On Oct 8, 2012, at 5:17 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/06/2012 11:59 AM, _ wrote:
Not that I think that STL/Boost are not great solutions for many
problems out there.
But the fact is that there is and always will be c/c++ code that can't
and will not use it.
But surely the
Ahh ... sorry for that incomplete mail. I lost my right hand in
paragliding accident 2 months ago. And writing mail with one hand on
tablet is kinda weird. Again sorry .;(
Here is the complete version.
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/06/2012 11:59 AM, _
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 11:29 PM, David Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 2012-10-08 at 18:21 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 5:17 PM, David Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com wrote:
I'm working on a static analysis extension to GCC via my
gcc-python-plugin [1]
The
Hi,
Is there any good way to define TARGET_CANNOT_MODIFY_JUMPS_P such that jumps
are not modified after sched2?
Or in other words, is there a way to recognize if sched2 has already been ran
(sched2_completed, maybe)?
Cheers,
Paulo Matos
Quoting Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com:
Paul Matos wrote (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-10/msg00123.html):
Is there any good way to define TARGET_CANNOT_MODIFY_JUMPS_P such that
jumps are not modified after sched2?
No, there isn't.
Well, you could add a target-specific pass after
Hi Joey
Thank you for explanations. Now I have some comments and additional
questions. Since now it will be a discussion rather than looking for
help, I am re-routing the discussion to GCC mailing list. For those
looking for the complete history, here is the context:
On 10/09/2012 12:31 AM, Peter wrote:
On Oct 8, 2012, at 5:17 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/06/2012 11:59 AM, _ wrote:
Not that I think that STL/Boost are not great solutions for many
problems out there.
But the fact is that there is and always will be c/c++ code that can't
Hi All,
I'm trying to verify the 'fldpi' instruction on the Intel Processor.
Hope you would like to have a look at the following piece of example code?
Best Regards,
Mischa.
Paulo Matos schrieb:
Hi,
Is there any good way to define TARGET_CANNOT_MODIFY_JUMPS_P such
that jumps are not modified after sched2?
Or in other words, is there a way to recognize if sched2 has already
been ran (sched2_completed, maybe)?
Such flags would be really helpful, but unfortunately
-Original Message-
From: Ilija Kocho [mailto:ili...@siva.com.mk]
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 21:08
To: Joey Ye
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Terry Guo
Subject: Re: [RFC] Unsolicited usage of VFP registers for Cortex-M4F
Hi Joey
Thank you for explanations. Now I have some comments
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54427
--- Comment #9 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09 06:18:35
UTC ---
Author: glisse
Date: Tue Oct 9 06:18:29 2012
New Revision: 192238
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192238
Log:
2012-10-09 Marc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54860
--- Comment #6 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2012-10-09 06:37:12
UTC ---
I can confirm the failure on alpha:
(gdb) bt
#0 0x000120b4c288 in htab_find_with_hash ()
#1 0x000120b4fac0 in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54863
Bug #: 54863
Summary: [4.8 regresssion] multiple 'comparison between signed
and unsigned integer expressions' errors in
simplify-rtx.c:simplify_truncation broke m68k-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54864
Bug #: 54864
Summary: Decltype in nested class
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54862
Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54863
Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54862
--- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2012-10-09
07:41:22 UTC ---
I got the exact same failure with gcc-4.8-20121007 on m68k-linux.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54860
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.8 Regression]: build |[4.8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54754
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09
08:16:36 UTC ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Oct 9 08:16:13 2012
New Revision: 192240
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192240
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54754
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54257
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53365
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54257
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gseanmcg at
On that machine, the entire user-space is built without any static
libstdc++
libraries, so it's quite annoying (and unexpected) to have to install them
for
Ada bootstrap. Couldn't Ada use the g++/libstdc++ bits from the compiler
being built?
That would probably be better indeed, it's
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
--- Comment #4 from charlet at adacore dot com charlet at adacore dot com
2012-10-09 08:34:03 UTC ---
On that machine, the entire user-space is built without any static
libstdc++
libraries, so it's quite annoying (and unexpected) to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54661
--- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton nickc at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09 08:37:10
UTC ---
Author: nickc
Date: Tue Oct 9 08:37:00 2012
New Revision: 192241
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192241
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54661
--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com 2012-10-09 08:39:03
UTC ---
This was due to a silly typo, now fixed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54865
Bug #: 54865
Summary: [parallel mode] tests timeout on power64
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54866
Bug #: 54866
Summary: gcc.target/i386/long-double-80-7.c FAILs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54866
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54826
Andreas Arnez arnez at linux dot vnet.ibm.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54867
Bug #: 54867
Summary: gcc.dg/pr44194-1.c FAILs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54868
Bug #: 54868
Summary: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/forwprop-22.c FAILs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54868
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53934
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
Bug #: 54869
Summary: ext/random/simd_fast_mersenne_twister_engine/cons/defa
ult.cc FAILs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54739
--- Comment #11 from Nick Clifton nickc at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09
09:22:00 UTC ---
Author: nickc
Date: Tue Oct 9 09:21:47 2012
New Revision: 192244
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192244
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54870
Bug #: 54870
Summary: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_4.f90 FAILs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54871
Bug #: 54871
Summary: [4.8 regression] gfortran.dg/vector_subscript_1.f90
FAILs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54856
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54871
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54872
Bug #: 54872
Summary: [4.8 regression] abi_check FAILs on Solaris 10/11
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54866
--- Comment #1 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2012-10-09 09:45:15
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
/var/gcc/regression/trunk/9-gcc/build/gcc/include/xmmintrin.h:32:3: error:
#erro
r SSE instruction set not enabled
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-10-09
09:49:08 UTC ---
Guys, I don't have Sparc-Solaris machines and didn't design the testcase. To be
honest, I didn't even realize so far that this simd_* variant was
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54865
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54873
Bug #: 54873
Summary: runtime/pprof FAILs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54868
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09 09:57:58
UTC ---
I expected these 2 lines to disqualify a basic x86 target:
/* { dg-require-effective-target vect_double } */
/* { dg-require-effective-target vect_perm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54862
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
Bug #: 54874
Summary: OOP: polymorphic allocation with SOURCE
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54784
--- Comment #9 from Salvatore Filippone sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2012-10-09 09:59:28 UTC ---
Just opened 54874. May or may not be a duplicate of this one.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54194
--- Comment #9 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-10-09 10:01:37 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Oct 9 10:01:31 2012
New Revision: 192246
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192246
Log:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
--- Comment #1 from Salvatore Filippone sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2012-10-09 10:02:41 UTC ---
Interestingly, taking out the outer container p% makes the code work...
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54194
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54867
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|sparc*-*-solaris2*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-10-09
10:20:45 UTC ---
Can also be something even more trivial, because I bet we didn't exercise much
the codepath for __SSE2__ undefined before committing the code.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
--- Comment #2 from Salvatore Filippone sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2012-10-09 10:37:13 UTC ---
And it is also a regression, as it works on 4.6.3:
---
[sfilippo@jacobi bug34]$ gfortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54699
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2012-10-09
10:48:30 UTC ---
And it is also a regression, as it works on 4.6.3: ...
Well, this may be more complicated. On x86_64-apple-darwin10, compiling the
attached
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
--- Comment #4 from Salvatore Filippone sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2012-10-09 11:03:10 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
And it is also a regression, as it works on 4.6.3: ...
Well, this may be more complicated. On
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #4 from Ulrich Drepper drepper.fsp at gmail dot com 2012-10-09
11:23:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
The new ext/random/simd_fast_mersenne_twister_engine/cons/default.cc testcase
FAILs on Solaris/SPARC (both 32 and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-10-09
11:28:45 UTC ---
Ok, thanks, I missed that remark of yours. Well, at present nothing prevents
people with big endian machines to try to use the code, and we
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2012-10-09
11:35:19 UTC ---
... I don't have access to any big endian machines
and therefore didn't even try to make it work.
AFAICT there are big endian machines in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2012-10-09
11:39:17 UTC ---
As Nathan Froyd said at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg00772.html
Please try to consider what's best for all the people who use
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-10-09
11:44:09 UTC ---
Boy, nobody cites me like that, at least, not while I'm still alive.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54862
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
On that machine, the entire user-space is built without any static
libstdc++
libraries, so it's quite annoying (and unexpected) to have to install
them for
Ada bootstrap. Couldn't Ada use the g++/libstdc++ bits from the compiler
being
built?
No, this is stage 1 so the libstdc++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
--- Comment #6 from charlet at adacore dot com charlet at adacore dot com
2012-10-09 13:09:38 UTC ---
On that machine, the entire user-space is built without any static
libstdc++
libraries, so it's quite annoying (and unexpected) to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54867
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09 13:35:01 UTC
---
Created attachment 28398
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28398
final dump
Unfortunately, this doesn't help. I'm attaching the -m64
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54868
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09 13:37:56
UTC ---
Maybe moving the test from tree-ssa/ to vect/ would be enough? Seems like
vect.exp uses check_vect_support_and_set_flags (I don't see how to use that for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09
13:37:57 UTC ---
Well, we could first build g++ and libstdc++, and then Ada I guess, but
that's probably too ambitious.
Very likely indeed, since you need to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54875
Bug #: 54875
Summary: Forward declare enums cannot be used as a template
argument
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54866
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09 13:40:32 UTC
---
Author: ro
Date: Tue Oct 9 13:40:21 2012
New Revision: 192253
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192253
Log:
Fix
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54866
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54845
Arnaud Charlet charlet at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54834
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Schlüter tobi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09
14:00:43 UTC ---
Created attachment 28399
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28399
toplevel config.log
I'm attaching the toplevel config.log. From it I read
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54834
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Schlüter tobi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09
14:06:19 UTC ---
I ran make in a directory with a pre-existing build, ao maybe that include file
was an old leftover. Please don't invest any further time in this now, I'll
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54860
--- Comment #8 from dodji at seketeli dot org dodji at seketeli dot org
2012-10-09 14:08:20 UTC ---
I can reproduce it now. I guess I shouldn't look at bugs around
midnight or something.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54808
--- Comment #3 from chgena at mail dot ru 2012-10-09 14:10:09 UTC ---
Some 4.8 betas seem to be affected too
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54837
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09
14:14:36 UTC ---
DECL_ABSTRACT_ORIGIN (parm) == aexp
(gdb) call debug_tree (parm)
parm_decl 0x75f34000 unit_num
type integer_type 0x760c85e8 int
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54875
Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54875
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54837
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09
14:40:12 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Oct 9 14:40:01 2012
New Revision: 192255
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192255
Log:
2012-10-09
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
--- Comment #6 from Salvatore Filippone sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2012-10-09 14:46:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
(In reply to comment #0)
I am getting the following output from the test case. It seems wrong, I do
not
see
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54874
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09 14:47:38 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Well, this may be more complicated. On x86_64-apple-darwin10, compiling the
attached test with 4.6.3 gives:
[...]
a.out(97528) malloc:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #9 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-10-09 14:50:31 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Oct 9 14:50:19 2012
New Revision: 192256
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192256
Log:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54860
--- Comment #9 from Dodji Seketeli dodji at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09
14:52:24 UTC ---
Created attachment 28400
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28400
Candidate fix patch
Guys, could you please test this patch on your
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54869
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-10-09 15:05:31 UTC ---
--- Comment #4 from Ulrich Drepper drepper.fsp at gmail dot com
2012-10-09 11:23:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54837
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29383
--- Comment #8 from Andy Nelson andy.nelson at lanl dot gov 2012-10-09
15:19:36 UTC ---
Interesting. Didn't see this dup originally in my search.
In response to your other email (that it is very very hard), can you explain
a bit why if
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54876
Bug #: 54876
Summary: [4.8 Regression] LTO bootstrap broken, streaming
garbage-collected BLOCK
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54876
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54876
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09
15:29:12 UTC ---
Err,
static tree
prune_expression_for_jf_1 (tree *tp, int *walk_subtrees, void *)
{
if (EXPR_P (*tp))
SET_EXPR_LOCATION (*tp,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51228
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53397
Venkataramanan venkataramanan.kumar at amd dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53763
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot
1 - 100 of 251 matches
Mail list logo