[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #14 from philip.copeland at oracle dot com 2013-01-09 08:27:19 UTC --- Smallest test case program #include iostream int main() { std::cerr we are able to write to stderr\n; } bash-4.2# g++ test.c bash-4.2# ./a.out

[Bug tree-optimization/43716] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Revision 158105 miscompiles doduc.f90

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43716 --- Comment #49 from richard.guenther at gmail dot com richard.guenther at gmail dot com 2013-01-09 08:52:21 UTC --- On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 8:52 PM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote:

[Bug tree-optimization/55912] missing optimization of x/x and x/std::abs(x)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55912 Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||glisse at

[Bug tree-optimization/48189] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE: SIGFPE (division by zero) in in predict_loops () at predict.c:991 with --param max-predicted-iterations=0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48189 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 09:00:32 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Wed Jan 9 09:00:22 2013 New Revision: 195046 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195046 Log: PR

[Bug tree-optimization/48189] [4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE: SIGFPE (division by zero) in in predict_loops () at predict.c:991 with --param max-predicted-iterations=0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48189 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.8.0

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #15 from philip.copeland at oracle dot com 2013-01-09 09:06:38 UTC --- I've a fc17 x86_64 box in the backroom here that I'm going to generate a comparison trace with [root@ZenV tmp]# gdb a.out (gdb) break

[Bug tree-optimization/55823] [4.8 Regression] ice in inline_call, at ipa-inline-transform.c:270

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55823 --- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 09:07:24 UTC --- We no longer ICE in the testcase. We still regress by missing devirtualization in new ipa-cp implementation and I would like Martin to double check that

[Bug pch/54117] [4.8 Regression] FAIL: ./decl-3.h -O0 -g (internal compiler error)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54117 --- Comment #12 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 09:22:21 UTC --- (In reply to comment #11) All that to avoid one #include output.h in one file? Is that one little thing really the only change you see? I see

[Bug tree-optimization/55912] missing optimization of x/x and x/std::abs(x)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55912 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug bootstrap/55792] [4.8 Regression] Bad memory access with profiledbootstrap and LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792 --- Comment #18 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 09:31:45 UTC --- (In reply to comment #17) gimple_location is duplicated by: #1 0x00751f32 in gimple_copy (stmt=0x7fffe8d75a00) at

[Bug tree-optimization/55823] [4.8 Regression] ice in inline_call, at ipa-inline-transform.c:270

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55823 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

[Bug fortran/54286] [4.8 Regression] Accepts invalid proc-pointer assignments involving proc-ptr function result

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54286 --- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 09:44:07 UTC --- Please find below my interpretation of the validity or not of the testcase for this PR. The following test is probably invalid, but not rejected by

[Bug tree-optimization/55913] New: ipa-cp should consider also constants implied by the context it is clonning for

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55913 Bug #: 55913 Summary: ipa-cp should consider also constants implied by the context it is clonning for Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0

[Bug c++/55910] One of instances generated for a method with -O3 uses incorrect parameter cleanup size with 'ret'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55910 Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug libstdc++/55911] Segfault in unordered_map with max_load_factor 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55911 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/55914] New: [C++11] Pack expansion for class member expression fails in lambda expressions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55914 Bug #: 55914 Summary: [C++11] Pack expansion for class member expression fails in lambda expressions Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2

[Bug c/55915] New: fails to build lto-compress.c, zlib.h not found

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55915 Bug #: 55915 Summary: fails to build lto-compress.c, zlib.h not found Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: lto Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikpe at

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #17 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2013-01-09 10:18:34 UTC --- Thanks Mikael. Thus I suppose the minimized snippet in Comment #14 also runs fine for you? Indeed, it would be nice if you could try to reproduce

[Bug c++/55914] [C++11] Pack expansion for class member expression fails in lambda expressions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55914 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|

[Bug c++/55900] [C++11]internal compiler error with initializer list

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55900 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #18 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2013-01-09 10:32:35 UTC --- Yes, the snippet in Comment #14 works fine for me, with both -m32 and -m64.

[Bug tree-optimization/55264] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE: in ipa_make_edge_direct_to_target, at ipa-prop.c:2141 with -O2 -fno-early-inlining -fno-weak

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55264 --- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 10:36:02 UTC --- Unfortunately, that causes the following failures: g++.dg/lto/20081217-2 cp_lto_20081217-2_0.o-cp_lto_20081217-2_0.o link, -O2 -flto

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #19 from philip.copeland at oracle dot com 2013-01-09 10:37:38 UTC --- Mikael, could you compare against the versions of packages that I'm using? gcc requires the following according to fedora)

[Bug c++/55914] [C++11] Pack expansion for class member expression fails in lambda expressions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55914 --- Comment #2 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com 2013-01-09 10:39:29 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) I suspect this is just a different manifestation of PR41933. Thanks Paolo, I partially agree. Indeed the problem is

[Bug middle-end/55882] [4.7/4.8 Regression] unaligned load/store : incorrect struct offset

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55882 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #20 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2013-01-09 10:49:44 UTC --- Thanks Mikael. Having the testresults for -m32 and -m64 is also nice, by the way. And they indeed look very good! Philip's latest testsuite

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #21 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2013-01-09 10:52:07 UTC --- Philip, from http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2013-01/msg00571.html seems obvious that Mikael is simply fetching with subversion and

[Bug c++/55914] [C++11] Pack expansion fails in lambda expressions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55914 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #22 from philip.copeland at oracle dot com 2013-01-09 10:59:13 UTC --- Ok so he's using 4.7.3 not 4.7.2-(butched by fedora folk) (there's about 24 patchs they apply) ugh,.. what would you like me to do here then? pull over

[Bug c++/55914] [C++11] Pack expansion fails in lambda expressions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55914 --- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2013-01-09 10:59:54 UTC --- Daniel, are you sure PR41933 isn't C++11 proper? I gather that the corresponding Core issue (which at the time Jason also referenced) went into

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #23 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2013-01-09 11:07:10 UTC --- Oh well, testing the current vanilla 4_7-branch is always a good idea, if you ask me. That said, it seems very unlikely that back in the 4.7.2

[Bug middle-end/55882] [4.7/4.8 Regression] unaligned load/store : incorrect struct offset

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55882 --- Comment #11 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 11:26:10 UTC --- (In reply to comment #8) Or more correct Index: gcc/emit-rtl.c === ---

[Bug middle-end/55882] [4.7/4.8 Regression] unaligned load/store : incorrect struct offset

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55882 --- Comment #12 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 11:35:33 UTC --- (In reply to comment #10) Eric, I am double-checking my patch and I believe all this 'bitpos' handling in set_mem_attributes_minus_bitpos (and/or

[Bug target/16350] gcc only understands little endian ARM systems

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16350 Sam Thursfield sam.thursfield at codethink dot co.uk changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug c++/55914] [C++11] Pack expansion fails in lambda expressions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55914 --- Comment #5 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com 2013-01-09 11:37:49 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) You are right, I missed the CD2 tag

[Bug libstdc++/55911] Segfault in unordered_map with max_load_factor 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55911 --- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2013-01-09 11:38:03 UTC --- Important note: I can reproduce the Segmentation fault way back to 4_5-branch, in other terms, whatever it is, happened also with the old

[Bug target/16350] gcc only understands little endian ARM systems

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16350 --- Comment #31 from Sam Thursfield sam.thursfield at codethink dot co.uk 2013-01-09 11:46:59 UTC --- Ignore the comment about GCC 4.7.3, which doesn't even exist. Looks like the fix is only in trunk so far.

[Bug fortran/55916] New: Alignment issues with real(16) on i686

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55916 Bug #: 55916 Summary: Alignment issues with real(16) on i686 Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #24 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 11:51:22 UTC --- #1 0xf80100490988 in __cxxabiv1::__cxa_get_globals () at ../../../../libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/eh_globals.cc:63 63 { return

[Bug fortran/55916] Alignment issues with real(16) on i686

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55916 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|

[Bug fortran/54286] [4.8 Regression] Accepts invalid proc-pointer assignments involving proc-ptr function result

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54286 Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikael at

[Bug libstdc++/55911] Segfault in unordered_map with max_load_factor 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55911 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 12:15:39 UTC --- This is invalid if size() bucket_count(), which is very likely: for (size_t i = 0; i umap.size(); i++) { const size_t bs =

[Bug libstdc++/55911] Segfault in unordered_map with max_load_factor 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55911 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug libstdc++/55911] Segfault in unordered_map with max_load_factor 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55911 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|major |normal

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #25 from philip.copeland at oracle dot com 2013-01-09 12:21:19 UTC --- Mmm yes I did notice the x86_64 trace I did bounced off into the tls/PLT area Breakpoint 1, __cxxabiv1::__cxa_get_globals () at

[Bug fortran/55916] Alignment issues with real(16) on i686

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55916 Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||glisse at

[Bug c/52991] attribute packed broken on mingw32?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52991 --- Comment #11 from Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 12:30:50 UTC --- Created attachment 29119 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29119 Testcase for bitfield and type-packing This first testcase checking

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #26 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2013-01-09 12:42:13 UTC --- (In reply to comment #19) Mikael, could you compare against the versions of packages that I'm using? Well, my environment is Fedora 15 so all

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #27 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2013-01-09 12:46:11 UTC --- (In reply to comment #25) Mikael, as reference was your version of 4.7.3 compiled without --enable-initfini-array ? Yes.

[Bug fortran/54286] [4.8 Regression] Accepts invalid proc-pointer assignments involving proc-ptr function result

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54286 --- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 13:07:31 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) (In reply to comment #3) snip Huh? the interface of `x%p' is `a', not `iabs'. I think the comments are correct; the

[Bug fortran/55072] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Missing internal_pack leads to wrong code with derived type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55072 --- Comment #19 from Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 13:16:59 UTC --- (In reply to comment #18) (In reply to comment #17) (In reply to comment #16) Question is: Is the packing needed here? I would guess that it

[Bug libstdc++/55917] New: Impossible to find/debug unhandled exceptions in an std::thread

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917 Bug #: 55917 Summary: Impossible to find/debug unhandled exceptions in an std::thread Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2 Status:

[Bug libstdc++/55917] Impossible to find/debug unhandled exceptions in an std::thread

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917 --- Comment #1 from Tobias Ringström tobias at ringis dot se 2013-01-09 13:22:52 UTC --- Created attachment 29120 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29120 Test program to illustrate the problem

[Bug fortran/55916] Alignment issues with real(16) on i686

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55916 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 13:30:27 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) (In reply to comment #1) posix_memalign unfortunately has a weird enough interface that we can't easily extract

[Bug c/52991] attribute packed broken on mingw32?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52991 --- Comment #12 from Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 13:34:07 UTC --- Created attachment 29121 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29121 Testcase for bitfield and structure-aligning via attribute This

[Bug c/52991] attribute packed broken on mingw32?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52991 --- Comment #13 from Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 13:37:13 UTC --- Created attachment 29122 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29122 Testcase for bitfield and structure field-aligning by attribute By

[Bug fortran/55916] Alignment issues with real(16) on i686

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55916 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 13:38:12 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) (In reply to comment #2) (In reply to comment #1) posix_memalign unfortunately has a weird enough interface that we

[Bug c++/55918] New: Stack partially unwound when noexcept causes call to std::terminate

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55918 Bug #: 55918 Summary: Stack partially unwound when noexcept causes call to std::terminate Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2 Status:

[Bug libstdc++/55917] Impossible to find/debug unhandled exceptions in an std::thread

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal

[Bug libstdc++/55917] Impossible to find/debug unhandled exceptions in an std::thread

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 13:48:04 UTC --- Ah, I se PR 55918 - thanks!

[Bug c++/55918] Stack partially unwound when noexcept causes call to std::terminate

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55918 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug fortran/53537] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Explicit IMPORT of renamed USE-associated symbol fails

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53537 --- Comment #5 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 13:54:15 UTC --- Created attachment 29124 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29124 Fix for the regression in comment #3 For the remaining problem:

[Bug libstdc++/55917] Impossible to find/debug unhandled exceptions in an std::thread

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 13:59:58 UTC --- One option would be to make the start function have a dynamic-exception-specification of throw(__cxxabiv1::__forced_unwind), which would allow the

[Bug libstdc++/55917] Impossible to find/debug unhandled exceptions in an std::thread

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917 --- Comment #5 from Tobias Ringström tobias at ringis dot se 2013-01-09 14:06:08 UTC --- Yes, I thought two reports were in order, as they are only vaguely related. To me, this one is the most important problem. I struggle to understand how I

[Bug fortran/55919] New: [4.8 Regression] Bogus warning with -J directory/

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55919 Bug #: 55919 Summary: [4.8 Regression] Bogus warning with -J directory/ Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords:

[Bug fortran/55919] [4.8 Regression] Bogus warning with -J directory/

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55919 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus

[Bug lto/55493] [4.8 Regression] LTO always ICEs on i686-mingw32

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55493 --- Comment #3 from Fanael fanael4 at gmail dot com 2013-01-09 14:19:09 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) Are you sure that you do not somehow pull in LTO objects from older releases? Yes, happens even with -nostdlib, even on builds

[Bug middle-end/55889] [4.8 Regression] ICE: in move_op_ascend, at sel-sched.c:6153 with -fschedule-insns -fselective-scheduling

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55889 --- Comment #5 from Andrey Belevantsev abel at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 14:26:22 UTC --- I've just got back from the holidays, I will take a look probably on Friday. David's analysis hints that the scheduler should treat the insn as

[Bug fortran/42769] [OOP] ICE in resolve_typebound_procedure

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42769 Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/45836] [OOP] Type Bound Procedure Error - Type Mismatch

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45836 Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/45900] [OOP] Static TBP resolved incorrectly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45900 Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug libstdc++/55917] Impossible to find/debug unhandled exceptions in an std::thread

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 14:42:00 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) Yes, I thought two reports were in order, as they are only vaguely related. To me, this one is the most important

[Bug c++/55918] Stack partially unwound when noexcept causes call to std::terminate

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55918 --- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 14:42:54 UTC --- If you're looking for 'bad_guy' to be in the backtrace, that sounds to me like you want it to not be unwound at all, and I'm surprised that it doesn't

[Bug c++/55801] ICE with thread_local after ill-formed forward declaration

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55801 --- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 14:43:59 UTC --- Author: paolo Date: Wed Jan 9 14:43:50 2013 New Revision: 195050 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195050 Log: /cp

[Bug c++/55801] ICE with thread_local after ill-formed declaration

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55801 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug libstdc++/55911] Segfault in unordered_map with max_load_factor 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55911 --- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2013-01-09 14:47:12 UTC --- Thanks Jon.

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #28 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2013-01-09 14:50:16 UTC --- Thanks Eric for following this.

[Bug c/48418] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Bit shift operator =

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48418 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 14:51:17 UTC --- Author: jakub Date: Wed Jan 9 14:51:09 2013 New Revision: 195051 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195051 Log: PR c/48418

[Bug c/48418] [4.6/4.7 Regression] Bit shift operator =

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48418 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at

[Bug tree-optimization/55875] [4.8 Regression] IVopts caused miscompilation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55875 --- Comment #10 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 15:10:55 UTC --- Author: hubicka Date: Wed Jan 9 15:10:43 2013 New Revision: 195054 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195054 Log: PR

[Bug tree-optimization/55875] [4.8 Regression] IVopts caused miscompilation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55875 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug lto/45375] [meta-bug] Issues with building Mozilla with LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375 --- Comment #165 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 15:16:26 UTC --- OK, I tracked down the undefined reference to error: /tmp/cc0oq4BG.ltrans1.ltrans.o: requires dynamic R_X86_64_PC32 reloc against

[Bug lto/45375] [meta-bug] Issues with building Mozilla with LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375 --- Comment #166 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 15:19:41 UTC --- Markus, the apperance of undefined references I fixed by patch above is highly sensitive to partitioning and inlining decision. Can you, please, check

[Bug tree-optimization/55264] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] ICE: in ipa_make_edge_direct_to_target, at ipa-prop.c:2141 with -O2 -fno-early-inlining -fno-weak

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55264 --- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2013-01-09 15:23:54 UTC --- Let me look into those... Try the patch I attached to PR45375 Honza

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #29 from philip.copeland at oracle dot com 2013-01-09 15:29:26 UTC --- Rebuilt fedoras 4.7.2-8 gcc without --enable-initfini-array reinstalled in a chroot and rebuilt the test program bash-4.2# g++ -v Using built-in specs.

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #30 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 15:45:35 UTC --- Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0xf8010030a558 in __frame_dummy_init_array_entry () from /lib64/libstdc++.so.6 Is

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #31 from philip.copeland at oracle dot com 2013-01-09 16:00:56 UTC --- Hurm,... bash-4.2# cd /tmp bash-4.2# mkdir expand bash-4.2# cd expand/ bash-4.2# rpm2cpio /builddir/build/RPMS/libstdc++-4.7.2-8.fc18.sparc64.rpm |

[Bug target/55909] libtool test exposes what I think is some alignment issue in libstdc++

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909 --- Comment #32 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2013-01-09 16:07:19 UTC --- Well, if you don't pass anything an autoconf test tries to figure out: --enable-initfini-array Force the use of sections .init_array and

[Bug fortran/55916] Alignment issues with real(16) on i686

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55916 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 16:09:25 UTC --- As __float128 is outside of the scope of C/C++, this is not a bug on the C library side. It might be outside the scope of C/C++ but doesn't C99

[Bug bootstrap/55792] [4.8 Regression] Bad memory access with profiledbootstrap and LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792 --- Comment #19 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-09 16:11:06 UTC --- The BLOCK tree node is cleared by (gdb) bt #0 0x00336b4882ee in __memset_sse2 () from /lib64/libc.so.6 #1 0x00545fdf in clear_marks ()

[Bug target/5372] [powerpc-*-eabi] -mno-eabi not working

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5372 Segher Boessenkool segher at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug bootstrap/55915] fails to build lto-compress.c, zlib.h not found

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55915 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c

[Bug fortran/55758] LOGICAL and BIND(C): Reject kind=2/4/8/16 with -std=f2008, improve warning, switch to nonBOOLEAN_TYPE for those

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55758 --- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 16:20:42 UTC --- Author: burnus Date: Wed Jan 9 16:20:33 2013 New Revision: 195055 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195055 Log: 2013-01-09

[Bug tree-optimization/55875] [4.8 Regression] IVopts caused miscompilation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55875 --- Comment #12 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2013-01-09 16:29:21 UTC --- Shall we track the C testcase regression in 4.7 and earlier? Honza

[Bug tree-optimization/55920] New: ICE in expand_debug_locations, at cfgexpand.c:3753

version 4.8.0 20130109 (experimental) [trunk revision 195054] (GCC) Using arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi $ ./xgcc -B. -O2 -g ~/ice.i -c /home/ryan/ice.i: In function 'state_panic': /home/ryan/ice.i:32:6: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function 'memcpy' [enabled by default

[Bug bootstrap/55915] fails to build lto-compress.c, zlib.h not found

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55915 --- Comment #2 from Alexey Pavlov alexpux at gmail dot com 2013-01-09 16:31:18 UTC --- Do I need add include paths to CXXFLAGS? But I successfully build gcc-4.6.3 and 4.7.2 without add zlib include path to CXXFLAGS only to CFLAGS.

[Bug rtl-optimization/55829] [4.8 Regression] ICE: in curr_insn_transform, at lra-constraints.c:3069 with -msse3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55829 --- Comment #6 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2013-01-09 16:33:02 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) BTW, there is a slight inconsistency between the two patterns, the first pattern uses sselog1 type for both the unpckldp %0, %0

[Bug tree-optimization/55875] [4.8 Regression] IVopts caused miscompilation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55875 --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-09 16:35:13 UTC --- Yes, but I'd say under a different PR.

[Bug middle-end/55921] New: Crash in verify_ssa for asm to side-steps complex pessimization

4.8.0 20130109 (experimental) (revision 195054) (gdb) run Starting program: /ssd/fsf/inst/libexec/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.8.0/cc1 -fpreprocessed tc3.i -quiet -dumpbase tc3.c -mtune=generic -march=pentiumpro -auxbase tc3 -version -o tc3.s GNU C (GCC) version 4.8.0 20130109 (experimental) (i686-pc

  1   2   >