http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58319
Bug ID: 58319
Summary: explicit cast doesn't disable -Wconversion warning.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58317
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58318
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58311
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52303
Olivier Grisel olivier.grisel at ensta dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58320
Bug ID: 58320
Summary: [4.7 / 4.8 / 4.9 Regression] code used in autoconf
test fails with -O2, works with -O0
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52303
--- Comment #5 from Olivier Grisel olivier.grisel at ensta dot org ---
The second option is basically was is being asked for at the end of this
section:
http://bisqwit.iki.fi/story/howto/openmp/#OpenmpAndFork
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58319
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58320
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47762
--- Comment #24 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
AFAICT the failures have disappeared on powerpc-apple-darwin9 between
revisions 186224 and 186440.
Unfortunately they have reappeared between revisions 197010 (OK) and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58321
Bug ID: 58321
Summary: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/memcpy-strategy-3.c
scan-assembler-times memcpy 2 on x86_64-apple-darwin*
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58319
--- Comment #2 from Pawel Sikora pluto at agmk dot net ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #1)
Your cast does nothing, because your typeof (or decltype) is just unsigned
int. Given that, the warning makes sense to me and certainly is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58319
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
You can ensure the value is not too large for the target:
X x = { .field = ( u (-1u 1) ) };
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58322
Bug ID: 58322
Summary: similar simple code produces different (nd
non-optimal) result
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58323
Bug ID: 58323
Summary: [-Wall] No warning when uninitialized integer
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58242
--- Comment #3 from Alexander Ivchenko aivchenk at gmail dot com ---
Should be fixed now by r202274
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58324
Bug ID: 58324
Summary: Incorrect iostat while reading SEQUENTIAL file
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58320
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org ---
Casting to uintptr_t should probably make this work as intented.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58065
--- Comment #9 from clyon at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: clyon
Date: Thu Sep 5 12:27:56 2013
New Revision: 202276
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202276root=gccview=rev
Log:
2013-09-05 Christophe Lyon christophe.l...@linaro.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57431
--- Comment #3 from clyon at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: clyon
Date: Thu Sep 5 12:31:03 2013
New Revision: 202277
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202277root=gccview=rev
Log:
2013-09-05 Christophe Lyon christophe.l...@linaro.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56315
--- Comment #2 from clyon at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: clyon
Date: Thu Sep 5 12:38:03 2013
New Revision: 202280
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202280root=gccview=rev
Log:
gcc/
2013-09-05 Christophe Lyon christophe.l...@linaro.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58137
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Sep 5 12:45:20 2013
New Revision: 202282
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202282root=gccview=rev
Log:
2013-09-05 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58137
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58320
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Well, until the compiler comes along and inlines 'inner'.
This is really a GIGO test.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58139
Peter Bergner bergner at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24702
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu.org|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55706
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to roger pack from comment #4)
(as a note, appears mingw-w64 2.0.8 is not sufficient you need something
newer...)
It should be. 2.0.8 is from r5746 which is new enough.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55706
roger pack rogerdpack at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rogerdpack at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58300
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24702
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The standard says:
When considering an associated namespace, the lookup is the same as the lookup
performed when the associated namespace is used as a qualifier (3.4.3.2) except
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58139
--- Comment #4 from Peter Bergner bergner at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: bergner
Date: Thu Sep 5 14:09:07 2013
New Revision: 202286
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202286root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/58139
* reginfo.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55706
--- Comment #6 from roger pack rogerdpack at gmail dot com ---
Yeah I was getting the same error message with 2.0.8 and pinged them about it.
Apparently the crt they bundled with 2.0.8 wasn't new enough or something like
that, and they plan on
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24702
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55342
--- Comment #8 from Yuri Rumyantsev ysrumyan at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 30751
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30751action=edit
modified test-case
Modified test-case to reproduce sub-optimal register allocation.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24702
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
Thanks Jon!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58269
--- Comment #7 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to tocarip.intel from comment #6)
-|| (TARGET_SSE SSE_REGNO_P (regno)
Those changes are not needed. If TARGET_64BIT is fasle all sse registers
except
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58325
Bug ID: 58325
Summary: Spurious unused-but-set-variable warning on delete[]
of volatile pointer
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58326
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28107
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58326
--- Comment #2 from Zhendong Su su at cs dot ucdavis.edu ---
For additional info, please find below a variant that fails only at -O3:
-
int a, b, c, d;
void foo ()
{
int e;
lbl:
for (c = 0; c 2; c++)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58252
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58139
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
New Revision: 202286
This seems to break bootstrap on *86*-*-*, see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/2013-09/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58326
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40075
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58327
Bug ID: 58327
Summary: Problem of quadmath in connection with SDL2
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58250
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
Prefetching generally increases code size, so I think we shouldn't do it, at
least not by default. So I'd say for !optimize_size -fprofile-use should just
not add
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58096
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
It was fixed by
2013-08-29 Jan Hubicka j...@suse.cz
* cgraph.c (cgraph_function_body_availability): Handle weakref
correctly.
* passes.def: Remove
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28831
--- Comment #22 from Chip Salzenberg chip at pobox dot com ---
Anyone? Bueller?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58328
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
I suspect the error isn't bogus, current clang++ also rejects it.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58328
--- Comment #2 from Paul Pluzhnikov ppluzhnikov at google dot com ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #1)
I suspect the error isn't bogus, current clang++ also rejects it.
Hmm, perhaps you are correct. The original test that is *not*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58139
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
FWIW, I was able to bootstrap subversion id 202295 on my x86_68 laptop
running RHEL 6.4, building c, c++, fortran languages, and using
--enable-lto --without-ppl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58300
--- Comment #6 from Caroline Tice cmtice at google dot com ---
When the preinit flag is used, the vtable verification constructor
initialization function was getting written to the assembly file before
cgraph_process_new_functions was being called
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43452
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu.org|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58139
--- Comment #10 from Peter Bergner bergner at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Reading the comments above and pr58269, does this mean my patch just exposed a
latent bug? ...and the supplied patches fix the latent bug?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58300
--- Comment #7 from Caroline Tice cmtice at google dot com ---
Created attachment 30752
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30752action=edit
Reorder two function calls to prevent an ICE.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58300
--- Comment #8 from Caroline Tice cmtice at google dot com ---
I have added the patch as an attachment, and also submitted it to the
gcc-patches list for review.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55342
--- Comment #9 from Yuri Rumyantsev ysrumyan at gmail dot com ---
The issue still exists in 4.9 compiler but we got another 30% degradation after
r202165 fix. It can be reproduced with modified test-case which as attached
with any 4.9 compiler,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55706
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Ah I see. Thanks for the info.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58269
tocarip.intel at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tocarip.intel at gmail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58139
--- Comment #7 from Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org ---
FWIW, I was able to bootstrap subversion id 202295 on my x86_68 laptop running
RHEL 6.4, building c, c++, fortran languages, and using --enable-lto
--without-ppl --without-cloog.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58328
Bug ID: 58328
Summary: [C++11] bogus: error: constructor required before
non-static data member for
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58329
Bug ID: 58329
Summary: [4.9 Regression] ld: Invalid symbol type for plabel
(.libs/libstdc++.lax/libc++11convenience.a/system_erro
r.o, std::error_category::default_error_condition(int)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58139
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
Boostrap with obj* completed successfully with r202295 reverted. I start again
with the patch in comment#9.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58329
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
Symbol has type data which is wrong for procedure label:
Symbols from system_error.o:
ValueInfo Type Scope ck HQIRCDSKLN xl reloc Name
Data Unsat 0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58329
--- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 5-Sep-13, at 7:31 PM, hubicka at ucw dot cz wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58329
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
Symbol has type data which
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58201
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #195 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
Today there was two fixes for bugs that produce undefined symbols like one you
see.
Does the problem still exist on current mainline? Are you using profile
feedback?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56726
--- Comment #7 from Chip Salzenberg chip at pobox dot com ---
Should this ticket have status CONFIRMED ? Also I suspect it's been fixed in
trunk...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58318
--- Comment #2 from Zhendong Su su at cs dot ucdavis.edu ---
did you compare trunk with --enable-checking=release?
Richard, you are right. Below is my 4.8 config:
$ gcc-4.8 -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc-4.8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58139
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
You can try this:
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
index a8d70bc..ab4dc6c 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
@@ -34466,7 +34466,7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58201
--- Comment #10 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Sep 5 23:04:11 2013
New Revision: 202298
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202298root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/58201
* cgraphunit.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54585
--- Comment #1 from Chip Salzenberg chip at pobox dot com ---
I'd like to suggest this ticket be at least CONFIRMED what with the code
samples in the ticket.
What will it take to fix this?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58328
Richard Smith richard-gccbugzilla at metafoo dot co.uk changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24702
--- Comment #9 from Mark Phillips pierhyth at gmail dot com ---
Thanks Jonathan for the information on the updated standard and the rationale
behind restricting Koenig to actual functions and function templates.
In one way it is a bit of a pity -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28107
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yes, this is invalid, a member definition such as union B b; does not declare
a nested type, that would be:
struct A {
union B;
B b;
};
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54585
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
,lto
--with-gmp=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --with-mpfr=/usr/local/gcc-trunk
--with-mpc=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --with-cloog=/usr/local/gcc-trunk
--prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.9.0 20130905 (experimental) [trunk revision 202269] (GCC)
$ gcc-trunk -O1 -c small.c
$ gcc-4.8 -O2 -c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58242
Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58325
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58330
Bug ID: 58330
Summary: powerpc64 atomic store split in two
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58330
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58330
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot
82 matches
Mail list logo
