http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60603
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Mar 22 07:18:38 2014
New Revision: 208763
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208763&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/60603
c-family/
* c-opts.c (c_finish_options): Restore cb_f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60603
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.6.0, 4.9.0
Summary|[4.7/4.8/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60607
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Variation of the problem without -march=native:
markus@x4 tmp % cat foo.ii
markus@x4 tmp % cat bar.ii
typedef int __m128i __attribute__ ((__vector_size__ (16)));
__m128i a, b, c;
void dequant_scaling ()
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60429
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60600
--- Comment #5 from lucdanton at free dot fr ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #2)
> Well, this is ICE on code with undefined behavior. Function test
> calls itself with a parameter which is a reference to an object of
> type child2 and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60620
Bug ID: 60620
Summary: missing gnattools dependency causes highly parallel
build failure with --disable-bootstrap
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60452
--- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou ---
This also happens for regular objects on stack, i.e. with a MEM_EXPR:
int a;
int
main (void)
{
char e[3] = { 0, 0, 0 }, f = 0;
if (a == 131072)
f = e[a];
return f;
}
But I think that using MEM_OF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55850
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58189
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58331
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58644
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58620
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56038
tim.lebedkov at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tim.lebedkov at gmail dot c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59202
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56670
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56491
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60613
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Mar 22 16:25:50 2014
New Revision: 208766
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208766&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/60613
* internal-fn.c (ubsan_expand_si_overflow_addsub_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60613
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46800
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41816
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30830
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36815
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60582
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|fortran |target
--- Comment #1 from Dominiq
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47506
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60334
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57079
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55849
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55758
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47605
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46496
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46020
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47648
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49331
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59537
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Summary
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51292
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60601
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|ebotcazou at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60477
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60601
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou ---
fix_up_fall_thru_edges is apparently looking for EDGE_CAN_FALLTHRU edges but
this flag is only set during bb-reorder. Testing trivial patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52176
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
With valgrind 3.7.0 and gfortran 4.9.0 r208594, I no longer see the
Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialized value
if I don't use -flto, while I still see them with 4.8.2. Note the errors are
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48961
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60601
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
The next error is:
In file included from /home/eric/svn/gcc/gcc/gcc.c:36:0:
/home/eric/svn/gcc/gcc/../include/obstack.h: In function 'const char*
handle_spec_function(const char*, bool*)':
/home/eric/svn/gcc/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59537
--- Comment #4 from Lorenz Hüdepohl ---
> From the above gfortran is right to reject the code with initialization.
>
> > Without the SAVE statement it compiles fine.
>
> From the above (C513) this is a bug, the code should give an error
> without
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29892
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60621
Bug ID: 60621
Summary: std::vector::emplace_back generates massively more
code than push_back
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59537
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|"An automatic object shall |No "Automatic array cannot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35667
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42945
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49802
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #7 from Dominique
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54070
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Summary|Wrong code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60622
Bug ID: 60622
Summary: [4.9 Regression] symbol missing when compiled with
-flto
Product: gcc
Version: lto
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37355
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment #6 from Dominique
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27436
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Adding to my list
Do you mean that you assign this PR to you?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60623
Bug ID: 60623
Summary: FAIL: libstdc++-abi/abi_check
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
53 matches
Mail list logo