https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61969
--- Comment #2 from Zhendong Su ---
> You mean in 32bit mode.
Richard, yes, I meant 32-bit mode.
> I can't reproduce it with trunk or 4.9 but only
> with 4.8:
>
> rguenther@murzim:/tmp> ./compile.sh gcc-4.8 32 1
> rguenther@murzim:/tmp> ./t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61985
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61985
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
I'm afraid I can't tell what you think the bug here is. You make a true
statement about C11 - that's not a bug report. You give some C code -
that's not a bug report either. You don't sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61144
--- Comment #30 from Rich Felker ---
I don't really understand how weak aliases come into play for implementing C++
features, but if their semantics are not identical to the necessary C++
semantics, the compiler should just distinguish between th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61985
Bug ID: 61985
Summary: It's possible to declare a function pointer as
noreturn using the old volatile syntax but not
normally.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61984
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Basically the scheduler has to move the mr 3,4 above the compare and then
combine it with the cmpdi. This is not doable with any of the current
infrastructure of GCC though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61844
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61984
Bug ID: 61984
Summary: use mr. to remove extra cmp instruction on ppc
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55143
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mliska at suse dot cz
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61983
Bug ID: 61983
Summary: 64 bit floating point instructions created for 32 bit
FPU on MIPS r5900
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61978
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61844
--- Comment #14 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Thu Jul 31 20:19:43 2014
New Revision: 213384
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=213384&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
Backport from mainline
2014-07-31 Oleg Endo
PR target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57541
Igor Zamyatin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61982
Bug ID: 61982
Summary: Optimizer does not eliminate stores to destroyed
objects
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61981
Bug ID: 61981
Summary: PowerPC Linux Split-Stack Support
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59855
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58122
--- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #0)
>
> I've also briefly checked with trunk rev 201282 and the problem seems to be
> still there. Here is a reduced test case:
>
> int test (void)
> {
> int sum = 0;
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59855
--- Comment #5 from Josh Triplett ---
(In reply to Tom Tromey from comment #4)
> Implemented on trunk.
Thanks!
Please consider including anonymous structs and unions in the test case as
well:
struct S {
int a;
union {
int b;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55190
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.9.0
--- Comment #5 from Oleg Endo ---
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15339
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61980
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61980
Bug ID: 61980
Summary: [GCC-4.9.1] ICE: in compute_affine_dependence, at
tree-data-ref.c:4233
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61964
--- Comment #12 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 33220
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33220&action=edit
Alternative patch
> But that line is never executed at runtime (well, unless tail
> merging comes al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56365
--- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo ---
As of r213381 this problem still exists.
compiled as C 003t.original:
;; Function min (null)
;; enabled by -tree-original
{
return MIN_EXPR ;
}
;; Function max (null)
;; enabled by -tree-original
{
re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61979
Bug ID: 61979
Summary: Why float variable loading twice into the FTU Stack
during condition checking ?
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61844
--- Comment #13 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Thu Jul 31 16:27:56 2014
New Revision: 213381
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=213381&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/61844
* config/sh/sh.c (sh_legitimate_address_p,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61978
Bug ID: 61978
Summary: implement blacklist for sanitizer
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: sanitizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53911
--- Comment #3 from Oleg Endo ---
Another offset assignment related paper:
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/summit/2003/Optimal%20Stack%20Slot%20Assignment.pdf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56924
--- Comment #3 from Joshua Conner ---
It appears that gcc has a different approach now, which has its own advantages
and disadvantages. Specifically, when I compile this same example I'm now
seeing an initial tree of:
if ((SAVE_EXPR & 240>)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61844
--- Comment #12 from dhowells at redhat dot com ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #10)
> Created attachment 33197 [details]
> a possible fix
It permits me to build a slew of sh64 libgccs, so it's looking good.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60167
Bug 60167 depends on bug 58606, which changed state.
Bug 58606 Summary: [4.8 Regression] [c++11] ICE with specialization in variadic
template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58606
What|Removed |Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58606
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61623
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61977
Bug ID: 61977
Summary: powerpc-eabi preprocessor breaks on lines that end
with "vector"
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51729
Matthew Fortune changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clm at codesourcery dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61762
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
[...]
> Patch attached, it may still help SPARC passing the testcase.
The patch doesn't make a difference, unfortunately.
Rainer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61948
--- Comment #2 from cbaylis at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: cbaylis
Date: Thu Jul 31 14:27:58 2014
New Revision: 213376
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=213376&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/61948
gcc/ChangeLog:
2014-07-29 Charles Baylis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61964
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jul 31 14:06:59 2014
New Revision: 213375
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=213375&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-07-31 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/61964
* tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61964
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.10.0
Summary|[4.8/4.9/4.10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61950
--- Comment #7 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
With the patch, the previously failing gfortran.dg/allocate_class_3.f90
testcase works fine on 64-bit SPARC.
Thanks.
Rainer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59318
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61723
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51312
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61976
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc-ibm-aix*
Status|UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61762
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 33218
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33218&action=edit
patch
I have a patch but as the relevant folding already triggers during C parsing it
is too early for the cg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61407
--- Comment #21 from aggrostyle at gmail dot com ---
Thank you! It worked perfect last night!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61976
Bug ID: 61976
Summary: aix64: Data corruption in struct passed by value
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61964
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 31 Jul 2014, vries at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61964
>
> vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61964
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61950
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Component|middle-en
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61975
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61393
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #1)
> However, I do not really know what the semantics of that flag mean so
> at least for now I am not going to propose this (I am also not quite
> sure this is the be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61975
Bug ID: 61975
Summary: default template arguments do not work with
out-of-class class declaration
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61950
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from Richard Bi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61969
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i?86-*-*
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61938
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to harmeeksingh from comment #6)
>
> Equivalent code when written by hand where tmp is a intermediate array . The
> compiler
> vectorizes both loops.
>
> int k, i;
> /* vectorize the comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61407
--- Comment #20 from James Clarke ---
(In reply to aggrostyle from comment #18)
> Guys, a question... how can i apply the patch? I've read that i have to add:
>
> patch do
> url "https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33180";
> s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61964
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61964
--- Comment #6 from Andreas Schwab ---
Equality test against pointer to void is explicitly allowed by the standard and
implicitly converts the other pointer to void*.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60517
--- Comment #15 from Marc Glisse ---
Author: glisse
Date: Thu Jul 31 09:33:58 2014
New Revision: 213323
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=213323&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-07-31 Marc Glisse
PR c++/60517
gcc/c/
* c-typeck.c (c_fin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61646
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61964
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61868
Bingfeng Mei changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61868
--- Comment #2 from meibf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: meibf
Date: Thu Jul 31 08:50:50 2014
New Revision: 213321
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=213321&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-07-31 Bingfeng Mei
PR lto/61868
* toplev.c (init
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61974
Bug ID: 61974
Summary: error: ‘ASM_WEAKEN_DECL’ was not declared in this
scope
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58408
Nadav Har'El changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nyh at math dot technion.ac.il
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61967
--- Comment #7 from Дилян Палаузов ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> (In reply to Дилян Палаузов from comment #5)
> > Using gcc-ar instead of ar does not help:
> >
> > $grep AR\ = Makefile
> > AR = gcc-ar
> > ...
>
> > ranlib li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61973
Bug ID: 61973
Summary: __thread and deleted destructor
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Ass
68 matches
Mail list logo
