https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63770
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63770
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
from a match.pd pattern
/* Try to fold (type) X op CST - (type) (X op ((type-x) CST))
when profitable.
For bitwise binary operations apply operand conversions to the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61515
--- Comment #26 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #25)
So I think there's another approach. invalidate_equivalences is passed in
the stack of temporary equivalences, which include those
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63770
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sasha.levin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63767
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63699
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63750
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63699
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63699
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|bootstrap fails with Apple
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63766
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63764
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63764
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #1)
Also happens when building the Linux kernel:
That is a different issue and already recorded as bug 63569 (I reduced it
further
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63761
thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63761
--- Comment #2 from thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I can reproduce, thanks for the testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63534
Martin Liška marxin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63765
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ro at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63764
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63765
--- Comment #4 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 33916
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33916action=edit
proposed patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48956
--- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
Out of curiosity, what happened to this issue? (is still assigned to Steven)
Note that as far as I can see it's essentially a C issue, because the C++
front-end rejects this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63771
Bug ID: 63771
Summary: internal compiler error: in lra_create_copy, at
lra.c:1532
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63764
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63770
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 7 10:51:06 2014
New Revision: 217214
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217214root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-11-07 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63770
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63766
--- Comment #2 from Ilya Enkovich enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com ---
Problem caused by the fact that now all function come to local optimizations in
SSA form. It affects inline parameters computation and therefore inlining
order.
During early
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63676
--- Comment #1 from Jiong Wang jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jiwang
Date: Fri Nov 7 11:08:30 2014
New Revision: 217215
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217215root=gccview=rev
Log:
[PATCH] PR63676, exit tree fold when node be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63676
Jiong Wang jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63534
--- Comment #59 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #58)
Hello Jack.
I would like to thank you for the effort you invested in testing. I'm going
to push all IPA ICF related patches to mainline as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63534
--- Comment #60 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
Martin,
Using make -k check-gfortran
RUNTESTFLAGS=--target_board=unix'{-m32,-m64}'
on the build from Comment 57 as a quick regression scan shows...
See pr63622
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63766
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Ilya Enkovich from comment #2)
Problem caused by the fact that now all function come to local optimizations
in SSA form. It affects inline parameters computation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63605
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
vect__4.18_102 = MEM[(int *)vectp_b.17_73];
vect_d_5.19_103 = vect__4.18_102 1;
vect_patt_13.20_104 = VEC_COND_EXPR vect__4.18_102 { 0, 0, 0, 0 }, { 1, 1,
1, 1 }, { 0, 0,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63595
--- Comment #11 from Martin Liška marxin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri Nov 7 12:32:30 2014
New Revision: 217218
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217218root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR ipa/63595
* g++.dg/ipa/pr63595.C: New
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63747
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška marxin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri Nov 7 12:35:43 2014
New Revision: 217219
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217219root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR ipa/63747
* gcc.dg/ipa/pr63747.c: New
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63595
Martin Liška marxin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63747
Martin Liška marxin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63610
--- Comment #10 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
(In reply to Volker Braun from comment #8)
Another workaround is to set MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET=10.9
Libtool-2.4.3 will have the fix, gcc (and everybody else) should just
reconfigure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63721
Martin Liška marxin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63580
Martin Liška marxin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jiwang at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48956
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63766
Ilya Enkovich enkovich.gnu at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63244
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63573
--- Comment #10 from Dominik Vogt vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---
This still happens for me on s390x on git-svn-id:
svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk@217069
138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4. Is this supposed to be fixed by now?
Is one
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63580
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška marxin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri Nov 7 13:37:41 2014
New Revision: 217222
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217222root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR ipa/63580
* cgraphunit.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63244
--- Comment #15 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
On x86_64:
markus@x4 /tmp % cat sock.i
struct sock
{
int sk_userlocks : 4;
} a;
const struct sock b;
void
fn1 ()
{
a.sk_userlocks = b.sk_userlocks 1;
}
markus@x4 /tmp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63534
--- Comment #61 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #60)
Martin,
Using make -k check-gfortran
RUNTESTFLAGS=--target_board=unix'{-m32,-m64}'
on the build from Comment 57 as a quick
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63573
--- Comment #11 from Dominik Vogt vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---
With the two patches for calls.c and expr.c atop the said commit the ICE is
gone on s390x.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63244
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P3
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63770
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61391
--- Comment #6 from Yuri Rumyantsev ysrumyan at gmail dot com ---
Arseny, I am not able to close this bug but you can do it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63534
--- Comment #62 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
(In reply to howarth from comment #61)
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #60)
Martin,
Using make -k check-gfortran
RUNTESTFLAGS=--target_board=unix'{-m32,-m64}'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63534
--- Comment #63 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
Reading through pr63622 a second time, it appears that these fortran
regressions were never triaged. I think we should proceed with the
bootstrap fixes and consider the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63617
--- Comment #2 from Adi adivilceanu at yahoo dot com ---
Can you tell me what are the supported version(s) now?
Also can you give me a kind of gcc supported version life cycle/chart/roadmap ?
Thank you,
Adi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63580
--- Comment #8 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The original testcase still ICEs on ppc64.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63534
--- Comment #64 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #63)
Please stop mixing the problems introduced by r216154 and r216305. While I
agree that the first step is to fix bootstrap, there is no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63771
--- Comment #1 from Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org ---
--with-as=/home/slug/optware/cs08q1armel/toolchain/arm-2008q1/bin/arm-none-linux-gnueabi-as
9828c9828
return \.word\\t0xe7f000f0\;
---
return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63404
Jiong Wang jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63463
Jiong Wang jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61391
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61319
--- Comment #18 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: manu
Revision: 211263
Modified property: svn:log
Modified: svn:log at Fri Nov 7 16:15:52 2014
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61391
--- Comment #8 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: manu
Revision: 211263
Modified property: svn:log
Modified: svn:log at Fri Nov 7 16:15:52 2014
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63366
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Nov 7 16:21:15 2014
New Revision: 217229
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217229root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/63366
* decl.c (grokdeclarator): Fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63244
--- Comment #17 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #16)
Hmm, the 5.0 issue was fixed by r217214. Maybe the fix should be
backported to 4.9?
The 5.0 issue was new in 5.0. What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61391
--- Comment #9 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Yuri Rumyantsev from comment #4)
It turned out that wrong PR number was used in ChangeLog. In fact this bug
was fixed:
You can also edit the svn:log with:
svn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63198
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Bernard thomas at famillebernardgouriou dot fr ---
I think I found the root of the problem. I'm preparing a patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63244
--- Comment #18 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #17)
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #16)
Hmm, the 5.0 issue was fixed by r217214. Maybe the fix should be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61515
--- Comment #27 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com ---
Richi,
I thought you had mentioned something along those lines as well and I scanned
for it yesterday but didn't see it. Maybe it's in a different BZ or
something. I'll probably
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63772
Bug ID: 63772
Summary: Double included .h files in gcc/gtype-desc.c
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63772
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|libgcc |middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59708
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #33912|0 |1
is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63773
Bug ID: 63773
Summary: [meta-bug] Restoring darwin bootstrap for gcc 5.0
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63773
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63774
Bug ID: 63774
Summary: wrong code at all optimization levels on
x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63774
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63774
--- Comment #2 from Zhendong Su su at cs dot ucdavis.edu ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
This code is undefined as you are returning an address of local variable.
Andrew, that's what I was unsure about and thus reported it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63244
Cary Coutant ccoutant at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63775
Bug ID: 63775
Summary: [C++11] Regex range with leading dash (-) not working
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63776
Bug ID: 63776
Summary: [C++11] Regex collate matching not working
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63774
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org ---
At least it was deliberate. I did wonder if anyone would complain when I wrote
the patch...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63710
--- Comment #1 from Chengnian Sun chengniansun at gmail dot com ---
I find the following test case, which seems related to this bug. The locations
of both warnings point to the condition instead of the expressions which
require conversion.
$:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63777
Bug ID: 63777
Summary: bootstrap failure under x86_64 Fedora 15 in the
linkage of libstdc++.so.6.0.21
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63534
--- Comment #65 from Kirill Yukhin kyukhin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kyukhin
Date: Fri Nov 7 20:42:36 2014
New Revision: 217237
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217237root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/63534
gcc/
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63605
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 7 20:57:01 2014
New Revision: 217238
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217238root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-11-07 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63605
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63773
--- Comment #2 from Stupachenko Evgeny evstupac at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to howarth from comment #0)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33915 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63534#c55
for disabling
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63773
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54232
Stupachenko Evgeny evstupac at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||evstupac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63777
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63748
Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63773
--- Comment #4 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
(In reply to Francois-Xavier Coudert from comment #3)
I'd like to help, but it's such a mess. There is not one PR per distinct
issue, but various things reported in long threads.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63748
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I think this is hard warning to avoid in the compiler as we don't know if foo
calls longjmp or not. Note we don't know if alloc_jmp_buf does a push
somewhere else.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55023
Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55023
--- Comment #5 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 11/7/2014 5:13 PM, law at redhat dot com wrote:
Agreed, seems that RTL DSE is eliminating the stores. Presumably its not
considering the call as potentially reading the argument stores.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55023
--- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com ---
Is the setup for the memory store different? ie, in the sibcall case are we
making it hard for DSE to see that we have argument stores? different base
register perhaps?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63773
--- Comment #5 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to howarth from comment #4)
Did you apply the PA ICF aliasing restriction patch from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33843?
Yes, I have it in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63773
--- Comment #6 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
(In reply to Francois-Xavier Coudert from comment #5)
(In reply to howarth from comment #4)
Did you apply the PA ICF aliasing restriction patch from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63748
--- Comment #4 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
I think this is hard warning to avoid in the compiler as we don't know if
foo calls longjmp or not. Note we don't know if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61515
--- Comment #28 from Jeffrey A. Law law at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: law
Date: Fri Nov 7 22:55:00 2014
New Revision: 217239
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217239root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/61515
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63651
--- Comment #2 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Francois-Xavier Coudert from comment #1)
I suppose as a first approach, we could make it equivalent to id.
Not really, apparently: the answer there gives
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63773
--- Comment #7 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to howarth from comment #6)
Sorry, stupid typo on my part in the latest build. Indeed, with the three
patches mentioned, my build is proceeding fine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63773
--- Comment #8 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
Bootstrap tested at r217238 with the remaining uncommitted patches applied
using...
Configured with: ../gcc-5.0-20141107/configure --prefix=/sw
--prefix=/sw/lib/gcc5.0 --mandir=/sw/share
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63778
Bug ID: 63778
Summary: Segfault with r217178 building 416.gamess from cpu2006
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
1 - 100 of 101 matches
Mail list logo
