http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49648
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49641
Sebastian Huber changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.4.6
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49542
--- Comment #4 from Ira Rosen 2011-07-06 06:20:06 UTC
---
In that case they should fail. The vf in 4.7 is correct. In 4.6 it is updated
after stmts analysis, which may cause inconsistency. This patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-04/msg0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49653
Johannes Schaub changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||schaub.johannes at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49657
--- Comment #1 from Ryan Hill 2011-07-06 04:54:56
UTC ---
Created attachment 24699
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24699
build log
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49657
Summary: array subscript warnings when building gcc with -O2
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48157
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill 2011-07-06
04:20:46 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Jul 6 04:20:39 2011
New Revision: 175904
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175904
Log:
PR c++/48157
* pt.c (tsubst_qualified_id):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49651
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49656
Summary: internal compiler error on Mac OS 10.7.0
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassig...@gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49474
Douglas Mencken changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.6.1
--- Comment #1 from Douglas Menck
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49655
Summary: diagnostic pragma accepts non-warning options
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: accepts-invalid
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49498
--- Comment #7 from davidxl 2011-07-05 22:51:49
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Created attachment 24693 [details]
> k.c.127t.uninit
1) is the complicated control flow generated by if-merging + jump-threading?
2) On the targets that have the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49648
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus 2011-07-05
22:52:01 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Draft patch, which should also save some memory, .mod file-size and should
> slightly speed the program.
The patch fails for procedure pointers - as the fun
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49654
Summary: Linear search through options in
handle_pragma_diagnostic
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49594
--- Comment #9 from David Fang 2011-07-05
22:34:43 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> I tested the patch on darwin 8 on a G5 and with crosses from darwin 9 - >
> darwin 8.
Using Iain's patch ( http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24655
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49651
--- Comment #3 from Pedro Larroy 2011-07-05
22:24:26 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Can you produce a testcase that aborts/fails if the problem occurs? Otherwise
> I
> seem to need to inspect thousands of lines to look for non-consecutive va
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49653
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-07-05
22:15:54 UTC ---
This is correct for C99. inline alone in C99 is the same GNU's C90's extern
inline.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49653
Summary: Undefined reference to inlined function with
-O0,-std=c99
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49651
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major |normal
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wak
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49649
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||spop at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from H.J
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49637
Timothy J Giese changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49353
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill 2011-07-05
20:41:17 UTC ---
The C++ linkage scheme has been to set DECL_EXTERN on comdat stuff until EOF,
at which point we decide whether or not to emit them and whether they should be
public or not. We need to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49651
--- Comment #1 from Pedro Larroy 2011-07-05
20:30:13 UTC ---
I think I'm able to reproduce with the following:
the output spotted is:
run.for_each.a: 20633
run.a: 20634
1 for_each.a: 20631
1 for_each.a: 20632
Compiled with:
g++ -Wall -std=c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49652
Summary: SIGFPE in vector_alignment_reachable_p
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49651
Summary: [C++0x] nested lambdas and -O3 produced incorrect
integer variable increments
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49644
--- Comment #4 from Orion Poplawski 2011-07-05
20:01:27 UTC ---
Yeah, I screwed that up. But it doesn't make any difference to the problem.
This should be correct though.
#include
#include
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
double data[6]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49598
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49637
--- Comment #10 from Jason Merrill 2011-07-05
19:51:02 UTC ---
This is related to
http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/cwg_defects.html#214
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49637
--- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill 2011-07-05
19:48:14 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> OH. I think I see what you are saying here. I now think that you're saying
> "the partial ordering will try to deduce the arguments regardless of whether
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49644
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49648
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2011-07-05
19:46:45 UTC ---
Draft patch, which should also save some memory, .mod file-size and should
slightly speed the program.
It fixes the test case in comment 0 and comment 2, but I have not yet regtested
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49650
Summary: MIPS should not use target_flags_explicit in insn
conditions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49649
Summary: [4.7 Regression] FAIL:
libgomp.graphite/force-parallel-1.c
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49618
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49648
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2011-07-05
19:00:51 UTC ---
Draft patch, which seems to fix some ref->u.ar->as issues for "p" - but not the
one, I am looking for. At least the added assert now triggers.
* * *
Debugging shows that when resolv
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49618
--- Comment #22 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-05
18:44:35 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jul 5 18:44:32 2011
New Revision: 175885
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175885
Log:
PR tree-optimization/49618
* tree-eh.c (tr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49618
--- Comment #21 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-05
18:43:07 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jul 5 18:43:04 2011
New Revision: 175884
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175884
Log:
PR tree-optimization/49618
* tree-eh.c (tr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49643
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49643
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill 2011-07-05
18:19:40 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Jul 5 18:19:38 2011
New Revision: 175881
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175881
Log:
PR testsuite/49643
* g++.dg/rtti/anon-ns1.C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49519
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49637
--- Comment #8 from Timothy J Giese 2011-07-05
18:02:26 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > (In reply to comment #1)
> > > Created attachment 24686 [details]
> > > minimal test case
> >
> > IMO this is ambiguous.
>
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49637
--- Comment #7 from Timothy J Giese 2011-07-05
17:34:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > Created attachment 24686 [details]
> > minimal test case
>
> IMO this is ambiguous.
> When doing partial ordering, in both c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49648
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Bloc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49637
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-07-05
17:28:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> struct S { typedef int iterator; };
> template void F( T, U ) {}
> template void F( T, int ) {}
> int main()
> {
> S::iterator i(42);
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49648
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus 2011-07-05
17:14:31 UTC ---
At some point, the array spec seems to got lost:
COMPLEX,SAVE,ALLOCATABLE::P(:)
COMPLEX:: PM(SIZE(P),SIZE(P))
We have:
(gdb) p expr->expr_type
$1 = EXPR_VARIABLE
(gdb) p e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48984
--- Comment #8 from Rainer Orth 2011-07-05 17:07:31 UTC
---
It also fails on alpha-dec-osf5.1b, sparc-sun-solaris2.*, and
i386-pc-solaris2.*.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49631
--- Comment #1 from Joseph S. Myers 2011-07-05
17:05:41 UTC ---
Also note that at least -shared and -pie are driver options that are currently
marked as Common rather than Driver so as to have help text in common.opt; as
part of fixing this issue
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49648
Summary: ICE(segfault) with MATHMUL and function-result actual
argument
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: norma
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49647
Summary: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/20030807-7.c XPASSes everywhere
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
As
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49643
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-07-05
17:00:41 UTC ---
> I've checked in a tweak to the testcase that ought to fix it, let me know if
> you still see the problem.
This fixes the failure for x86_64-apple-darwin10 and powerpc-apple-d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49646
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth 2011-07-05 17:00:00 UTC
---
Created attachment 24695
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24695
-fdump-rtl-dse1 output
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49646
Summary: gcc.dg/pr44194-1.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC, Tru64 UNIX
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49645
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth 2011-07-05 16:53:42 UTC
---
Created attachment 24694
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24694
-fdump-tree-fre1-details output
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49645
Summary: [4.7 regression] g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr8781.C FAILs on
Tru64 UNIX
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49643
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 |hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11
|*-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49643
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49637
Johannes Schaub changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||schaub.johannes at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49498
--- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law 2011-07-05 16:05:22
UTC ---
Created attachment 24693
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24693
k.c.127t.uninit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49498
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law 2011-07-05 16:05:21
UTC ---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/30/11 14:37, xinliangli at gmail dot com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49498
>
> --- Comment #4 from david
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49637
--- Comment #4 from Timothy J Giese 2011-07-05
16:04:29 UTC ---
icpc (ICC) 11.1 20091130 compiles the original minimal test case without
warning nor error.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47715
--- Comment #12 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-05
15:47:44 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Tue Jul 5 15:47:40 2011
New Revision: 175864
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175864
Log:
Promote the function argument before checki
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49542
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-05
15:42:55 UTC ---
> You wrote (here http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg00508.html)
> > They pass on SPARC 64-bit because the operations are
> > transformed to use the word mode.
> It doesn't
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49644
Orion Poplawski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[ 4.5/4.6 Regression ] |[ 4.5/4.6 Regression ]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49644
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49637
--- Comment #3 from Timothy J Giese 2011-07-05
15:40:59 UTC ---
The original minimal test case also fails to compile with g++ 4.5.1.
I can confirm that the following compiles fine with g++ 4.6.0, 4.5.1, and
4.4.3.
struct S { typedef int iterato
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49644
Summary: [ 4.5/4.6 Regression ] post-increment of promoted
operand is incorrect.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49429
Steve Ellcey changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49598
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill 2011-07-05
14:51:59 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Jul 5 14:51:56 2011
New Revision: 175863
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175863
Log:
PR c++/49598
* semantics.c (finish_id_expre
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47654
--- Comment #9 from Sebastian Pop 2011-07-05 14:50:37
UTC ---
Author: spop
Date: Tue Jul 5 14:50:34 2011
New Revision: 175861
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175861
Log:
Fix PR47654: Loop blocking should strip-mine at leas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49598
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill 2011-07-05
14:47:26 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Jul 5 14:47:21 2011
New Revision: 175857
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175857
Log:
PR c++/49598
* semantics.c (finish_id_expre
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49519
--- Comment #10 from Jason Merrill 2011-07-05
14:45:40 UTC ---
*** Bug 49639 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49639
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49643
--- Comment #2 from John David Anglin 2011-07-05
14:33:38 UTC ---
I thought I had attached the hpux assembler. The string is similar
to darwin:
_ZTSN12_GLOBAL__N_11AE:
.STRING "*N12_GLOBAL__N_11AE\x00"
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49643
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 |hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49643
Summary: FAIL: g++.dg/rtti/anon-ns1.C scan-assembler
"*N[^"]+1AE"
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36884
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
--- Comment #5 from Georg-Johann
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36884
--- Comment #4 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-07-05
13:20:15 UTC ---
Created attachment 24691
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24691
C Testcase pr36884.c
This testcase shows the dis-optimization in 4.7. trunk
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47449
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49642
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47449
--- Comment #13 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-05
12:47:38 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Tue Jul 5 12:47:35 2011
New Revision: 175849
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175849
Log:
Don't propagate hard registers in forward_p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49642
--- Comment #2 from marcus at jet dot franken.de 2011-07-05 12:42:28 UTC ---
looking at the assembly, both x() and y() call the assembler functions,
just the static function is still emitted with
<.ehca_get_max_hwpage_size.part.0>:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49637
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49642
--- Comment #1 from marcus at jet dot franken.de 2011-07-05 12:41:05 UTC ---
Created attachment 24690
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24690
ehca_mrmw.i
gcc -m64 -O2 -fno-inline-functions-called-once -c ehca_mrmw.i ; objdump -dr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49642
Summary: constant part of a macro not optimized away as
expected due to splitter
Product: gcc
Version: tree-ssa
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49641
Summary: [ARM] Wrong code for ARMv4T and stmia
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassig...@
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49640
--- Comment #1 from doriankrause at web dot de 2011-07-05 11:49:09 UTC ---
Created attachment 24688
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24688
The test code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49640
Summary: Internal compiler in C99 code (using variable-length
arrays) and OpenMP
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18918
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49518
--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther 2011-07-05
11:24:30 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jul 5 11:24:26 2011
New Revision: 175847
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175847
Log:
2011-07-05 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49628
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49518
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.0
Summary|[4.6/4.7 Regr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49628
--- Comment #8 from Richard Guenther 2011-07-05
11:24:30 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jul 5 11:24:26 2011
New Revision: 175847
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175847
Log:
2011-07-05 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43052
--- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka 2011-07-05 11:08:50
UTC ---
>
> Do you think you could spin a script which also tests memcmp?
memcmp is different story. Few years back I rewrote memcpy/memset codegen to
allow choosing
from several basic implem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49639
Summary: [4.7 Regression] 447.dealII in SPEC CPU 2006 runtime
fail
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49636
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49628
--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther 2011-07-05
08:53:46 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
>
> > I wonder where we are supposed to set GROUP_SIZE here
> In vect_analyze_data_ref_access(),
> but your patch does this:
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38342
--- Comment #11 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-07-05
08:43:17 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> I was using documented avr-libc features. Does that mean that this is an
> avr-libc bug rather than a gcc bug? Neither of the web pages you reference
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49632
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||spop at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49628
--- Comment #6 from Ira Rosen 2011-07-05 08:18:09 UTC
---
Sorry, I was wrong about group size check. It is ok without your patch. So,
this should be enough:
Index: tree-vect-data-refs.c
===
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49638
Summary: [OOP] length parameter is ignored when overriding type
bound character functions with constant length.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
100 matches
Mail list logo