http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60267
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Feb 19 18:11:54 2014
New Revision: 207914
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207914root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/60267
* pt.c (tsubst_expr): Handle
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56563
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Feb 19 18:12:31 2014
New Revision: 207915
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207915root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR debug/56563
* cp-objcp-common.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60046
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60272
--- Comment #2 from torvald at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
So, either we'd need to change this function, so that it sets oldval to
NULL_RTX
first, and passes ..., oldval, mem, expected, ... and needs to also
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37743
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
confirm this with:
gcc version 4.8.3 20140219 (prerelease) [gcc-4_8-branch revision 207910]
(GCC)
~/gcc-build-48/gcc/cc1 -m32 -march=x86-64 pr57896.c
This is the same problem, as confirmed by following debug patch:
--cut here--
Index: i386.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60272
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rth at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60267
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57896
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60267
--- Comment #12 from Sylwester Arabas slayoo at staszic dot waw.pl ---
Thanks a lot! I'll try it as soon as it will get into Debian's gcc-snapshot
package.
Sylwester
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60046
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Feb 19 19:03:19 2014
New Revision: 207917
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207917root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/60046
* pt.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57896
--- Comment #13 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Seems like r196890 made this latent.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45833
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60276
Bug ID: 60276
Summary: -O3 autovectorizer breaks on a particular loop
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
trunk:
g++ (GCC) 4.9.0 20140219 (experimental)
g++ -c -Wall -Wextra t.cc
t.cc:2:23: warning: inline function 'virtual void Foo::func()' used but never
defined
inline virtual void func() = 0;
^
But Foo::func is never actually used.
Analysis by Nick Lewycky
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56563
Mark Wielaard mark at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60046
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Feb 19 19:59:07 2014
New Revision: 207921
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207921root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/60046
* pt.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60046
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Feb 19 19:59:09 2014
New Revision: 207922
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207922root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/60046
* pt.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60273
Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60273
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |SUSPENDED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59933
--- Comment #11 from Mark Warner warnerme at ptd dot net ---
I'm confused .. what about..
for (k = i; k (int)(sizeof(NSQ_del_dec_struct) / sizeof(opus_int32)); ++k)
... is illegal or invalid ?
Why does it only fail if -DDEBUG is defined ?
I mean,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59933
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Mark Warner from comment #11)
I'm confused .. what about..
for (k = i; k (int)(sizeof(NSQ_del_dec_struct) / sizeof(opus_int32)); ++k)
... is illegal or invalid ?
Why
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51823
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60277
--- Comment #1 from Nick Lewycky nlewycky at google dot com ---
Furthermore, if the testcase ended with:
f-Foo::func();
then the warning should be issued.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52306
--- Comment #31 from Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org ---
Created attachment 32175
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32175action=edit
Testcase from jumpnbump
After backporting the patch to 4.8 there is still a package that
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53711
patrick at parcs dot ath.cx changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||patrick at parcs dot ath.cx
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37743
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Feb 19 22:27:40 2014
New Revision: 207924
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207924root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c/37743
* c-common.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57320
--- Comment #3 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
This has been fixed by r204211 on the trunk, any reason to keep this PR open?
Eh, really? That commit is supposed to change nothing
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60207
--- Comment #3 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Feb 19 22:43:19 2014
New Revision: 207925
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207925root=gccview=rev
Log:
Remove TFmode check for X86_64_INTEGER_CLASS
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60207
--- Comment #4 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Feb 19 22:45:34 2014
New Revision: 207926
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207926root=gccview=rev
Log:
Remove TFmode check for X86_64_INTEGER_CLASS
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60207
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60172
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steven at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49397
--- Comment #14 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: burnus
Date: Wed Feb 19 23:32:46 2014
New Revision: 207927
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207927root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-02-19 Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60278
Bug ID: 60278
Summary: string::erase() (and other containers) does not take
const_iterators
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49397
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60278
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
deque::erase() is fixed for 4.9, string will be fixed after 4.9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59933
--- Comment #13 from Ian Hamilton ian at g0tcd dot com ---
(In reply to Mark Warner from comment #11)
I'm confused .. what about..
for (k = i; k (int)(sizeof(NSQ_del_dec_struct) / sizeof(opus_int32)); ++k)
... is illegal or invalid ?
Why does
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60279
Bug ID: 60279
Summary: Incorrect column number for -Wuninitialized in return
statement
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58555
--- Comment #24 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
So, shall we just apply #c15 here?
Diff works fine for me for over five weeks now, so I say yes.
It is easier to just return at beggining instead of duplicating the check.
Have
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60243
--- Comment #10 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
estimate_calls_size_and_time is quite high on the profile - called via
do_estimate_edge_size it walks callgraph edges
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60065
Adam Butcher abutcher at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abutcher at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59193
Max TenEyck Woodbury mtewoodbury at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58555
--- Comment #25 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
It is easier to just return at beggining instead of duplicating the check.
Have patch for it, just for some reason
I wanted to look deper into why we inline here. I forgot the reason,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60065
--- Comment #2 from Adam Butcher abutcher at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Turns out the base template parameter index was not been initialized correctly
so it was trying to convert the 'int' parameter to a pack as well as the
invented template parameter
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60280
Bug ID: 60280
Summary: gcc.target/arm/ivopts.c and gcc.target/arm/ivopts-2.c
failed caused by preserving loop structure.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60280
--- Comment #1 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com ---
It's caused by patch at (revision r198333):
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-04/msg01530.html
After patching, forwarder basic block 6 in below dump didn't get removed:
tr4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60279
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59193
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58555
--- Comment #26 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Thanks, but please fix the typoes:
s/ulikely/unlikely/
s/appers/appears/
s/bookeeping/bookkeeping/
?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58555
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58555
--- Comment #28 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #27)
s/typoes/typos
;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60204
--- Comment #6 from Kirill Yukhin kyukhin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kyukhin
Date: Thu Feb 20 06:32:21 2014
New Revision: 207933
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207933root=gccview=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/60204
* config/i386/i386.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58555
--- Comment #29 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Feb 20 06:40:07 2014
New Revision: 207934
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207934root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR ipa/58555
* ipa-inline-transform.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58555
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014, Rainer Orth wrote:
As described in PR middle-end/60092, gcc.dg/torture/pr60092.c execution
FAILs at -O0 on Solaris 11. posix_memalign modifies it's first arg in
the error case, which is at least a QOI issue.
Therefore I'd like to XFAIL the test like this. Tested with
Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com writes:
Hi!
The following testcase build with -ftrack-macro-expansion=0,
but don't build otherwise. The problem seems to be that
the libcpp for macro redefinition warning/error purposes if it sees
more than one paste operator adds those extra CPP_PASTE tokens
Richard Biener-2 wrote
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 3:50 AM, dxq lt;
ziyan01@
gt; wrote:
What compiler version did you check? I think that 4.8 has improvements
for 1. and 2. (SMS is unmaintained). Note that we only spent time to
make -O1 behave sanely with extremely large functions.
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
The following two pieces fix the fallout of
2013-05-22 Mark Mitchell m...@codesourcery.com
Sandra Loosemore san...@codesourcery.com
* configure.ac (dbexecdir): Base on $(toolexeclibdir), not
$(libdir).
...
Hi!
While fixing PR60267, I've noticed that #pragma simd is not registered
when -E -fcilkplus, even when it asks for macro replacements in the clauses.
So, either we have to register it even when preprocessing, so that say for
-save-temps, or other cases of separate preprocessing and separate
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 02:38:42PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
This removes the update_ssa call in ipa_modify_call_arguments by
keeping virtual SSA form up-to-date. It also avoids leaking
the virtual SSA name defined by the replaced call (and thus
keeping more than necessary memory live
Ping ^ 4
-Original Message-
From: Joey Ye [mailto:joey...@arm.com]
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 9:58
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH][4.8] Backport strict-volatile-bitfields fixes to 4.8
Ping ^3
These fixes are very important to 4.8 ARM embedded users, as
On 02/19/2014 09:03 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
The following two pieces fix the fallout of
2013-05-22 Mark Mitchell m...@codesourcery.com
Sandra Loosemore san...@codesourcery.com
* configure.ac (dbexecdir): Base on
On Wed, 19 Feb 2014, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 02/19/2014 09:03 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
The following two pieces fix the fallout of
2013-05-22 Mark Mitchell m...@codesourcery.com
Sandra Loosemore san...@codesourcery.com
Hi all,
here is a small patch for an OOP-related rejects-valid problem, which
is technically not a regression, but I hope the patch is simple enough
to still make it into trunk.
The problem is this: When using a dimensionful function as an
EXPR_VARIABLE (e.g. as the target in a procedure pointer
On 02/19/2014 09:34 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
Sandras patch was supposed to introduce support
for --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs in libgcj (but obviously
it failed, given the result above).
Sandra? You're very quiet. What say you?
I don't want this ping-ponging.
Andrew.
Hi Janus,
Janus Weil wrote:
The problem is this: When using a dimensionful function as an
EXPR_VARIABLE (e.g. as the target in a procedure pointer assignment),
we wrongly add a REF_ARRAY, because we are tricked to believe that the
expression is dimensionful
The patch was regtested on
Hi,
Patterns had previously been added to thumb2.md to support ORN, but only for
SImode.
This patch adds DImode support, to cover the full 64|64-64 operation and
the various 32|64-64 operations (see AND:DI variants that use NOT).
The patch comes with its own execution test and looks for correct
This patch fixes a crash in a task body with a single statement missing a
terminating semicolon. The tree can be repaired locally so further compilation
can proceed.
Compiling libthr3.adb must yield:
libthr3.adb:10:18: missing ;
libthr3.adb:13:04: warning: no accept for entry Test
---
This patch implements the following SPARK RM rule from 7.2.5 (3g):
at least one of its constituents shall be denoted in the input_list of a
null_dependency_clause; or
-- Source --
-- null_dependency.ads
package Null_Dependency
with Abstract_State =
This patch updates the analysis of aspect/pragma Refined_Global to interpret
states and variables with an encapsulating state as constituents only when the
related state has visible refinement.
-- Source --
-- parent.ads
package Parent
with Abstract_State = State
is
When the GNAT driver is invoked to bind a main of a project file, and
there are externally built library projects in the closure of the main
project file, the invocation of gnatbind may fail if the object directory
does not contain any ALI files.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed on trunk
Am Tue, 18 Feb 2014 17:51:00 +0100
schrieb Kai Tietz ktiet...@googlemail.com:
So patch is ok with proper ChangeLog mentioning PR. Patch is ok for
back-port too.
I wonder if the instaned of RtlUnwindEx that come before the patched
line should be changed as well, though.
--
Jonathan
This patch modifies the parser to detect missing parentheses on SPARK aspects
Global, Depends, Refined_Global and Refined_Depends.
-- Source --
-- malformed_contracts.ads
package Malformed_Contracts
with Abstract_State = (State_1, State_2)
is
procedure OK_1
This patch implements rule SPARK RM 6.1.3 (5) which states:
If an Old attribute_reference occurs within a consequence other than the
consequence selected for (later) evaluation as described above, then the
associated implicit constant declaration (see Ada RM 6.1.1) is not
elaborated.
In the GNATprove mode for formal verification, side-effects are removed
from expressions when the corresponding procedure is called in the
frontend. This should only be done when not inside a generic, which is
both useless and harmful as it deactivates the mechanism for name
resolution of generic
This patch detects additional errors when a Synchronization aspect on an
overriding protected operation does not match the given aspect on the
overridden operation of an ancestor interface.
Compiling b95000g.ads must yield:
b95000g.ads:29:13:
type Lock_Type must implement abstract
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 04:43:06AM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Attached, please find a patch with the test case attached (for1.cc). The
patch is the same but the cp-changelog has been modified to reflect the
new test-case. Is this OK to install?
1) have you tested the patch at all? I see
Hi,
The problem is this: When using a dimensionful function as an
EXPR_VARIABLE (e.g. as the target in a procedure pointer assignment),
we wrongly add a REF_ARRAY, because we are tricked to believe that the
expression is dimensionful
The patch was regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Ok
Woudln't it be better to do this in the series of conversions, that is
inside the preceeding if-statement? (the integral type case using
convert_modes looks weird enough, so adding this kind-of less
weird one there looks sensible)
Yes, the integral type case is very strange: it was
This allows cfgcleanup to remove some of the extra CFG that exists
just for loop analysis passes convenience (those can be and are
easily re-created by passes doing loop_optimizer_init ()).
It may fix a regression uncovered in private communication.
Untested - my original idea how to fix this
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com wrote:
Woudln't it be better to do this in the series of conversions, that is
inside the preceeding if-statement? (the integral type case using
convert_modes looks weird enough, so adding this kind-of less
weird one there
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 5:39 PM, nick clifton ni...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi Richard,
Instead of modifying testcases I'd be less nervous if you'd make them
require 32bit. Otherwise you should reproduce the original issues with the
modified testcases.
OK, I can do that. How about this patch.
Replace calls to error() by error_at().
* c-parser.c (c_parser_declspecs): replace call to error () by error_at ()
* c-parser.c (c_parser_parameter_declaration): Likewise
Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Ok for trunk ?
Thanks and Regards,
Prathamesh
Index: gcc/c/c-parser.c
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 06:55:51PM +0100, Jose E. Marchesi wrote:
This patch fixes builds with --enable-sanitizer, which seems to be the
default for sparc now.
Build tested in a sparc64-*-linux-gnu system with linux 3.8.13 headers.
2014-02-18 Jose E.
Since there is already the __divtf3@GCC_3.0 compatibility alias in
libgcc we need to attach an explicit symbol version to the real __divtf3
in order to get it exported. This fixes the unversioned reference in
libgfortran.so, and fixes the failure of gfortran.dg/erf_3.F90. Tested
on
Hi everyone,
As AVX512 abi for passing/returing structs was recently changed in
https://github.com/hjl-tools/x86-64-psABI/commit/6d7ccd614fe67111d2aecec853c3df0310b372d2
We need to update GCC accordingly. This patch does it.
It bootstraps, passes make check (including updated abi tests), spec2006
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 06:05:12PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
Replace calls to error() by error_at().
* c-parser.c (c_parser_declspecs): replace call to error () by error_at ()
Replace, drop ()'s, full stop at the end.
* c-parser.c (c_parser_parameter_declaration): Likewise
Full
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Ilya Tocar tocarip.in...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
As AVX512 abi for passing/returing structs was recently changed in
https://github.com/hjl-tools/x86-64-psABI/commit/6d7ccd614fe67111d2aecec853c3df0310b372d2
We need to update GCC accordingly. This patch
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:06:14PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
This is invalid.
Thanks. In that case, this patch should error out on such invalid uses as
well, instead of ICEing.
Regtested/bootstrapped on x86_64-linux.
2014-02-19 Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com
PR c/60197
Hi Richard,
Does this have to wait for stage 1? Or I will try to work out a full
patch with loop recreating issue fixed.
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de wrote:
This allows cfgcleanup to remove some of the extra CFG that exists
just for loop analysis passes
On 18/02/14 21:09, Philipp Tomsich wrote:
The following patch-set contains the pipeline-independent changes to gcc
to support the APM XGene-1 and contains various enhancements derived from
real-world applications and benchmarks running on XGene-1.
As the pipeline model has not been fully
On Wed, 19 Feb 2014, Bin.Cheng wrote:
Hi Richard,
Does this have to wait for stage 1? Or I will try to work out a full
patch with loop recreating issue fixed.
If it is a regression and there is a bugzilla about it it doesn't
have to wait.
The patch should be complete (but is untested yet)
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 06:05:12PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
Replace calls to error() by error_at().
* c-parser.c (c_parser_declspecs): replace call to error () by error_at ()
Replace, drop ()'s, full stop at
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 10:06 PM, Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de wrote:
On Wed, 19 Feb 2014, Bin.Cheng wrote:
Hi Richard,
Does this have to wait for stage 1? Or I will try to work out a full
patch with loop recreating issue fixed.
If it is a regression and there is a bugzilla about it it
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 07:43:56PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/decl-9.c
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/decl-9.c (revision 207700)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/decl-9.c (working copy)
@@ -30,3 +30,14 @@
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 9:09 PM, Philipp Tomsich
philipp.toms...@theobroma-systems.com wrote:
The following patch-set contains the pipeline-independent changes to gcc
to support the APM XGene-1 and contains various enhancements derived from
real-world applications and benchmarks running on
In GNATprove mode for formal verification, some treatment typically only
done during expansion needs to be performed on the tree, but it should
not be applied inside generics. Otherwise, this breaks the name
resolution mechanism for genetic instances. This completes a previous
similar fix.
Tested
Hello,
This patch is a followup of
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-02/msg01042.html
If fixes a bunch of ICEs for the testsuite ran with
--target_board=arm-sim/\{-mapcs-frame\}, noticed on a reference branch
for testing the former patch.
One of the strange issue I had to deal with, for
When the same projec is imported by several projects in the project tree
through different paths that includes symbolic links, the Project Manager
may reported an error indicating that two different projects have the
same name. This is corrected by this patch.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu,
Hi!
In #pragma GCC ivdep there is nothing the preprocessor should care about,
thus there is no reason to register it when doing just -E (and, otherwise
we'd have to handle PRAGMA_IVDEP in pragma lookups).
Fixed thusly, bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for
trunk?
101 - 200 of 236 matches
Mail list logo
