc/cc1plus-checksum.o differs
Bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65791
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 12:32:03PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
So Jakub says that using comp_unit_die () for the context of the stub
DIE is wrong and he is of course right. The following adjusted patch
uses the correct context, but only if we already have a DIE for it,
otherwise we drop the
My point is that adding your patch while keeping the logic at the top
which claims to catch ALL vector operations makes for less readable
code.
At the very least you'll need to update this comment:
/* TODO: The cost infrastructure currently does not handle
vector operations. Assume
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62077
--- Comment #62 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Works for me. Of course we should hunt down IL differences that appear with
GC.
It's just a lurking bug that can hit the non-GC checking path as well.
But all this is
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com wrote:
OK.
Thanks, committed as revision 222176.
Jason
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55932
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Hi!
As discussed in the PR, during LTO bootstrap we have some hard to debug
issues where different gc checking values between stage1 and stage2 result
in different GC collections and occassionally we generate different code for
that. The stated workaround is --enable-stage1-checking=release,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65792
Bug ID: 65792
Summary: allocation of scalar elemental function with structure
constructor fails
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 05:36:30AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
This patch works for me. OK for trunk?
gcc/testsuite/
PR target/65612
* g++.dg/ext/mv18.C: New test.
* g++.dg/ext/mv19.C: Likewise.
* g++.dg/ext/mv20.C: Likewise.
* g++.dg/ext/mv21.C: Likewise.
* g++.dg/ext/mv22.C: Likewise.
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64527
ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64950
--- Comment #8 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to vries from comment #7)
Marking resolved, fixed.
So, can PR41089 hack [1] finally be reverted?
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-08/msg00072.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65794
Bug ID: 65794
Summary: Building crossback fails: No rule to make target
`auto-build.h', needed by `build/genmddeps.o'
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65549
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot
Committed r222177 after testing on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and aarch64-none-elf.
gcc/ChangeLog:
config/aarch64/arm_neon.h (vdup_n_f32): Remove forward declaration
diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/arm_neon.h b/gcc/config/aarch64/arm_neon.h
index 71ef027..e9cc825 100644
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65673
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
What happens here is that pop_init_level returns error_mark_node because
initializing a zero-length array member with {} is discarded:
7565 /* Silently discard empty
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64999
--- Comment #56 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
Here is a bit more detail. Now that I think I understand all the
considerations, I'm proposing this simple fix for gcc 5. Maybe longer term a
more thorough solution could be done but not sure it
Note that Jakub requested a small change in the bugzilla commentary,
which I've implemented. I'm doing a regstrap now.
Bill
On Thu, 2015-04-16 at 16:46 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
Hi,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65787 identifies an issue
where the powerpc64le vector swap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57965
Bug 57965 depends on bug 55932, which changed state.
Bug 55932 Summary: [F03] ICE for structure constructor with scalar allocatable
component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55932
What|Removed
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 4:59 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 04:48:48AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
I don't like it. Nonshared libgcc is libgcc.a, period. No sense in
creating yet another library for that.
So, IMHO beyond making the __cpu* entrypoints compat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65793
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=65793
Bug ID: 65793
Summary: Libstdc++ docs on _GLIBCXX_CONCEPT_CHECKS are
duplicated
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: documentation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61275
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64999
--- Comment #55 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
Created attachment 35344
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35344action=edit
Increment the pc in the callback routine for backtrace_full
Always increment the pc in the callback,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61831
--- Comment #46 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
And I haven't looked yet at Dominique's feedback in comment #43.
The test in comment #41 fails at run time when compiled with
-fsanitize=address.
If I take the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65612
--- Comment #7 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Apr 17 12:58:07 2015
New Revision: 222178
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222178root=gccview=rev
Log:
Hide __cpu_indicator_init/__cpu_model from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64683
boger at us dot ibm.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||boger at us dot ibm.com
---
Dear gcc list,
we are trying to clarify what behaviour of C implementations is
actually relied upon in modern practice, and what behaviour is
guaranteed by current mainstream implementations (these are quite
different from the ISO standards, and may differ in different
contexts).
Focussing on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65549
--- Comment #28 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
So the context I put the stub DIE in is technically wrong. Thus some more
analysis results. The reason why we end up populating the limbo_die_list
from the force_decl_die path
Hi,
This patch is to resolve missing IPA_REF_CHKP issues. When node has
instrumented version it usually has no body (either originally or was
tranfromed into instrumentation thunk). But in some cases we don't instrument
function and instrumentation clone becomes a thunk instead. In this
On Apr 17, 2015, at 1:05 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote:
On Apr 14, 2015, at 8:07 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
I can confirm that the most current patch bootstraps on
x86_64-apple-darwin14 and that all
Dave == David Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com writes:
Dave However within libcpp and gcc, in linemap's expanded_location and in
Dave diagnostic messages, the column numbers are actually 1-based counts of
Dave *characters*, so the column numbers emitted in diagnostics for the
Dave start of the first
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Bill Schmidt
wschm...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 07:27 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
Note that Jakub requested a small change in the bugzilla commentary,
which I've implemented. I'm doing a regstrap now.
Bill
Here's the revised and tested
2015-04-17 17:02 GMT+03:00 Georg-Johann Lay a...@gjlay.de:
...I went ahead and installed as
http://gcc.gnu.org/r222179
It will be backported to 5.2 as soon as 5.1 is open for patches again
(assuming RM won't approve this one for 5.1).
IMHO AVR port is not locked for patches.
It's not a
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 08:28:02AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 07:27 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
Note that Jakub requested a small change in the bugzilla commentary,
which I've implemented. I'm doing a regstrap now.
Bill
Here's the revised and tested patch. OK
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65787
--- Comment #6 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Fri Apr 17 14:50:50 2015
New Revision: 222182
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222182root=gccview=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2015-04-17 Bill Schmidt
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 05:43:26PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
On Tue, 14 Apr 2015 15:15:02 +0100, Julian Brown jul...@codesourcery.com
wrote:
On Wed, 8 Apr 2015 17:58:56 +0300
Ilya Verbin iver...@gmail.com wrote:
I see several regressions:
FAIL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65296
--- Comment #9 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: gjl
Date: Fri Apr 17 13:54:16 2015
New Revision: 222179
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222179root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/65296
*
Wilco Dijkstra wdijk...@arm.com writes:
While investigating why the IRA preferencing algorithm often chooses
incorrect preferences from the costs, I noticed this thread:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2011-05/msg00186.html
I am seeing the exact same issue on AArch64 - during the final
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65612
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 07:27 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
Note that Jakub requested a small change in the bugzilla commentary,
which I've implemented. I'm doing a regstrap now.
Bill
Here's the revised and tested patch. OK for trunk and gcc-5-branch?
Thanks,
Bill
[gcc]
2015-04-16 Bill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65787
--- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Updated patch at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg00883.html.
...I went ahead and installed as
http://gcc.gnu.org/r222179
It will be backported to 5.2 as soon as 5.1 is open for patches again (assuming
RM won't approve this one for 5.1).
As far as I can tell, all works fine now, even with install-paths containing
spaces and LTO.
Johann
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.8.3, 4.9.2,
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 12:36 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
I can confirm that the most current patch bootstraps on
x86_64-apple-darwin14 and that all of the new tests show up as
unsupported in the test suite.
Jack
I am re-posting this patch. OK for trunk?
If Jack is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62077
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
Hi,
This patch is to resolve missing IPA_REF_CHKP issues. When node has
instrumented version it usually has no body (either originally or was
tranfromed into instrumentation thunk). But in some cases we don't
instrument function and instrumentation clone becomes a thunk instead.
In this case we
On Fri, 17 Apr 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
For PR65549 the issue is that the force_decl_die DW_TAG_GNU_call_site
resolve_addr does can end up creating DIEs for types we won't emit
(it re-populates the limbo DIE list for the testcase). For the
particular testcase this happens because the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
In fact comment 3 doesn't even need C++11, it's valid C++03.
It came from http://stackoverflow.com/a/29696258/981959
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 12:36 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
I can confirm that the most current patch bootstraps on
x86_64-apple-darwin14 and that all of the new tests show up as
unsupported in the test suite.
2015-04-17 10:46 GMT+03:00 Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
senthil_kumar.selva...@atmel.com:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 06:47:26PM +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
Am 04/16/2015 um 11:28 AM schrieb Senthil Kumar Selvaraj:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 11:02:05AM +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
Am 04/16/2015 um
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 01:04:20PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 12:36 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
I can confirm that the most current patch bootstraps on
x86_64-apple-darwin14 and that all of the new tests show up as
unsupported in the test suite.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 04:48:48AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
I don't like it. Nonshared libgcc is libgcc.a, period. No sense in
creating yet another library for that.
So, IMHO beyond making the __cpu* entrypoints compat symbols only (@ instead
of @@ symbol versions) the right fix is simply
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65788
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 17 Apr 2015, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65788
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64527
--- Comment #3 from ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Fri Apr 17 12:14:24 2015
New Revision: 222176
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222176root=gccview=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/64527
gcc/
PR c++/64527
* gimplify.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65460
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
stage1 ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg00861.html
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 1:05 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote:
On Apr 14, 2015, at 8:07 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
I can confirm that the most current patch bootstraps on
x86_64-apple-darwin14 and that
On 17/04/15 12:19, Kugan wrote:
Hi James,
Here is an attempt along this line. Is this what you have in mind?
Trying to keep functionality as before so that we can tune the
parameters later. Not fully tested yet.
Hi Kugan,
I'm not doing a full review here, just have a comment inline.
Thanks,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65788
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
---
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 4:37 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 01:04:20PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 12:36 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
I can confirm that the most current patch bootstraps on
x86_64-apple-darwin14 and that all
On 04/17/2015 10:49 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Toon Moene t...@moene.org wrote:
See:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2015-04/msg01975.html
Comparing stages 2 and 3
warning: gcc/cc1-checksum.o differs
warning: gcc/cc1obj-checksum.o differs
warning:
1 - 100 of 239 matches
Mail list logo
