http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49882
Summary: class_getSuperClass() returns nil on a newly
allocated, but not registered, class
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49883
Summary: clang + gcc 4.6 runtime = broken
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libobjc
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49687
--- Comment #5 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-07-28
08:03:12 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Thu Jul 28 08:03:07 2011
New Revision: 176862
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176862
Log:
PR target/49687
* config/avr/t-avr (LIB1A
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49545
--- Comment #12 from Ulrich Weigand 2011-07-28
08:43:31 UTC ---
After this commit:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2011-07/msg01132.html
the regression is now gone again on the 4.6 branch.
On spu-elf, this bug is now fixed both on mainline and the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47727
--- Comment #11 from Uros Bizjak 2011-07-28 09:22:29
UTC ---
With recent changes in mainline, the testcase from Comment #0 compiles OK:
__do_global_ctors_aux:
.LFB0:
.cfi_startproc
mov-4+__CTOR_END__(%rip), %eax
pushq%rbx
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49884
Summary: get_last_value in combine ignores register mode
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Ass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #52 from rguenther at suse dot de
2011-07-28 09:26:40 UTC ---
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, ghazi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
>
> --- Comment #50 from Kaveh Ghazi 2011-07-27
> 23:13:18 UTC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49881
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #3 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49884
--- Comment #1 from Paulo J. Matos 2011-07-28
09:46:36 UTC ---
Created attachment 24854
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24854
Fixes PR49884
Sent to gcc-patches.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49876
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49873
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49872
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49872
--- Comment #2 from sgunderson at bigfoot dot com 2011-07-28 10:09:51 UTC ---
I'm not sure if I've seen exactly this construction in real-world code, but
I've certainly seen examples of the hybrid I sketched out (looking at one was
what motivated m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49313
--- Comment #7 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-07-28
10:29:24 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Thu Jul 28 10:29:17 2011
New Revision: 176865
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176865
Log:
PR target/49313
Undo r176835 from trunk
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49313
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49885
Summary: Segmentation fault when writing to an automatic
character array
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49886
Summary: pass_split_functions cannot deal with function type
attributes
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49886
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47364
--- Comment #10 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-28
12:32:29 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Jul 28 12:32:23 2011
New Revision: 176868
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176868
Log:
Only expand strlen to Pmode.
2011-07-28 H
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49885
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47364
--- Comment #11 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-28
12:58:06 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Jul 28 12:58:00 2011
New Revision: 176869
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176869
Log:
Only expand strlen to Pmode.
2011-07-28 H
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49885
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|libfortran |fortran
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47364
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31067
--- Comment #43 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-28
13:51:32 UTC ---
Created attachment 24856
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24856
gcc47-pr31067.patch
Patch to optimize a = minloc (b) for rank 1 b into a = minloc (b, dim = 1),
acc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47502
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49885
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||domob at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49885
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2011-07-28
14:06:46 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Thus, the regression is caused by:
Ups, wrong patch. The person and the PR were correct, the cited patch was not.
Correct patch, which causes the regressio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49887
Summary: [4.7 regression] .debug_macro breaks many
Solaris/SPARC tests
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49885
Daniel Kraft changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47715
--- Comment #15 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-28 14:42:52 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Jul 28 14:42:45 2011
New Revision: 176872
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176872
Log:
PR target/47715
* config/i386/i386.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49887
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-28
14:45:11 UTC ---
So, how are the group signature symbols supposed to be emitted on
SPARC/Solaris? A dummy symbol of that name somewhere in the section? Can it
be local, or must it be global symbol?
W
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49887
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-07-28 14:52:35 UTC ---
> --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-28
> 14:45:11 UTC ---
> So, how are the group signature symbols supposed to be emitted on
> SPARC/Solaris? A dummy sy
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49545
--- Comment #13 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2011-07-28
14:56:33 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> After this commit:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2011-07/msg01132.html
I.e. r176864, applied to the 4.6 branch.
Still, at r176866, g++.dg/tree-ssa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49881
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #24848|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48175
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x32
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48085
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x32
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31067
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #24856|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49881
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||49864
--- Comment #5 from Georg-Johann
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49881
--- Comment #6 from Richard Henderson 2011-07-28
16:14:46 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Regenerating avr-libc (with your patch atop r176818) fails with PR49864 and
> the
> exact line number from there. Do you need more food, or is the test
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47364
--- Comment #13 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-28 16:20:17 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Jul 28 16:20:06 2011
New Revision: 176875
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176875
Log:
PR target/47364
* config/i386/i386.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49879
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49871
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-28
16:21:14 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jul 28 16:21:08 2011
New Revision: 176876
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176876
Log:
PR debug/49871
* dwarf2out.c (size_of_die,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47364
--- Comment #14 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-28 16:21:47 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Jul 28 16:21:44 2011
New Revision: 176877
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176877
Log:
PR target/47364
* config/i386/i386.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49886
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor 2011-07-28
16:53:23 UTC ---
Proposed patch posted to the mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg02546.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47725
--- Comment #21 from Uros Bizjak 2011-07-28 17:02:49
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> I'm seeing the same problem in gcc 4.4 and 4.6, I did not test 4.5:
Please, do not hijack bug reports.
Open new one, this one is for x32 (that is x86_64 wi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47725
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x32
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48084
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x32
Status|UNCONFIRMED
;
v = 0; /* break-here */
}
int
main ()
{
int v = 2;
f (&v);
return 0;
}
FAIL: gcc (GCC) 4.5.4 20110728 (prerelease)
FAIL: gcc (GCC) 4.6.2 20110728 (prerelease)
FAIL: gcc (GCC) 4.7.0 20110728 (experime
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47346
Dodji Seketeli changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|dodji at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49889
Summary: Calling a function whose name is obscured by a local
variable does not produce an error
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49883
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-07-28
19:09:00 UTC ---
I think we should declare this a bug in clang and not the runtime.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49890
Summary: IRA spill with plenty of available registers
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assign
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48851
--- Comment #23 from Jonathan Gray 2011-07-28 19:24:43
UTC ---
yes, with the bypass line as proposed both
#ifndef NULL
#ifdef __GNUG__
#define NULL__null
#else
#define NULL((void *)0)
#endif
#endif
and
#ifndef NULL
#ifdef __GNUG__
#d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49846
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-28
20:35:16 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jul 28 20:35:12 2011
New Revision: 176892
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176892
Log:
PR debug/49846
* var-tracking.c (prepare_ca
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49871
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-28
20:37:50 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jul 28 20:37:43 2011
New Revision: 176895
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176895
Log:
PR debug/49871
* dwarf2out.c (size_of_die,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31067
--- Comment #45 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-28
20:56:57 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jul 28 20:56:50 2011
New Revision: 176897
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176897
Log:
PR fortran/31067
* frontend-passes.c (opti
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #53 from Steve Ellcey 2011-07-28 20:59:15
UTC ---
Author: sje
Date: Thu Jul 28 20:59:11 2011
New Revision: 176899
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176899
Log:
2011-07-28 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/49813
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from H.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49871
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49846
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49810
Steve Ellcey changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu 2011-07-28 21:27:33
UTC ---
The question is we have
(zero_extend:DI (plus:SI (FOO:SI) (const_int Y)))
Is is OK to transform it to
(plus:DI (zero_extend:DI (FOO:SI)) (const_int Y))
The current convert_memory_address
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49846
--- Comment #4 from Jan Kratochvil
2011-07-28 21:29:27 UTC ---
Thanks, great:
#0 stacktest (r1=1, r2=2, r3=3, r4=4, r5=5, r6=6, s1=3, s2=4, d1=1.5, d2=2.5,
d3=3.5, d4=4.5, d5=5.5, d6=6.5, d7=7.5, d8=8.5, d9=3.5, da=4.5) at
./gdb.arch/amd64-entry
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 2011-07-28
21:31:20 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> The question is we have
>
> (zero_extend:DI (plus:SI (FOO:SI) (const_int Y)))
>
> Is is OK to transform it to
>
> (plus:DI (zero_extend:DI (FOO:SI)) (cons
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49721
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu 2011-07-28 21:39:47
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > The question is we have
> >
> > (zero_extend:DI (plus:SI (FOO:SI) (const_int Y)))
> >
> > Is is OK to transform it to
> >
> > (plus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48648
--- Comment #11 from Sebastian Pop 2011-07-28
21:57:15 UTC ---
Author: spop
Date: Thu Jul 28 21:57:10 2011
New Revision: 176901
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176901
Log:
Fix PR48648: Handle CLAST assignments.
The CLAST p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49876
--- Comment #3 from Sebastian Pop 2011-07-28 21:57:04
UTC ---
Author: spop
Date: Thu Jul 28 21:57:00 2011
New Revision: 176900
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176900
Log:
Fix PR49876: Continue code generation with integer_z
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49876
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48648
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49891
Summary: [4.7 regression] ICE in redirect_jump_1
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
Compone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49891
--- Comment #1 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-07-28
22:47:26 UTC ---
Author: bernds
Date: Thu Jul 28 22:47:21 2011
New Revision: 176905
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176905
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/49891
* cfgrtl.c (forc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49880
Kazumoto Kojima changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|shle--netbsdelf |sh*-*-*
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49799
--- Comment #9 from carrot at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-29 01:27:32 UTC ---
Author: carrot
Date: Fri Jul 29 01:27:29 2011
New Revision: 176911
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176911
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/49799
* com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47048
--- Comment #7 from Jack Howarth 2011-07-29
01:54:25 UTC ---
Checking the failures in vect.exp at r176905 with -fgraphite-identity enabled
at -O2, we seem to have picked up a bunch for -flto at -m32 on
x86_64-apple-darwin11...
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49892
Summary: Error in configure test xgcc in
x86_64-apple-darwin11.0.0/libgcc
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49893
Summary: [4.7 Regression] -O3 generates wrong code for volatile
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
As
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49893
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47958
--- Comment #4 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-29
05:17:41 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Jul 29 05:17:36 2011
New Revision: 176914
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176914
Log:
Add a testcase for PR rtl-optimization/47958
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47958
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu 2011-07-29 0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47453
__vic changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||d.v.a at ngs dot ru
--- Comment #4 from __vic 20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49894
Summary: Uniform initialization in constructor (C++0x)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49894
--- Comment #1 from __vic 2011-07-29 06:28:47 UTC ---
class mutex
{
::pthread_mutex_t mtx;
public:
constexpr mutex() : mtx(PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER) {}
};
Compiles fine... What is the difference?
82 matches
Mail list logo
