--- Comment #24 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-03 10:50
---
Fixed in 4.6, wontfix in 4.5.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #21 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-06 11:19
---
GCC 4.5.0 is being released. Deferring to 4.5.1.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #20 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-30 17:22 ---
Still have gcc.dg/pr34668-1.c failing on mainline (with checking enabled).
--
ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #19 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-29 22:32
---
*** Bug 42902 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #18 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 16:45
---
Not working on this. The ICE will go away with release checking.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #17 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2010-01-05 11:25
---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] IMA is broken
See what I said in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2009-09/msg00519.html
suggesting deprecating the implementation of -combine and keeping the
interface.
--
--- Comment #16 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-03 23:08 ---
Can we close this bug as WONTFIX, and remove IMA for GCC 4.5?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39959
--- Comment #15 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-22 18:56
---
*** Bug 42147 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-14 21:28
---
*** Bug 41086 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39959
--- Comment #14 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-14 21:28
---
We also have
FAIL: gcc.dg/pr34668-1.c (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gcc.dg/pr34668-1.c (test for excess errors)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39959
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-23 16:14
---
*** Bug 41450 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39959
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-23 16:18
---
P1? This is --combine being randomly broken with the C FEs inability to
properly
unify all same types from different TUs. An ICE with checking only, but a
(non-regression) possible wrong-code issue due to
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-18 05:10
---
*** Bug 41052 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-08-16 11:31 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] IMA is broken
On Sun, 16 Aug 2009, hp at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #8 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-16 00:16 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
It was fixed
--- Comment #8 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-16 00:16 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
It was fixed between revision revision 150368 and revision 150371.
For the record, covered up rather than fixed according to
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-08/msg00102.html.
Richi, the
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-08-03 14:41 ---
It was fixed between revision revision 150368 and revision 150371.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39959
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-17 21:08 ---
I have a patch.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-08 20:46 ---
On powerpc*-linux this test begins failing in the same way with this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revrev=146831
r146831 | rguenth | 2009-04-27 11:18:38 + (Mon, 27 Apr 2009)
--
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39959
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39959
--- Comment #1 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-30 00:16 ---
Noticed on cris-elf too, once the build issues were resolved.
Thus I don't have a better certain regression-range than 146694:146982, but
with a previous patch by Matz I didn't see this at 146828, so perhaps it's
--- Comment #2 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-30 00:24 ---
I see what appears as the same bug for gcc.dg/struct/wo_prof_double_malloc.c
too, so I won't open a separate PR for that regression:
Running /tmp/hpautotest-gcc1/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/struct/struct-reorg.exp
...
--- Comment #3 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-30 01:24 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
I see what appears as the same bug for gcc.dg/struct/wo_prof_double_malloc.c
Woops, ok, I noticed that's PR39960. Ignore this and the previous comments. :)
--
23 matches
Mail list logo
