http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45381
--- Comment #18 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-18
20:20:45 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Fri Mar 18 20:20:35 2011
New Revision: 171165
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=171165
Log:
PR bootstrap/45381
* lex.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45381
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48075
--- Comment #1 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-12
22:03:29 UTC ---
It is not TM related. If you remove the TM constructs, the test case
still crashes with stack overflow in mainline. Of course, there are
a number of errors
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48074
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48074
--- Comment #2 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-12
22:58:25 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Sat Mar 12 22:58:23 2011
New Revision: 170911
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170911
Log:
PR 48074
* trans-mem.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48074
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47952
--- Comment #13 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-10
23:04:11 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Thu Mar 10 23:04:05 2011
New Revision: 170854
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170854
Log:
PR 47952
* trans-mem.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48021
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47952
--- Comment #14 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-10
23:42:10 UTC ---
*** Bug 48021 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47952
--- Comment #15 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-10
23:45:53 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
Should I fill a new PR for this even if I don't have any real testcase?
Yes please.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47952
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47952
--- Comment #9 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-09
21:14:51 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Wed Mar 9 21:14:45 2011
New Revision: 170836
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170836
Log:
PR 47952
include
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47952
--- Comment #10 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-09
23:01:38 UTC ---
The remaining problem in the full glob2 test is
src/Unit.o: In function `transaction clone for Unit::~Unit()':
Unit.cpp:(.text._ZGTtN4UnitD2Ev[transaction
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47952
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47952
--- Comment #7 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-08
22:27:31 UTC ---
The name isn't being properly demangled. Although this ought not
matter for correctness; what matters is that the group name is
consistent across all uses
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47952
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47952
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47952
--- Comment #5 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-08
00:44:41 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Tue Mar 8 00:44:37 2011
New Revision: 170768
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170768
Log:
PR 47952
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17994
--- Comment #9 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-16
18:04:08 UTC ---
Going by the internals document, INCOMING_FRAME_SP_OFFSET is already defined
but it is not used anywhere (in my patch).
Certainly it's going to be used
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17994
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47530
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47530
--- Comment #2 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-09
20:24:02 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Wed Feb 9 20:23:56 2011
New Revision: 169984
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=169984
Log:
PR 47530
* trans
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47530
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45381
--- Comment #9 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-08
16:17:10 UTC ---
I don't think we really want to pursue this further.
I had hoped to find a solution that satisfied the older apple compiler -- it
is supposed to support
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45381
--- Comment #11 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-08
16:52:41 UTC ---
Yes, a patch like in #1 would be fine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47290
--- Comment #11 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-18
16:45:09 UTC ---
Jakub, I'm fine with your second patch to detect infinite loops, with
the proviso that you break out the test into a separate function.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47290
--- Comment #13 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-18
18:20:49 UTC ---
Looks good. Ok if it passes tests.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47311
--- Comment #15 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-17
16:03:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
But it never checks the buffer end. It looks bogus to me.
Read the comment at the beginning of the section. This is an aligned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47311
--- Comment #17 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-17
18:40:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #16)
==5267== Invalid read of size 8
==5267==at 0x11E4E24: search_line_sse42(unsigned char const*, unsigned
It's fine. (1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46923
Summary: [trans-mem] thread-local memory variable not properly
logged
Product: gcc
Version: trans-mem
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46434
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-22
21:20:58 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Mon Nov 22 21:20:52 2010
New Revision: 167053
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=167053
Log:
PR target/46434
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46571
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-21
17:19:40 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Sun Nov 21 17:19:37 2010
New Revision: 167007
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=167007
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/46571
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46571
--- Comment #4 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-21
17:27:26 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Sun Nov 21 17:27:23 2010
New Revision: 167008
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=167008
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/46571
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46593
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46571
Summary: bootsrap comparison failure in fortran/trans-openmp.c
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46571
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46571
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||ia64-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46515
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46515
--- Comment #8 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-18
16:51:36 UTC ---
We do: maybe_copy_epilogue_insn.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46515
--- Comment #10 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-18
21:08:45 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Thu Nov 18 21:08:38 2010
New Revision: 166920
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=166920
Log:
PR middle-end/46515
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46470
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46470
--- Comment #2 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-16
22:22:19 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Tue Nov 16 22:22:13 2010
New Revision: 166829
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=166829
Log:
PR target/46470
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46470
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46095
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-15
19:30:09 UTC ---
The patch looks good. Ok after testing.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46269
--- Comment #4 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-09
18:06:35 UTC ---
Since updateBuildingSite is transaction_callable, not
transaction_safe, we should handle this no matter how
the other functions are annotated.
When
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46226
Summary: asm goto may leave stack pointer invalid
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46226
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46219
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46226
--- Comment #2 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-29
16:56:26 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Fri Oct 29 16:56:18 2010
New Revision: 166067
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=166067
Log:
PR rtl-opt/46226
* stmt.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46226
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-29
16:58:43 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Fri Oct 29 16:58:36 2010
New Revision: 166068
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=166068
Log:
PR rtl-opt/46226
* stmt.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46226
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46226
--- Comment #5 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-29
17:12:51 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Fri Oct 29 17:12:46 2010
New Revision: 166069
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=166069
Log:
PR rtl-opt/46226
Move test
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46226
--- Comment #6 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-29
17:16:16 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Fri Oct 29 17:16:11 2010
New Revision: 166070
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=166070
Log:
PR rtl-opt/46226
Move test
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46144
--- Comment #4 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-23
16:42:30 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Sat Oct 23 16:42:24 2010
New Revision: 165885
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=165885
Log:
PR target/46144
* config
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46144
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45865
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46131
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-22
14:51:59 UTC ---
I don't see anything wrong in the assembler code for
the test case. I think you'll need to debug the libgcc
routines to see what's going wrong in between
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45962
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45962
--- Comment #18 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-19
23:21:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
Is there a particular reason it should be MAX_OFILE_ALIGNMENT?
No. For ELF, that just means arbitrarily large.
Hm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46041
--- Comment #6 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-18
16:12:21 UTC ---
Does anyone honestly expect a pre-processor macro to change due to
attributes on a function? I sure don't -- that would seem to be a
clear translation phase
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46041
Summary: __FP_FAST_FMA not defined with -E
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46041
--- Comment #2 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-15
23:01:19 UTC ---
I think the easiest solution is to simply do
switch (mode)
{
case SFmode:
#ifdef HAVE_fmasf4
return HAVE_fmasf4;
#endif
break
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46041
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-15
23:02:26 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Doesn't that mean -save-temps is also broken?
Yes.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45962
--- Comment #6 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-12
15:53:21 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Tue Oct 12 15:53:15 2010
New Revision: 165382
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=165382
Log:
PR middle-end/45962
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45962
--- Comment #7 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-12
15:55:09 UTC ---
Bah. Changelog conflict and I wasn't paying attention. Done now.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45856
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45962
--- Comment #10 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-12
21:31:00 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
I have to reopen this: the SEGV ICE is gone, but no regressions were fixed...
These aren't technically regressions; these tests
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45962
--- Comment #12 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-12
22:05:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
... these tests fail with r165239 too, if you run them by hand. If you
just compare gcc.sum files of course they'll appear
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45962
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45962
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |rth at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45962
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33721
--- Comment #7 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-09
22:05:55 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Sat Oct 9 22:05:51 2010
New Revision: 165240
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=165240
Log:
PR rtl-opt/33721
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33721
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33721
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12990
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||davidm at hpl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18749
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12990
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12990
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33721
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45911
Summary: bugzilla: Changing status to assigned no longer
auto-adjusts the assign-to field
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45381
--- Comment #6 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-01
22:00:47 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
I think altivec should disabled with gcc version 4.0.1 (Apple Inc. build
5493). Otherwise this pr could be closed as wontfix.
I'd
701 - 781 of 781 matches
Mail list logo
