On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 23:48 +, Peter Sewell wrote:
On 18 February 2014 20:43, Torvald Riegel trie...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 12:12 +, Peter Sewell wrote:
Several of you have said that the standard and compiler should not
permit speculative writes of atomics, or
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 22:52 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
4.Some drivers allow user-mode code to mmap() some of their
state. Any changes undertaken by the user-mode code would
be invisible to the compiler.
A good point, but a compiler that doesn't try to (incorrectly)
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 14:58 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:40:15PM +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
xagsmtp4.20140218214207.8...@vmsdvm9.vnet.ibm.com
X-Xagent-Gateway: vmsdvm9.vnet.ibm.com (XAGSMTP4 at VMSDVM9)
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 09:16 -0800, Paul E. McKenney
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 22:47 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:21:56PM +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
Yes, I do. But that seems to be volatile territory. It crosses the
boundaries of the abstract machine, and thus is input/output. Which
fraction of your atomic accesses
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 12:07:02PM +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
Its not only hardware; also the kernel/user boundary has this same
problem. We cannot a-priory say what userspace will do; in fact, because
we're a general purpose OS, we must assume it will willfully try its
bestest to wreck
Vlad,
When fixing PR60169, I found that reload fail to assert
verify_initial_elim_offsets ()
if (insns_need_reload != 0 || something_needs_elimination
|| something_needs_operands_changed)
{
HOST_WIDE_INT old_frame_size = get_frame_size ();
reload_as_needed (global);
Andrew Pinski pins...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 6:56 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool
compn...@compnerd.org wrote:
Hello.
I am sending this at the behest of Renato. I have been working on the ARM
integrated assembler in LLVM and came across an interesting item in the Linux
kernel.
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Non-ODR types born from other frontends will then need to be made to
alias all the ODR variants that can be done by storing them into the
current canonical type hash.
(I wonder if we want to support cross language aliasing for non-POD?)
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 14:14 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:21 PM, Torvald Riegel trie...@redhat.com wrote:
So imagine that you have some clever global optimizer that sees that
the program never ever actually sets the dirty bit at all in any
thread, and then uses
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014, Torvald Riegel wrote:
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 22:40 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:21:56PM +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
Well, that's how atomics that aren't volatile are defined in the
standard. I can see that you want something else too, but that
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 11:59:08AM +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 14:58 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:40:15PM +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
xagsmtp4.20140218214207.8...@vmsdvm9.vnet.ibm.com
X-Xagent-Gateway: vmsdvm9.vnet.ibm.com (XAGSMTP4 at
On 2/19/2014, 6:54 AM, Joey Ye wrote:
Vlad,
When fixing PR60169, I found that reload fail to assert
verify_initial_elim_offsets ()
if (insns_need_reload != 0 || something_needs_elimination
|| something_needs_operands_changed)
{
HOST_WIDE_INT old_frame_size = get_frame_size
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 07:14 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 11:59:08AM +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 14:58 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:40:15PM +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 07:23 -0800, David Lang wrote:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014, Torvald Riegel wrote:
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 22:40 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:21:56PM +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
Well, that's how atomics that aren't volatile are defined in the
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Non-ODR types born from other frontends will then need to be made to
alias all the ODR variants that can be done by storing them into the
current canonical type hash.
(I wonder if we want to support cross language aliasing for non-POD?)
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Torvald Riegel trie...@redhat.com wrote:
If all those other threads written in whichever way use the same memory
model and ABI for synchronization (e.g., choice of HW barriers for a
certain memory_order), it doesn't matter whether it's a hardware thread,
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 1:50 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 1:42 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 8:11 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Here is the proposal to update x86-64 PLT for MPX. The linker change
is implemented
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 06:55:51PM +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 07:14 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 11:59:08AM +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
[ . . . ]
On both sides, the compiler will see that mmap() (or similar) is called,
so that means the
On 19 February 2014 11:58, Richard Sandiford
rsand...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
I agree that having an unrecognised asm shouldn't be a hard error until
assembly time though. Saleem, is the problem that this is being rejected
earlier?
Hi Andrew, Richard,
Thanks for your reviews! We agree that
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Renato Golin renato.go...@linaro.org wrote:
On 19 February 2014 11:58, Richard Sandiford
rsand...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
I agree that having an unrecognised asm shouldn't be a hard error until
assembly time though. Saleem, is the problem that this is being
On 19 February 2014 23:19, Andrew Pinski pins...@gmail.com wrote:
With the unified assembly format, you should not need those
.arm/.thumb and in fact emitting them can make things even worse.
If only we could get rid or all pre-UAL inline assembly on the planet... :)
The has been the only
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Torvald Riegel trie...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 09:44 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Can you point to it? Because I can find a draft standard, and it sure
as hell does *not* contain any clarity of the model. It has a *lot* of
verbiage, but it's
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 04:53:49PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Torvald Riegel trie...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 09:44 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Can you point to it? Because I can find a draft standard, and it sure
as hell does *not*
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 8:01 PM, Paul E. McKenney
paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
The control dependency should order subsequent stores, at least assuming
that a and b don't start off with identical stores that the compiler
could pull out of the if and merge. The same might also be true for
On 13 February 2014 20:47, Patrick Palka wrote:
On a related note, would a patch to officially enable
-Wmissing-declarations in the build process be well regarded?
What would be the advantage?
Since
-Wmissing-prototypes is currently enabled, I assume it is the
intention of the GCC devs to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60258
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57896
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57896
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |target
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60170
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=59933
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60267
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 32167
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32167action=edit
gcc49-pr60267.patch
Untested fix for the preprocessing ICE. So, with this patch you
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60268
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60266
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59537
--- Comment #1 from Lorenz Hüdepohl bugs at stellardeath dot org ---
Maybe related to the already fixed #51800?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59537
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60243
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Feb 19 09:29:34 2014
New Revision: 207879
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207879root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-02-19 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60268
Andrey Belevantsev abel at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60267
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59193
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=60269
Bug ID: 60269
Summary: #pragma simd tsubst related ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60204
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ubizjak at gmail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60204
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #3)
So, let's fix the psABI first and then fix gcc.
psABI is fixed in [1].
[1]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57232
Alexandre Oliva aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aoliva
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=60255
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60238
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59193
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=60270
Bug ID: 60270
Summary: [C++1y] std::quoted is too eager to clear the string
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60271
Bug ID: 60271
Summary: [C++1y] std::max(initializer_listT) cannot use
std::max_element
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60204
--- Comment #5 from tocarip.intel at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 32169
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32169action=edit
Proposed patch.
Currently testing attached patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60272
Bug ID: 60272
Summary: atomic::compare_exchange_weak has spurious store and
can cause race conditions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60272
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60172
--- Comment #10 from Joey Ye joey.ye at arm dot com ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #9)
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014, joey.ye at arm dot com wrote:
But that doesn't make sense - it means that -fdisable-tree-forwprop4
should get
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60172
--- Comment #11 from Joey Ye joey.ye at arm dot com ---
Repost from another record. It is annoying that after commenting one record it
automatically jumps to the next.
Here is good expansion:
;; _41 = _42 * 4;
(insn 20 19 0 (set (reg:SI 126 [
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #36 from Joey Ye joey.ye at arm dot com ---
Please ignore previous comment as it shouldn't be here.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60232
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Wed Feb 19 11:52:39 2014
New Revision: 207896
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207896root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-02-19 Janus Weil ja...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran/60232
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60232
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60255
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Antony, is it possible for you to try the patch in comment 2, in order to check
if it produces the expected runtime behavior for your code?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56563
Mark Wielaard mark at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59933
--- Comment #5 from Mark Warner warnerme at ptd dot net ---
sizeof(NSQ_del_dec_struct) / sizeof(opus_int32) is guaranteed to produced a
even number with a remainder of 0.
Note the __attribute__ ((__aligned__ (8))) to make it a multiple of 8 in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60272
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=60273
Bug ID: 60273
Summary: gcc gets confused when one class uses variadic
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60267
--- Comment #7 from Sylwester Arabas slayoo at staszic dot waw.pl ---
Created attachment 32172
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32172action=edit
preprocessed source trigerring ICE with g++ snapshot 20140212
Thanks a lot for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60274
Bug ID: 60274
Summary: String as template parameter - regression in 4.8.2
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60267
--- Comment #8 from Sylwester Arabas slayoo at staszic dot waw.pl ---
BTW, I have initially reported it as a comment to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60198 (the same file/line in ICE
error message).
S.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60274
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60275
Bug ID: 60275
Summary: [UBSAN] Add
-f[no-]sanitize-recover/-fsanitize-undefined-trap-on-e
rror to make UBSAN's runtime errors fatal
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59933
--- Comment #6 from Mark Warner warnerme at ptd dot net ---
If it is invalid, why does -Wall not trigger anything ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60266
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
It's caused by mixing -O0 and -O2 with LTO:
markus@x4 ~S % cat TableCopyHelper.ii
namespace com {
namespace sun {
namespace star {}
}
}
namespace css = com::sun::star;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60275
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50925
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60243
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Feb 19 14:25:47 2014
New Revision: 207899
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207899root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-02-19 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59933
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(int)(sizeof(NSQ_del_dec_struct) / sizeof(opus_int32) seems to be 1168/4 = 292,
but sLPC_Q14 has only 112 elements.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60155
John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikulas at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54737
John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57232
--- Comment #16 from Sebastian Götte gcc at jaseg dot net ---
Alexandre, curiously, applying this patch to the cross-compiler source tree
fixes the problem for me building 4.8.2 for rx-elf using a 4.8.2 x86_64 host
gcc. I did not even have to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59799
--- Comment #9 from yroux at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: yroux
Date: Wed Feb 19 15:32:54 2014
New Revision: 207908
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207908root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-02-19 Michael Hudson-Doyle michael.hud...@linaro.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57232
--- Comment #17 from Nick Clifton nickc at redhat dot com ---
Hi Alex,
if (reg != hard_frame_pointer_rtx fixed_regs[REGNO (reg)])
cselib_preserve_cfa_base_value (val, REGNO (reg));
This works for the RX port - thanks!
Cheers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60274
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=60064
Volker Reichelt reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56563
--- Comment #2 from Mark Wielaard mark at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Jakub proposed a patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-02/msg01166.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59933
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=51976
--- Comment #13 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The latest patch posted at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2014-02/msg00109.html
works smoothly on the test case in comment 12.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59794
--- Comment #17 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Wed Feb 19 15:53:59 2014
New Revision: 207910
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207910root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/59794
* config/i386/i386.c (type_natural_mode):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60251
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
Not sure this is valid. Anyway, the ICE is due to the COMPONENT_REF being
wrapped in a NOP_EXPR.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59797
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60205
--- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com ---
*** Bug 59797 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57320
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=59933
--- Comment #9 from Ian Hamilton ian at g0tcd dot com ---
Yes, that's all proper and correct. The invalid C code induces undefined
behaviour. I don't think anyone is disputing that.
However, to be pragmatic for a moment, the experience of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59933
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
We have -fsanitize=undefined which can catch some issues, though the array
bounds instrumentation (nor __builtin_object_size based instrumentation) has
not been added yet for GCC 4.9,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60267
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Feb 19 16:45:21 2014
New Revision: 207911
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207911root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/60267
* c-pragma.c (init_pragma):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59794
--- Comment #18 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Wed Feb 19 16:50:22 2014
New Revision: 207912
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207912root=gccview=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2014-02-19 Uros Bizjak
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59797
Bug 59797 depends on bug 59794, which changed state.
Bug 59794 Summary: [4.7/4.8 Regression] i386 backend fails to detect
MMX/SSE/AVX ABI changes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59794
What|Removed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59794
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50925
Ralf Corsepius corsepiu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||corsepiu at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37743
--- Comment #11 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com ---
Yes, we could do something like that (but I also think it's time to put
the targets without this type information on the deprecation list and warn
their
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57896
--- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Vittorio Zecca from comment #6)
As an aside, in gcc 4.8.1 source code, before line 6995 of gcc/expr.c I put
printf(\nexpr.c:6995 value-code=%d NUM_RTX_CODE=%d\n,(int)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57896
--- Comment #10 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Vittorio Zecca from comment #5)
Adding option -m32 I get ICE in ix86_expand_prologue, at
config/i386/i386.c:10559
I can confirm this with:
gcc version 4.8.3 20140219
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37743
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 32173
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32173action=edit
gcc49-pr37743.patch
Untested fix. The deprecation can hopefully be done separately.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60207
--- Comment #2 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Feb 19 18:10:04 2014
New Revision: 207913
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207913root=gccview=rev
Log:
Remove TFmode check for X86_64_INTEGER_CLASS
1 - 100 of 236 matches
Mail list logo
