https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61797
Bug ID: 61797
Summary: [4.10 regression] 'bool decl_in_symtab_p(const_tree)'
defined but not used error breaks x86_64-linux
bootstrap
Product: gcc
Version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61797
--- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson mikpelinux at gmail dot com ---
decl_in_symtab_p is used under #ifdef ENABLE_CHECKING by symtab_get_node (also
in craph.h), and unconditionally by fold-const.c:tree_single_nonzero_warnv_p.
Sticking an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61656
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jul 14 07:31:57 2014
New Revision: 212509
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212509root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/61656
* config/i386/i386.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61294
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jul 14 07:36:39 2014
New Revision: 212510
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212510root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/61294
gcc/c-family/
* c.opt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61757
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The first interesting difference is that for
bb 14:
_793 = ASSERT_EXPR _73, _73 != 18;
switch (_793) default: L32, case 0: L26, case 1: L27, case 2: L28,
case 3: L29, case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61757
--- Comment #24 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
w/o missing return:
extern void abort (void);
struct X { void *p; int res; } a[32];
int foo (unsigned i, unsigned n, void *q)
{
if (i + 1 n q == a[i + 1].p)
{
do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61757
--- Comment #25 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hmm, reverting the record_equality change that is supposed to fix the unrelated
testsuite fallout fixes the testcase ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61757
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61798
Bug ID: 61798
Summary: OpenMP exit code 155, profiling related?
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgomp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41227
--- Comment #12 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I disagree with Tobias' reading: it seems to me that the single-variable common
block should be interoperable with both the single-common C struct and C
variable.
The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61797
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61792
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60608
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
I'm going to save some debugging notes, mostly about non-variadic vs variadic.
First one: the tsubst in fn_type_unification:
fntype = tsubst (TREE_TYPE (fn),
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61790
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41227
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 14 Jul 2014, fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41227
--- Comment #12 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61631
Dmitry G. Dyachenko dimhen at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61783
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61782
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61780
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61787
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41227
--- Comment #14 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #13)
Does it need to inter-operate with
extern struct { struct { int i; } a; } a;
No, I don't read anything in the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61757
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61787
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61783
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61783
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jul 14 10:50:46 2014
New Revision: 212513
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212513root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-07-14 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61757
--- Comment #28 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jul 14 10:50:46 2014
New Revision: 212513
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212513root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-07-14 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61787
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jul 14 10:50:46 2014
New Revision: 212513
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212513root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-07-14 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41227
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Ok, the warning is implemented with checking gimple type compatibility in
lto/lto-symtab.c:
if (!types_compatible_p (TREE_TYPE (prevailing-decl),
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61786
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41227
--- Comment #16 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #15)
Btw, what kind of single-elements can I expect? I suppose they can
be arbitrary (so aggregate as well)?
From the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61786
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jul 14 11:22:34 2014
New Revision: 212515
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212515root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-07-14 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41227
--- Comment #17 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Francois-Xavier Coudert from comment #12)
I disagree with Tobias' reading: it seems to me that the single-variable
common block should be interoperable with both the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61779
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61799
Bug ID: 61799
Summary: [4.6/4.7 regression][ia64] r165240 caused GDB stops
with SIGTRAP at 0 address
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41227
--- Comment #18 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Francois-Xavier Coudert from comment #14)
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #13)
Does it need to inter-operate with
extern struct { struct { int i; } a;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41227
--- Comment #19 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 14 Jul 2014, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41227
--- Comment #17 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61799
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||ia64-*-*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59611
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41227
--- Comment #20 from Tobias Schlüter tobi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Let's please not invent new semantics. There are two things to distinguish:
1) legacy code, where no interoperability semantics were defined
2) new code, where the semantics are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41227
--- Comment #21 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #18)
By your argument,
int i;
and
struct { int i; } a;
are interoperable.
No. The standard only defines
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61780
--- Comment #6 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com paul.richard.thomas
at gmail dot com ---
Dear Richie,
Thanks for doing that. I was going to do 4.8 as soon as I had a
moment and would have changed the summary then. As it happens, I was
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61800
Bug ID: 61800
Summary: [4.10 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault during
Firefox build
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41227
--- Comment #22 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #19)
Well, Bill Long of Cray seems to agree with my interpretation, cf.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61779
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jul 14 13:52:38 2014
New Revision: 212521
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212521root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-07-14 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56858
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61800
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61632
--- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
The following code
program p
call ss0()
end program p
subroutine ss0
CHARACTER(3), save :: ZTYP(3)
DATA ZTYP /'XXX','YYY','ZZZ'/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61802
Bug ID: 61802
Summary: AArch64 execute.exp failures with LTO after r212467
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61801
Bug ID: 61801
Summary: sched2 miscompiles syscall sequence with -g
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44317
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44317
--- Comment #6 from emsr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 33119
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33119action=edit
Patch to pedwarn.
This doesn't have the right column pointed out.
Also, the message (and that given by
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61782
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Santos daniel.santos at pobox dot com ---
Hmm, I suppose I wasn't considering that interpretation of the language. Your
clarification helps though, and actually sounds pretty good: always_inline
forces inlining of the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60608
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61803
Bug ID: 61803
Summary: error reports macro location first, but should not
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56218
--- Comment #4 from Rich Townsend townsend at astro dot wisc.edu ---
Seems to work fine on 4.10 (20140710).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61144
Alexander Monakov amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61144
Alexander Monakov amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #32830|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61757
--- Comment #29 from Pat Haugen pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #21)
(In reply to Pat Haugen from comment #19)
So in the case where MIN_INT32 is passed (sign extended), the upper 32 bits
are '1'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61796
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61632
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
Its not really a glitch. In this case reversion has occurred so i can only
approximate where in the string the error occured. I can improve on it with:
offset =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61803
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61757
Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61757
--- Comment #31 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de ---
On July 14, 2014 8:57:31 PM CEST, law at redhat dot com
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61757
Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61757
--- Comment #32 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com ---
No, we don't have that information available in any reasonable form. That's
one of the things I need to investigate.
One of the possibilities is to flip things on their side a bit.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #3)
(In reply to dhowe...@redhat.com from comment #1)
Index: gcc/config.gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61794
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61632
--- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
A little bit less clumsy
if (f != NULL)
-fmt-format_string = f-source;
+fmt-format_string_len = strrchr (f-source, ')') - f-source + 1;
I don't understand why
+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61796
Luka Perkov luka.perkov at sartura dot hr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61796
--- Comment #3 from Luka Perkov luka.perkov at sartura dot hr ---
Hi Hans-Peter,
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #1)
I think you need to mention the options you passed to configure. Does not
--with-float=hard work? I'd also
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61445
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61445
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Jul 14 20:39:35 2014
New Revision: 212524
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212524root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/61445
PR c++/56947
* pt.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56947
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Jul 14 20:39:35 2014
New Revision: 212524
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212524root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/61445
PR c++/56947
* pt.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61623
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60324
Rich Townsend townsend at astro dot wisc.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||townsend
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38603
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61804
Bug ID: 61804
Summary: rejects-valid if parenthesized temporary is
incremented
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2014-7-15
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #6 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 33121
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33121action=edit
Patch to config.gcc
Correct patch to config.gcc required to actually build the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to dhowe...@redhat.com from comment #0)
BTW,
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61632
--- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This:
+fmt-format_string_len = strrchr (f-source, ')') - f-source + 1;
Is taking the difference between two string pointers, ie memory addresses
This:
printf(pos 0 =%x,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61632
--- Comment #14 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #10)
--- snip ---
Is the printing of 'YYY' supposed to happen?
Its sort of like Steve said earlier. The coder is choosing to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #8 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to dhowe...@redhat.com from comment #0)
../../../gcc-4.9.0-20140702/libgcc/libgcc2.c: In function ‘__subvsi3’:
../../../gcc-4.9.0-20140702/libgcc/libgcc2.c:122:1: error:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61737
--- Comment #9 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #8)
This symbol_ref must be wrapped inside a CONST by the middle-end.
Uh, strike that, I'm hallucinating.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61720
--- Comment #1 from Tim Shen timshen at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: timshen
Date: Tue Jul 15 04:28:51 2014
New Revision: 212539
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212539root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/61720
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61538
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
What is the kernel version? There has been some recent (this year) fixes
inside the kernel for futex.
Though I admit I have seen this just recently when debugging a program where
87 matches
Mail list logo
