https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59708
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to John David Anglin from comment #18)
> On hppa-unknown-linux-gnu, I get:
>
> FAIL: c-c++-common/torture/builtin-arith-overflow-14.c -O0 execution test
> FAIL: c-c++-common/torture/builtin-ari
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63986
--- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo ---
Created attachment 34073
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34073&action=edit
A possible patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60111
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60111
--- Comment #5 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Sat Nov 22 04:52:46 2014
New Revision: 217959
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217959&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
Backport from mainline
2014-11-20 Segher Boessenkool
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60111
--- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Sat Nov 22 04:45:46 2014
New Revision: 217958
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217958&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
Backport from mainline
2014-11-20 Segher Boessenkool
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64008
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iwamatsu at nigauri dot org
--- Comment #2 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63783
--- Comment #17 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Michael Karcher from comment #15)
> I did not get around to test your proposed patch yet, but it seems like the
> new "logical not" operation always compares only the low 32 bit against
> zero, even
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63783
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #34062|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38958
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Sat Nov 22 02:21:35 2014
New Revision: 217957
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217957&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/63657
PR c++/38958
* call.c (set_up_extended_ref_temp):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63657
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Sat Nov 22 02:21:35 2014
New Revision: 217957
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217957&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/63657
PR c++/38958
* call.c (set_up_extended_ref_temp):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59708
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63939
--- Comment #26 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The failures in comment 22 are due to r217769 and are now fixed at r217946,
likely by r217853 (no interest to check it). Note for the record that the
double spaces were due to r217518 (libsanitizer me
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59148
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Created attachment 34071
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34071&action=edit
Patch fixing the test failure.
With the attached patch based on comment 3, the test now succeeds.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64020
--- Comment #1 from dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org ---
builtin_info.decl is NULL for BUILT_IN_CEXPI.
4586static inline bool
4587builtin_decl_implicit_p (enum built_in_function fncode)
4588{
4589 size_t uns_fncode = (size_t)fncode;
4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63942
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63588
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63849
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63849
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Nov 21 21:36:04 2014
New Revision: 217951
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217951&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/63849
* mangle.c (decl_mangling_context): Use template_type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63588
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Nov 21 21:34:54 2014
New Revision: 217948
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217948&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/63588
* pt.c (uses_template_parms): Handle null argument.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63942
--- Comment #11 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Nov 21 21:35:09 2014
New Revision: 217950
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217950&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/63942
* name-lookup.c (supplement_binding_1): Override a m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63849
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Nov 21 21:35:00 2014
New Revision: 217949
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217949&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/63849
* mangle.c (decl_mangling_context): Use template_type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63897
--- Comment #8 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Fri Nov 21 21:29:54 2014
New Revision: 217947
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217947&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-11-21 Vladimir Makarov
PR target/63897
* lra-lives.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63661
--- Comment #21 from H.J. Lu ---
It was fixed by r217783 on trunk and the fix also works
on 4.9 branch. Is is the real fix?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64006
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63975
Bug 63975 depends on bug 63848, which changed state.
Bug 63848 Summary: [5 Regression] FAIL:
c-c++-common/torture/builtin-arith-overflow-17.c -O0 execution test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63848
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63848
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63848
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Nov 21 20:42:20 2014
New Revision: 217946
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217946&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/63848
PR target/63975
* internal-fn.c (expand_arith_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63975
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Nov 21 20:42:20 2014
New Revision: 217946
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217946&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/63848
PR target/63975
* internal-fn.c (expand_arith_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64006
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Nov 21 20:41:37 2014
New Revision: 217945
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217945&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/64006
* tree-vrp.c (stmt_interesting_for_vrp)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63468
Ryan Mansfield changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63551
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
I have posted the fix to the mailing list as well:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg02842.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63544
tbsaunde at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31798
Dima Krasner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dima at dimakrasner dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63703
Lawrence Velázquez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||larryv at macports dot org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64020
Bug ID: 64020
Summary: jit misses sin/cos optimizations
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: jit
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63814
--- Comment #25 from Martin Jambor ---
I proposed a fix on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg02832.html
If it gets accepted, please feel free to add the testcase(s). I only
checked using a darwin cross compiler an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64003
--- Comment #6 from dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org ---
If I'm reading things right, this loop in shorten_branches populates
insn_lengths[uid] in order of the NEXT_INSN () iteration:
int (*length_fun) (rtx_insn *) = increasing ? insn_min_length :
i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63783
--- Comment #15 from Michael Karcher ---
I did not get around to test your proposed patch yet, but it seems like the new
"logical not" operation always compares only the low 32 bit against zero, even
if there is a 64 bit operand. If my analysis i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64017
howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||howarth at bromo dot med
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64019
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64015
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679
--- Comment #15 from jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I wonder whether the call to can_move_by_pieces in gimplify.c is bogus. It
seems to me that gimplify.c really wants to know whether it is a good idea to
scalarize the constructor copy - nothi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63965
--- Comment #8 from Pat Haugen ---
(In reply to Michael Meissner from comment #5)
> Note, the patch will fix the errors in compiling pr27158.c and
> altivec-spat.c. It will not fix the errors in compiling unonbon.c, which is
> an entirely differ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64019
Bug ID: 64019
Summary: ICE in extract_constrain_insn
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63856
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
It was fixed by r217909. We can add the testcase and close it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63762
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63749
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63965
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63965
--- Comment #6 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Fri Nov 21 18:03:09 2014
New Revision: 217940
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217940&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-11-21 Michael Meissner
PR target/63965
* config/rs6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63929
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63848
--- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> Created attachment 34069 [details]
> gcc5-pr63848.patch
>
> Untested fix.
Yes, this fixes failures for alpha with:
gmake -j 4 -k check RUNTESTFLAGS=dg-torture.ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63661
--- Comment #20 from Martin Jambor ---
So had a look at what my tiny bit in IRA does with this testcase and
while it certainly triggers the bug, I don't think it causes it. It
performs exactly the same modifications as when -mtune=nehalem is not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63731
--- Comment #18 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
The -a option to "go build" means to rebuild all packages rather than using the
installed versions (see http://golang.org/cmd/go for documentation). The
"-tags netgo" option means to build with the build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63848
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63784
--- Comment #7 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Nov 21 16:49:17 2014
New Revision: 217937
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217937&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Always use PIC option with -shared in libtool
Libtool needs to pas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63784
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63942
--- Comment #10 from Jason Merrill ---
Reduced:
template
struct A
{
A(const T&) {}
A(const A&) {}
};
template class A;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63969
--- Comment #6 from dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to dmalcolm from comment #4)
> Patch posted for review as
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg02617.html
TMM confirmed on IRC that the proposed patch fixes the issue for th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38757
--- Comment #7 from Mark Wielaard ---
Author: mark
Date: Fri Nov 21 16:00:06 2014
New Revision: 217934
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217934&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/38757 gcc does not emit DW_LANG_C99.
For C and C++ add the langua
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64018
Bug ID: 64018
Summary: JIT tutorial does not describe error-handling
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: jit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63673
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63673
--- Comment #8 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Fri Nov 21 15:39:20 2014
New Revision: 217931
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217931&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-11-21 Bill Schmidt
PR target/63673
* config/rs6000/rs60
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63673
--- Comment #7 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Fri Nov 21 15:38:15 2014
New Revision: 217930
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217930&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-11-21 Bill Schmidt
PR target/63673
* config/rs6000/rs60
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63942
--- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to David Edelsohn from comment #8)
> I see -nostdinc++ -std=gnu++11 -g -O2
Ah, it seems to be triggered by -g.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63952
Ulrich Weigand changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63952
--- Comment #4 from Ulrich Weigand ---
Author: uweigand
Date: Fri Nov 21 15:33:27 2014
New Revision: 217929
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217929&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/63952
* optabs.c (prepare_cmp_insn): Do no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63731
--- Comment #17 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
Can you clarify how using -a -tags netgo actually works. I know it requires
that the source be available, but it must mean that it rebuilds the package for
the current link only, throws it away aft
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63551
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #3)
> indeed, somewhere we need to view convert the aggregate value... Predicates
> works on conditions on arguments, so I suppose this ought to happen at
> ipa-prop side
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63598
--- Comment #5 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 11/21/2014 7:52 AM, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Can you please check if the issue still persists?
I will check. All my recent builds are with flag_ipa_icf_functions = 0.
>
> I would ap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63942
--- Comment #8 from David Edelsohn ---
The testsuite invokes compiles overloaded.cc with the following command line on
AIX:
/tmp/20141120/./gcc/xg++ -shared-libgcc -B/tmp/20141120/./gcc -nostdinc++
-L/tmp/20141120/powerpc-ibm-aix7.1.0.0/libstdc+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63633
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63633
--- Comment #2 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Author: gjl
Date: Fri Nov 21 14:04:25 2014
New Revision: 217922
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217922&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
Forward-port from 2014-10-30 4_9-branch r216934
PR target/63
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64013
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Nov 21 14:03:37 2014
New Revision: 217921
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217921&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/64013
* sanitizer_common/sanitizer_linux.cc (FileExis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64013
Dmitry Vyukov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dvyukov at google dot com
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63975
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63901
--- Comment #5 from Peter A. Bigot ---
Yes, that could work. msp430mcu in mspgcc days did a lot more than specs
fragments; if interested see the relevant material (BSD-3-Clause) is in the
msp430mcu repository at:
https://sourceforge.net/p/mspgcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64013
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57335
--- Comment #10 from Paolo Carlini ---
Ah, excellent.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64014
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63977
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64017
Bug ID: 64017
Summary: Support ISL 0.14.0 (to fix ICE with
gfortran.dg/graphite/pr42393.f90)
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64014
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63243
Bug 63243 depends on bug 63239, which changed state.
Bug 63239 Summary: DWARF does not represent C++ deleted methods
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63239
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63239
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63239
--- Comment #11 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Fri Nov 21 13:32:08 2014
New Revision: 217920
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217920&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/63239
* g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/deleted-member
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61137
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50459
Bug 50459 depends on bug 61137, which changed state.
Bug 61137 Summary: [5 regression] FAIL: gcc.target/ia64/small-addr-1.c (test
for excess errors)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61137
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63239
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
You should pass -gno-strict-dwarf unconditionally, I think vxworks has similar
defaults as darwin.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61137
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Nov 21 13:28:58 2014
New Revision: 217919
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217919&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/61137
* config/ia64/ia64.c (ia64_attribute_takes_identif
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63239
--- Comment #9 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Fri Nov 21 13:27:57 2014
New Revision: 217918
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217918&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/63239
* g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/deleted-member-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63239
--- Comment #8 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> So using
> -gdwarf-2 and -gstrict-dwarf by default is necessary because of badly
> written toolchain.
I had tried -gdwarf-4, but didn't know about -gst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63942
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to David Edelsohn from comment #6)
> It still occurred as of [trunk revision 217822]
I'm still not seeing it in a cross-compiler. Does the error depend on
particular flags?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63239
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Mark Wielaard from comment #6)
> It looks like for some reason Darwin defaults to some ancient (v2) strict
> version of DWARF. Please try adding -gno-strict-dwarf -gdwarf-4 to
> gcc/testsuite/g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63239
--- Comment #6 from Mark Wielaard ---
It looks like for some reason Darwin defaults to some ancient (v2) strict
version of DWARF. Please try adding -gno-strict-dwarf -gdwarf-4 to
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/deleted-member-function.C dg-opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64006
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
/testcase.c
-fdump-ipa-icf-details
uname -a
Linux marxinbox.suse.cz 3.16.6-2-desktop #1 SMP PREEMPT Mon Oct 20 13:47:22 UTC
2014 (feb42ea) x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
gcc version 5.0.0 20141121 (experimental) (GCC)
ipa-icf-details log:
Equal symbols: 1
Fraction of visited symbols: 33.33%
debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63598
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Can you please check if the issue still persists?
I would appreciate further information related to PR, or do we have any GCC fam
machine I can debug it?
Thanks,
Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63569
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Problem is that IPA ICF contains compare_operand that is called recursively and
handles all tree types. Richard correctly pointed that we should split the
method to memory-related operand comparison and the re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63573
--- Comment #20 from Martin Liška ---
Hello.
I've just bootstrapped on ggc110 after r217307 was applied.
Can you please verify if the problem still persists?
Thanks,
Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57335
--- Comment #9 from Kai Tietz ---
Yes, that works without any warnings with delayed-folding patch.
(I mentioned it in comment #6 as *valid-code* sample)
1 - 100 of 155 matches
Mail list logo
