I want to do some optimizations for Cortex-A15,Is anyone doing this too or is
there any work has been done?
Yang Yueming
In fact my final purpose is to replace $INP by a register bank in order to be
able to read several inputs using pipelined instructions (and instruction
scheduler). The fixed reg solution will prevent me from doing this. Is there
another way to prevent the use of some registers during the reload
Hello,
I have a system with Suse 10.3 and gcc version 4.2.1. Will there be
inbuilt fortran compiler or do I have to install it separately. Thanks
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Alexander Herz alexander.h...@mytum.de wrote:
Given this piece of code (gcc-4.7-20120114):
static void Test(Batch* block,Batch* new_block,const uint32 offs)
{
T* __restrict old_values
=(T*)__builtin_assume_aligned(block-items,16);
T*
On 19 January 2012 10:21, tintu david joy wrote:
Hello,
I have a system with Suse 10.3 and gcc version 4.2.1. Will there be
inbuilt fortran compiler or do I have to install it separately. Thanks
This question is unsuitable for this mailing list, please use the
gcc-h...@gcc.gnu.org list for
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:37 AM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012, willus.com wrote:
For those who might be interested, I've recently benchmarked gcc 4.6.3
(and 3.4.2) vs. Intel v11 and Microsoft (in Windows 7) here:
http://willus.com/ccomp_benchmark2.shtml
Hello.
I'm developing a C++ analyzer and I would like to get source text of
file when I'm analyzing C++ code.
When I'm analyzing source code I would like to get source text line
from a location of a type. I have got type location but I don't know a
function to get source line text from source
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Alberto Lozano Alelu ale...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello.
I'm developing a C++ analyzer and I would like to get source text of
file when I'm analyzing C++ code.
When I'm analyzing source code I would like to get source text line
from a location of a type. I have
Hi,
I am developing a new pass and looking for suggestions on the best way
to record in a data structure which regs and subregs I have seen and
which mode they are in through the insn chain so I know if I find
duplicates.
Any suggestions on the best way to do this?
Are there any rtx hashes
Hello.
Thanks for your fast response.
With expand_location I get struct expanded_location which has these fields:
type = struct {
const char *file;
int line;
int column;
unsigned char sysp;
}
But it hasn't source line text.
I know how I have to use expand_location function but
The generated non-vectorized assembly is simply the unrolled loop with
8 iterations, so loop structure is pretty much intact (except for
unrolling).
Does the vectorizer fail on unrolled loops?
I can compile some assembly dumps showing both the vectorized and the
unvectorized loop?
Alex
On
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Alberto Lozano Alelu ale...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello.
Thanks for your fast response.
With expand_location I get struct expanded_location which has these fields:
type = struct {
const char *file;
int line;
int column;
unsigned char sysp;
}
But
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Alexander Herz alexander.h...@mytum.de wrote:
The generated non-vectorized assembly is simply the unrolled loop with 8
iterations, so loop structure is pretty much intact (except for unrolling).
Does the vectorizer fail on unrolled loops?
I can compile some
On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 14:06 +0100, Alberto Lozano Alelu wrote:
Hello.
Thanks for your fast response.
With expand_location I get struct expanded_location which has these fields:
type = struct {
const char *file;
int line;
int column;
unsigned char sysp;
}
But it
Hello!
For the math functions, this is normally more a libc feature, so you might
get very different results on different OS. Then again, by using
-ffast-math, you allow the math functions to return any random value, so I
can think of ways to make it even faster ;-)
Also for math
Hello,
A number of compilers claim to be GCC, without actually being GCC. This
has come to a point where they can hardly be distinguished–until one
actually tries to use them.
I had the following macro to determine whether plug-in support is
available:
On 1/19/2012 2:59 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:37 AM, Marc Glissemarc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012, willus.com wrote:
For those who might be interested, I've recently benchmarked gcc 4.6.3
(and 3.4.2) vs. Intel v11 and Microsoft (in Windows 7) here:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 3:27 PM, willus.com willus@willus.com wrote:
On 1/19/2012 2:59 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:37 AM, Marc Glissemarc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012, willus.com wrote:
For those who might be interested, I've recently benchmarked
Hi Ludo,
A number of compilers claim to be GCC, without actually being GCC. This
has come to a point where they can hardly be distinguished–until one
actually tries to use them.
this suggests that you shouldn't be testing for GCC, and instead should be
testing for support for particular
Hi Ducan,
Duncan Sands baldr...@free.fr skribis:
A number of compilers claim to be GCC, without actually being GCC. This
has come to a point where they can hardly be distinguished–until one
actually tries to use them.
this suggests that you shouldn't be testing for GCC, and instead should
Hi Ludo, I didn't really get it. Why do you want to know whether the compiler
is GCC or not? Presumably because you have several versions of your code,
one version using GCC feature XYZ and the other not using XYZ. If so, the
logically correct (but maybe impractical) approach is to test if the
REMINDERS:
1- If you are thinking of preparing a presentation ahead of
time, please let us know before 31/Jan. You do not need to
prepare a detailed write-up. We will also be voting on
discussion topics just ahead of the conference, like we did
at the last one.
2- Please REGISTER
On Sun, 2012-01-15 at 19:42 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
I noticed that when you generate dwarf for an inlined function it often
comes with duplicate range lists for both the DW_TAG_inlined_subroutine
and the child DW_TAG_lexical_block DIE.
I filed a bug report for it with some additional
On 01/19/12 06:24, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
I don’t see what can be done on “our” side (perhaps Autoconf’s feature
test could be strengthened, but how?)
Which feature test would that be?
I certainly understand the problem, and have run into issues where
clang fools 'configure' into thinking a
On 1/19/2012 9:27 AM, willus.com wrote:
On 1/19/2012 2:59 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:37 AM, Marc Glissemarc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012, willus.com wrote:
For those who might be interested, I've recently benchmarked gcc 4.6.3
(and 3.4.2) vs. Intel
Hi Paul,
Paul Eggert egg...@cs.ucla.edu skribis:
A 'configure' script is supposed to check for behavior, not identity.
If the compiler supports the features needed, then generally speaking
a 'configure' script shouldn't care whether the compiler is truly GCC.
Right. But how would you write
Duncan Sands baldr...@free.fr skribis:
Why do you want to know whether the compiler
is GCC or not?
Because I’m writing a plug-in for GCC.
Ludo’.
libacml from AMD is also a good candidate to try:
http://www.ualberta.ca/AICT/RESEARCH/LinuxClusters/doc/acml350/Linking_002fWindows.html
David
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 2:59 AM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:37 AM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr
Write a test that checks for the existence of that machinery. I agree with the
earlier comments. Checking version strings or program names is the wrong way,
because you're essentially saying if it is X then I know it can do Y rather
than directly asking the question can it do Y. The issue
BELBACHIR Selim selim.belbac...@fr.thalesgroup.com writes:
In fact my final purpose is to replace $INP by a register bank in order to be
able to read several inputs using pipelined instructions (and instruction
scheduler). The fixed reg solution will prevent me from doing this. Is there
Nice work! The only think is that you didn't enable WPO/LTCG on VC++
builds, so that test is a little skewed...
On 2012/1/18 20:35, willus.com wrote:
Hello,
For those who might be interested, I've recently benchmarked gcc 4.6.3
(and 3.4.2) vs. Intel v11 and Microsoft (in Windows 7) here:
Paulo J. Matos pa...@matos-sorge.com writes:
I am developing a new pass and looking for suggestions on the best way
to record in a data structure which regs and subregs I have seen and
which mode they are in through the insn chain so I know if I find
duplicates.
Any suggestions on the best
For a Go program being compiled in gcc, from the middle end, is there a way to
figure-out which routines make up the interface-method-table? I could check the
mangled name of the method table, but is there another way to deduce what
methods compose it from the middle-end?
Thanks!
-Matt
Snapshot gcc-4.5-20120119 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.5-20120119/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.5 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
On 19/01/2012 16:51, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
Right. But how would you write feature tests that would check (1)
whether the GNU C language is supported,
Try and compile a conftest that uses it. If you wanted a possibly
over-engineered solution, write one conftest for each feature of GNU C
On 17/01/2012 21:16, Paul S wrote:
For example the i386 seems to use predicates and constraints of the form
*_operand and m/r/i for the reload versions of these instructions -
and I haven't been able to find definitions of these or a mention in
gcc_internals.pdf of any special meaning
On 2012-01-19 15:58:22 +0100, Duncan Sands wrote:
Hi Ludo, I didn't really get it. Why do you want to know whether the compiler
is GCC or not? Presumably because you have several versions of your code,
one version using GCC feature XYZ and the other not using XYZ. If so, the
logically
Dear Sir/madam,
You wish to host a new mirror site, in my area. Below mention is my
personal detail.
Name: Santosh Sharma poudel
City: kathmandu.
Country: Nepal.
Looking forward for your positive responce
Regards,
Santosh Sharma Poudel
On 1/18/2012 10:37 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012, willus.com wrote:
For those who might be interested, I've recently benchmarked gcc
4.6.3 (and 3.4.2) vs. Intel v11 and Microsoft (in Windows 7) here:
http://willus.com/ccomp_benchmark2.shtml
On 1/19/2012 6:29 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 3:27 PM, willus.comwillus@willus.com wrote:
On 1/19/2012 2:59 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:37 AM, Marc Glissemarc.gli...@inria.frwrote:
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012, willus.com wrote:
For those
On 1/19/2012 9:24 PM, willus.com wrote:
On 1/18/2012 10:37 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012, willus.com wrote:
For those who might be interested, I've recently benchmarked gcc
4.6.3 (and 3.4.2) vs. Intel v11 and Microsoft (in Windows 7) here:
willus.com willus@willus.com writes:
For the math functions, this is normally more a libc feature, so you
might get very different results on different OS. Then again, by using
-ffast-math, you allow the math functions to return any random value,
so I can think of ways to make it even
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51634
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48426
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51899
Bug #: 51899
Summary: [4.7 Regression] libgfortran's chmod.c fails to build
on MinGW
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51505
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49829
--- Comment #5 from Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-19
08:52:04 UTC ---
As per #4, here's the convenience library approach.
With this, libstdc++.so is composed of three convenience libraries:
1. libsupc++convenience.la
2.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49829
--- Comment #6 from Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-19
08:52:55 UTC ---
Created attachment 26373
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26373
libstdc++ binary composed from three convenience libraries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49829
--- Comment #7 from Paolo Bonzini bonzini at gnu dot org 2012-01-19 08:59:02
UTC ---
The convenience library can be linked with -L.../.libs -lsupc++convenience
-lstdc++convenience98.
But it really looks like you attached the wrong patch?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49829
Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #26373|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51899
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51106
Andrey Belevantsev abel at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45472
--- Comment #18 from Andrey Belevantsev abel at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-19
09:28:56 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
By the way I think we could get cases where the user wrote volatile in one
case
and non-volatile in another so fixing up the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51832
--- Comment #13 from Markus Trippelsdorf markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2012-01-19 09:34:07 UTC ---
Created attachment 26375
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26375
libxul link error log
BTW I've first observed this bug while
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37997
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-19
09:35:38 UTC ---
int foo (int i, int b)
{
int mask;
int result;
if (b)
mask = -1;
else
mask = 0;
result = result mask;
return result;
}
actually
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37997
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37997
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-19
09:38:04 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 19 09:37:58 2012
New Revision: 183297
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183297
Log:
2012-01-19 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51106
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-19
09:43:16 UTC ---
Shorter testcase for gcc.c-torture/compile/ :
int
foo (int x)
{
asm goto ( : : i (x) : : lab);
return 1;
lab:
return 0;
}
Yeah, I think
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51896
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51895
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51894
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51893
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51895
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-19
10:16:07 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
bftype = TREE_TYPE (base);
if (TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (exp)) != BLKmode)
bftype
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51900
Bug #: 51900
Summary: [4.6 Regression] const variable initialization always
zero
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50237
--- Comment #36 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-19
10:43:58 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 19 10:43:54 2012
New Revision: 183299
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183299
Log:
PR bootstrap/50237
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51845
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-19
10:46:35 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 19 10:46:31 2012
New Revision: 183300
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183300
Log:
PR libstdc++/51845
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51893
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48496
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-19
10:48:05 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 19 10:47:59 2012
New Revision: 183301
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183301
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50237
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51566
--- Comment #2 from Greta Yorsh Greta.Yorsh at arm dot com 2012-01-19
10:50:09 UTC ---
I did git bisect and it shows that the ICE disappears from r182403.
Looks like the problem has been fixed by this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51566
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51845
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51901
Bug #: 51901
Summary: [4.7 regression] java.security.Security.getProperty
throws ExceptionInInitializerError
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50200
--- Comment #2 from Zdenek Sojka zsojka at seznam dot cz 2012-01-19 11:03:26
UTC ---
Created attachment 26376
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26376
testcase failing in r183270
Both testcases were reduced from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51784
--- Comment #37 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2012-01-19 11:03:58 UTC ---
Regstrapped with the patch in comment #35. The patch fixes this PR without
regression (down to 2 failures with some pending patches) and the tests for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30994
Axel Mueller aegges at web dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51900
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51901
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51901
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48496
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51784
--- Comment #38 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-19
11:30:37 UTC ---
If the insn pattern is #, then if no split pass splits it before final,
during final it will be split anyway. So no idea why you play games with
!optimize
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51900
--- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2012-01-19
11:34:52 UTC ---
I can reproduce with x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc-4.6.2 on cygwin. Adding 'extern'
to the declaration in the .h file fixes it.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51900
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Starke daniel.f.starke at freenet dot de
2012-01-19 11:52:27 UTC ---
[...]
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-static' '-O2' '-v' '-Q' '-o' 'a.o' '-c' '-mtune=i386'
'-march=i386'
[...]
GNU C (GCC) version 4.6.2 (mingw32)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51900
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-19
11:57:18 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
[...]
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-static' '-O2' '-v' '-Q' '-o' 'a.o' '-c' '-mtune=i386'
'-march=i386'
[...]
GNU C (GCC) version
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51784
--- Comment #39 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-19 12:01:32
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #38)
If the insn pattern is #, then if no split pass splits it before final,
during final it will be split anyway. So no idea why you
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47249
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48949
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49936
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51895
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-19
12:33:55 UTC ---
Created attachment 26377
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26377
gcc47-pr51895.patch
Untested patch that attempts to fix BLKmode MEM_REF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51901
--- Comment #2 from gee jojelino at gmail dot com 2012-01-19 12:36:35 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Why the 4.7 regression tag? Does it work in 4.6? I think the amount of
libgcj
changes since 4.6 has been very small...
sorry for 4.7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50229
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50557
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50686
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51570
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-19
12:49:40 UTC ---
Any updates here? Should we simply XFAIL the tests?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51832
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51819
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|arm |arm-*-*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51856
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51871
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-19
12:55:26 UTC ---
So, you are not sure this is a regression?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51876
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50686
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
1 - 100 of 281 matches
Mail list logo
