https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66810
--- Comment #3 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Tue Oct 20 15:20:29 2015
New Revision: 229083
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229083=gcc=rev
Log:
Skip local error_mark_node decls
There is no need to finalize local
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52970
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52403
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51632
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67609
--- Comment #11 from Vladimir Makarov ---
I've committed the patch into the trunk. As the patch is not trivial, I'd wait
for a week before committing it into gcc-5-branch to see how it is doing on the
trunk first.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68033
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
BT in trunk branch:
#0 c_tree_printer (pp=0x2518a50, text=0x7fffb650, spec=0x2513a61 "E",
precision=, wide=, set_locus=false, hash=false)
at ../../gcc/c/c-objc-common.c:174
#1 0x0177715c in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51947
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67964
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67964
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Tue Oct 20 16:53:45 2015
New Revision: 229091
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229091=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c/67964
* c-parser.c (c_parser_attributes): Break out of the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57360
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68035
Bug ID: 68035
Summary: ipa performance issue when no procedures are present
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55179
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20151020 (experimental) [trunk revision 229078] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -O1 -c small.c
$ gcc-5.2 -Os -c small.c
$
$ gcc-trunk -Os -c small.c
small.c: In function ‘fn1’:
small.c:4:1: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
fn1
%rbp
leaq-16(%r13), %rsp
.cfi_def_cfa 7, 16
popq%r13
.cfi_def_cfa_offset 8
iret
.L5:
.cfi_restore_state
callabort
.cfi_endproc
.LFE0:
.size fn, .-fn
.comm ip,8,8
.comm error,8,8
.ident
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56626
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47235
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49565
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51591
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67933
--- Comment #4 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #3)
> (In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #2)
> > The generated finalization wrapper has code doing
> > deallocate(ptr2%classes(:)%class_var)
> > where ptr2 is a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59796
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21855
Andrew Haley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68032
Bug ID: 68032
Summary: std-c++-14: Regex fails to match
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15525
Andrew Haley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67443
--- Comment #19 from Dominik Vogt ---
This is a cleaner test case for s390/s390x. If there was a way to tell gcc
"all registers except the first three argument registers are not available",
the test should be fairly easy to convert to other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57957
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66583
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68032
ge...@schorsch-tech.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67443
--- Comment #20 from Dominik Vogt ---
Created attachment 36553
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36553=edit
Dejagnu test case for s390/s390x.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67999
--- Comment #18 from Alexander Cherepanov ---
I guess nobody doubts that the current situation in gcc+glibc (and clang+glibc)
should be fixed as valid programs are miscompiled. And it's easy to imagine
security consequences of this when buffers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60976
--- Comment #24 from Giuseppe Ottaviano ---
> No, only on trunk. It depends on the additions in r225242, so to use the new
> alloc_traits.h you would only need the new code in
> https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc/trunk/libstdc%2B%2B-v3/include/std/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67999
--- Comment #19 from Alexander Cherepanov ---
(In reply to Daniel Micay from comment #5)
> Objects larger than PTRDIFF_MAX are forbidden with musl (malloc, mmap and
> friends report ENOMEM and it's explicitly undefined to create them in
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68038
Bug ID: 68038
Summary: "Internal compiler error: Killed: program cc1" should
read "Virtual memory exhausted"
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68038
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67999
--- Comment #20 from Daniel Micay ---
> I think several issues are mixed:
A conforming C implementation requires either fixing both the compiler and libc
functions to handle > PTRDIFF_MAX objects or preventing them from being
allocated via
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66583
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Oct 21 02:24:08 2015
New Revision: 229108
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229108=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/66583
* init.c (innermost_aggr_scope): New.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68037
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68039
Bug ID: 68039
Summary: Incorrect unused-result warning
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67443
--- Comment #18 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 20 Oct 2015, vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67443
>
> --- Comment #17 from Dominik Vogt ---
> > So does [patch] fix the issue?
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67435
--- Comment #10 from Yann Collet ---
> there already is an aligned attribute for functions, variables and fields,
Sure, but none of them is related to aligning the start of an hot instruction
loop. Aligning the function instead looks like a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67443
--- Comment #17 from Dominik Vogt ---
> So does [patch] fix the issue?
Yes. The testsuite on 64-bit and 31-bit systems has no regressions with the
patch either.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67964
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68030
Bug ID: 68030
Summary: Redundant address calculations in vectorized loop
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68015
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Krebbel ---
Created attachment 36549
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36549=edit
Experimental fix
I'm regression testing the attached patch.
101 - 143 of 143 matches
Mail list logo
