t/users/vlivinsk/gcc-trunk/mpc-1.0.3/bin
--prefix=/export/users/vlivinsk/gcc-trunk/bin
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20160315 (experimental) (Revision=234226)
Test:
#include
void hash(unsigned long long int &seed, unsigned long long int const &v) {
seed ^= v + 0x9e3779b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70245
--- Comment #5 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #4)
>
> I see in peephole a wrong transformation:
>
> 190: cx:SI=dx:SI
> REG_DEAD dx:SI
>95: {cx:SI=cx:SI+[cx:SI];clobber flags:CC;}
>
> into
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70147
--- Comment #20 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16)
> I am really concerned about the rest of the base object, because
> the constructor is only called once, and only in the in_charge
> ctor.
I don't think that's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67687
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2015-10-19 00:00:00 |2016-3-15
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70233
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Harold,
Thanks for the help and I will test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66477
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Last reconfirmed|2015-0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 58281, which changed state.
Bug 58281 Summary: Problem with explicitly instantiated constexpr template
functions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58281
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58281
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58281
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Wed Mar 16 03:00:02 2016
New Revision: 234246
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234246&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/58281 - Problem with explicitly instantiated constexpr template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65908
--- Comment #18 from Arthur Rodrigues ---
I'm using GCC 5.2.1 and the same happened to me just now.
Above is the output from `gcc -v` command:
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/5/lto-wr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60430
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|5.0 |5.3.0, 6.0
--- Comment #4 from Martin Seb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 70247, which changed state.
Bug 70247 Summary: constexpr error using the address of an initialized reference
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70247
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60430
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70247
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70250
Bug ID: 70250
Summary: Compilation hangs without optimization.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70048
--- Comment #19 from Richard Henderson ---
(In reply to Jiong Wang from comment #16)
> But there is a performance issue as described at
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/msg00281.html
>
> "this patch forces register scaling ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70246
--- Comment #4 from Mike Jarvis ---
Created attachment 37984
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37984&action=edit
An alternate source that uses a custom Complex class
OK, here is a version that rolls its own Complex class, rath
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70245
--- Comment #4 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> The difference between r227381 and r227382 on the testcase is:
> --- r227382-1.s1 2016-03-15 20:34:52.699640513 +0100
> +++ r227382-1.s2 2016-03-15 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70246
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #2)
> This is too large to analyze. See https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/minimize.html
>
> If it cannot be minimized, then I would suggest closing this as WONTFIX
> beca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70246
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69799
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69799
--- Comment #7 from John David Anglin ---
Author: danglin
Date: Tue Mar 15 23:34:49 2016
New Revision: 234240
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234240&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libfortran/69799
* gfortran.dg/coarray_allocate_5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70249
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
-W -Wall would have detected it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63169
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54110
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32621
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26525
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26270
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70249
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70249
Bug ID: 70249
Summary: print error float with printf
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47992
--- Comment #10 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Mar 15 22:05:22 2016
New Revision: 234237
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234237&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix thinko in indirect_jump_optimize
PR rtl-optimization/69195
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47992
--- Comment #9 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Mar 15 22:04:54 2016
New Revision: 234236
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234236&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix thinko in indirect_jump_optimize
PR rtl-optimization/69195
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69195
--- Comment #25 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Mar 15 22:05:22 2016
New Revision: 234237
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234237&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix thinko in indirect_jump_optimize
PR rtl-optimization/69195
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69195
--- Comment #24 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Mar 15 22:04:54 2016
New Revision: 234236
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234236&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix thinko in indirect_jump_optimize
PR rtl-optimization/69195
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69195
--- Comment #23 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Mar 15 22:04:42 2016
New Revision: 234235
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234235&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix thinko in indirect_jump_optimize
PR rtl-optimization/69195
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47992
--- Comment #8 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Mar 15 22:04:42 2016
New Revision: 234235
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234235&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix thinko in indirect_jump_optimize
PR rtl-optimization/69195
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70155
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70209
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6 Regression] ICE in |[5 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70209
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Tue Mar 15 21:10:11 2016
New Revision: 234234
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234234&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/70209
* tree.c (strip_typedefs): Call strip_type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70248
Bug ID: 70248
Summary: constexpr initialization with unspecified equality
expression accepted
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70233
Harald Anlauf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70247
Bug ID: 70247
Summary: constexpr error using the address of an initialized
reference
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70240
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70141
--- Comment #20 from Alexander Kondratskiy ---
Awesome! Thank you Jason!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70246
Bug ID: 70246
Summary: Spurious -Wmaybe-uninitialized warnings with -O1
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70246
--- Comment #1 from Mike Jarvis ---
Created attachment 37981
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37981&action=edit
Preprocessed file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70141
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70245
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70095
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Mar 15 19:37:37 2016
New Revision: 234231
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234231&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/70095
* pt.c (instantiate_decl): Fix call to variab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70245
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 37979
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37979&action=edit
r227382-2.C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70245
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 37978
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37978&action=edit
r227382-1.C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70245
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70245
Bug ID: 70245
Summary: [6 Regression] Miscompilation of ICU on i386 with atom
tuning starting with r227382
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70141
--- Comment #18 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Mar 15 19:21:44 2016
New Revision: 234228
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234228&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/70141
* pt.c (for_each_template_parm_r): Always wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70244
Bug ID: 70244
Summary: ICE spec_dimen_size() Bad dimension
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68809
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 69353 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69353
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70120
--- Comment #7 from Zdenek Sojka ---
(In reply to Richard Henderson from comment #6)
> Created attachment 37975 [details]
> proposed patch
>
> This is kind of a hack, but not too bad.
>
> Zdenek, could you please test on that third testcase tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69513
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69822
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68659
--- Comment #23 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 69822 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69513
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Mar 15 17:55:39 2016
New Revision: 234226
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234226&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/69513
* dwarf2out.c (flush_limbo_die_list
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70220
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70235
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70237
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68232
--- Comment #9 from Pat Haugen ---
(In reply to James Greenhalgh from comment #8)
>
> For powerpc64 you'll need to enable conditional move instructions using
> "-misel" (or equivalent) for this test to pass.
>
Added -misel for powerpc* in r2342
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70235
--- Comment #3 from Antoine Gardeux ---
Thanks for the quick confirmation.
Since this kind of format is widely used in our code base, it would be very
tedious to change all the occurrences. Is there any other way to work around
this issue ?
Tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70243
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|PowerPC V4DFmode should not |PowerPC V4SFmode should not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68715
--- Comment #8 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 69735 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69735
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70242
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
So something like this may work:
diff --git a/config/bootstrap-O3.mk b/config/bootstrap-O3.mk
index b269a3f7e12a..b9881e9c1664 100644
--- a/config/bootstrap-O3.mk
+++ b/config/bootstrap-O3.mk
@@ -1 +1,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70243
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70243
Bug ID: 70243
Summary: PowerPC V4DFmode should not use Altivec instructions
on VSX systems
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70229
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
And the fix should be just to
--- a/gcc/cp/constexpr.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/constexpr.c
@@ -419,7 +419,8 @@ check_constexpr_ctor_body_1 (tree last, tree list)
switch (TREE_CODE (list))
{
case DECL_EXPR:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68715
--- Comment #7 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to vries from comment #6)
> Created attachment 37976 [details]
> tentative patch, fixes examples from comment 4 and 5.
also fixes the first testcase, thanks!
For whatever reason I had to app
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70229
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70222
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fixed for 6+ so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70239
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70240
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Well, perhaps even better would be not to build all the trees, but use
> gimple_build () APIs that should also simplify stuff while building it on
> GIMPLE. But that might be too risky for stage4 now.
My p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70240
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #4)
> > Better gimplify a and b before building the COND_EXPR.
>
> But then you undo the fix for PR middle-end/68215, so you make
> c-c++-common/opaque-vector.c
> re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70240
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Better gimplify a and b before building the COND_EXPR.
But then you undo the fix for PR middle-end/68215, so you make
c-c++-common/opaque-vector.c
regress again on a bunch of platforms.
Besides gimplifi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70240
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70242
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68715
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=68802
cbaylis at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70120
--- Comment #6 from Richard Henderson ---
Created attachment 37975
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37975&action=edit
proposed patch
This is kind of a hack, but not too bad.
Zdenek, could you please test on that third testca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70222
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 15 16:11:48 2016
New Revision: 234222
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234222&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/70222
* combine.c (simplify_shift_cons
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70239
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 15 16:10:59 2016
New Revision: 234221
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234221&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/70239
* tree-ssa-sccvn.c (VN_INFO_GET): Use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70242
Bug ID: 70242
Summary: GCC bootstrap failed on x86_64 using
"--with-build-config=bootstrap-O3"
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70120
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70141
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70209
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69032
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Mar 15 15:42:07 2016
New Revision: 234219
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234219&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR rtl-optimization/69032
* sel-sched-ir.c (get_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=0
--- Comment #9 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Mar 15 15:36:44 2016
New Revision: 234218
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234218&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/0
* sel-sched-ir.c (merge_expr): Avoid c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70162
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64939
--- Comment #3 from Ken Brown ---
This bug is gone as of gcc 5.3.0. It can be closed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64939
--- Comment #2 from Ken Brown ---
This bug is gone as of gcc 5.3.0. It can be closed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63384
--- Comment #6 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Mar 15 15:25:41 2016
New Revision: 234217
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234217&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR rtl-optimization/63384
* sel-sched.c (invoke_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68809
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hmm, apparently char 0 and int 0 are equal as far as operand_equal_p is
concerned:
...
(gdb) p gimple_phi_arg_def (p1, 0)
$3 = (tree_node *) 0x761463a8
(gdb) p gimple_phi_arg_def (p2, 0)
$4 = (t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64411
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Author: abel
Date: Tue Mar 15 15:13:29 2016
New Revision: 234216
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234216&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/64411
* sched-deps.c (get_implicit_reg
1 - 100 of 169 matches
Mail list logo
