On 2015.03.09 at 14:00 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Alan Modra amo...@gmail.com wrote:
This arranges to build a powerpc64le-linux compiler without -m32
support by default. Bootstrapped and regression tested on Ubuntu
powerpc64le-linux without
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65286
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65367
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64895
--- Comment #6 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
From PR64342 comment 7:
Register allocation seems to progress similarly, up until this message in
reload, which seems to be directly related to the r216154 patch:
...
Spill r86 after risky
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:08:50PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
On 2015.03.10 at 08:56 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-03/msg00288.html
for similar issue on aarch64.
You really don't want to use MULTIARCH_DIRNAME for the powerpc64le* case,
as that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65377
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
This removes the old vestige loop to find a gsi for a stmt (from times
where gsi_for_stmt was O(n)).
PR44563 shows gimple_split_block quite high in the profile (this
patch doesn't fix that) as the tail loop setting BB on all stmts
moved to the new block shows quadratic behavior when inlining
N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65343
--- Comment #2 from frankhb1989 at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
Maybe we want to placement-new the mutexes into a buffer so they are never
destroyed, although on mingw that will show up as leaked resources at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65376
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Robbert Krebbers
mailingli...@robbertkrebbers.nl wrote:
Dear Richard,
On 03/10/2015 09:51 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
struct X { int i; int j; };
int foo (struct X *p, struct X *q)
{
q-j = 1;
p-i = 0;
return q-j;
}
will optimize to return 1.
Oleg Endo oleg.e...@t-online.de wrote:
I think the same should be done in t-sh and in t-linux we could add the
SH1 little endian exception, too ... just in case (see attached patch).
I'm not sure whether TM_MULTILIB_EXCEPTIONS_CONFIG is needed in t-linux
or not. Moreover, I don't understand
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63155
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Mar 10 11:16:33 2015
New Revision: 221318
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221318root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-03-10 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63155
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.3, 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44563
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Funnily apart from the IPA inline summary updating issue the next important
time-hog is basic-block splitting we do for inlining a call. This is because
split_block moves the
On 03/10/2015 11:27 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
Is this fixing a regression in some way?
Not really. The optimization supposed to fold the bswap in that case is not
that old:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01378.html
The underlying problem however is probably visible in one
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65368
--- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
To some extent BZHI is a special case of BEXTR, but I'm afraid any
generalization is much harder due to the weirdo encoding of the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65296
--- Comment #3 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: gjl
Date: Tue Mar 10 09:50:41 2015
New Revision: 221316
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221316root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/65296
* config.gcc (extra_options)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44563
--- Comment #22 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I wonder why we have split_bb_on_noreturn_calls in cfg-cleanup rather than in
fixup_cfg. It's quite expensive, walking all stmts and calling
gimple_call_noreturn_p which is very
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 11:59 PM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 7:59 PM, vax mzn wrote:
w.r.t, https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Speedup_areas where we want to improve the
performance of splay trees.
The function `splay_tree_node splay_tree_lookup (splay_tree,
Typing call debug_function (current_function_decl, 0) every time I want to see
the current function is bothersome, the more so if I accidentally tap TAB and
gdb
tries to autocomplete the current word (argh!). The following adds an alias so
I
can just type pcfun and be happy.
Ok?
2015-03-10
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:33:13AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
Isn't cfun-decl much more likely to work?
Dunno, if that's the case, then:
2015-03-10 Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com
* gdbinit.in (pcfun): Define and document.
diff --git gcc/gdbinit.in gcc/gdbinit.in
index
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65377
npl at chello dot at changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
On Tue, 10 Mar 2015, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:53:56AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
2015-03-09 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
PR middle-end/44563
* tree-inline.c (copy_cfg_body): Skip block mapped to entry/exit
for redirect_all_calls.
Index:
CFG cleanup currently searches for calls that became noreturn and
fixes them up (splitting block and removing the fallthru). Previously
that was technically necessary as propagation may have turned an
indirect call into a direct noreturn call and the CFG verifier would
have barfed. Today we
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:47:54PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
On 2015.01.26 at 23:22 -0500, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
Gerald,
Could I get a hand on checking in this last addition?
-m 'Add a blurb to htdocs/gcc-5/changes.html to explain the
__has_cpp_attribute and
the
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:36:24PM +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:08:50PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
On 2015.03.10 at 08:56 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-03/msg00288.html
for similar issue on aarch64.
You really don't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65376
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65368
--- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
For zero_extract RTL we require that the POS and LEN arguments are in the
right ranges, while bextr allows any values, and either uses 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65370
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65377
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65365
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.4
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65377
--- Comment #7 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Unfortunately https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-01/msg02357.html hasn't
been checked in yet.
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Andreas Krebbel
kreb...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On 03/10/2015 10:12 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 8:57 AM, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
* gcc/ifcvt.c (if_convert):
...yes...?
Damn. mklog is still not able to do the complete job
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com wrote:
Typing call debug_function (current_function_decl, 0) every time I want to
see
the current function is bothersome, the more so if I accidentally tap TAB and
gdb
tries to autocomplete the current word (argh!). The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65377
Bug ID: 65377
Summary: [5.0 Regression] cpp attribute check ala clang fails
to compile
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:53:56AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
2015-03-09 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
PR middle-end/44563
* tree-inline.c (copy_cfg_body): Skip block mapped to entry/exit
for redirect_all_calls.
Index: gcc/tree-inline.c
On 2015.01.26 at 23:22 -0500, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
Gerald,
Could I get a hand on checking in this last addition?
-m 'Add a blurb to htdocs/gcc-5/changes.html to explain the
__has_cpp_attribute and
the equivalent __has_attribute macros.'
Thanks,
Ping?
And maybe add a word about
On 09/03/15 12:47, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 13/02/15 13:48 +, Matthew Wahab wrote:
Some DOS line endings were introduced into the char/isctype.cc file
when I committed this change These aren't visible in a terminal or
with svn diff but do show up in emacs. This is causing the test to
fail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65377
--- Comment #6 from npl at chello dot at ---
(In reply to npl from comment #3)
1) It simply shouldnt fail.
2) this is a generic header for C and C++.
__has_cpp_attribute(clang::fallthrough) should resolve to 0 and not fail.
This is a bug in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65377
--- Comment #8 from npl at chello dot at ---
This (and the Iso recommendation) doesnt answer the question whether the
__has_cpp_attribute macro should be defined for C sources either (it seems
illogical to me).
Guess its undefined and not a bug,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53927
--- Comment #23 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The offset between the CFA and e FRAME object is now 0x90 bytes. So
because of alignment constraints, I think we cannot assume we can have a
constant offset (even
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65368
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #5)
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
For zero_extract RTL we require that the POS and LEN arguments are in the
right ranges,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65370
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64le-linux-gnu |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65367
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65368
--- Comment #8 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #7)
Probably I didn't form the question in the right way - I was trying to point
out, if we also describe BEXTR without unspec (in a similar way
Hi,
Currentl we loose returned bounds when functions are merged. This patch fixes
it by adding returne bounds support for cgraph_node::expand_thunk.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. OK for trunk?
Thanks,
Ilya
--
gcc/
2015-03-06 Ilya Enkovich ilya.enkov...@intel.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65370
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65363
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
FRE can only eliminate the dominated one (obviously), so the first one is
the one prevailing.
I don't understand that.
Say we have load A (loading
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44563
--- Comment #24 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
So in gimple_expand_calls_inline we could look only at BBs last stmt for the
actual inlining but for the rest just do the basic-block splitting. And then
perform that walk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65377
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65365
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Ok with me.
This improves PR44563 a lot by not walking the block before/after
the call being inlined for redirect_all_calls - that block will
have up to 10 (unrelated) calls.
Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, regtest in progress.
Will apply to trunk after that succeeded.
Thanks,
Richard.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65365
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65377
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Use the proper check if you are want check if you are compiling c++ code first.
On 2015.03.10 at 08:56 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 08:32:59AM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
On 2015.03.10 at 17:58 +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 07:13:48AM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
This patch breaks the build on ppc64le:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:33:13AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
Isn't cfun-decl much more likely to work?
Dunno, if that's the case, then:
Ok (or use cfun ? cfun-decl : current_function_decl).
Thanks,
Richard.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64999
--- Comment #42 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
(In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #41)
I really don't want libbacktrace to be processor-dependent. That makes all
uses of it more complex for no significant gain. Maybe we should
Hi!
All the offloading folks agree, but we need someone to formally
approve this patch?
On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 22:27:43 +0300, Ilya Verbin iver...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 10:27:26 +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 10:28:46 +0100, Bernd Schmidt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51628
--- Comment #23 from Sven sven.koehler at gmail dot com ---
FYI: I have asked the llvm folks to add a warning to their compiler for the
when a pointer to a member of a packed struct is assigned to an ordinary
pointer with higher alignment
Hi!
Ping.
Thanks!
On 02/16/2015 12:26 PM, James Norris wrote:
This fixes the validation of the argument to the deviceptr clause.
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
OK to commit to trunk?
Jim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65286
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 10 13:54:11 2015
New Revision: 221324
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221324root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/65286
* config/rs6000/t-linux:
Hi!
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 19:49:03 +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 02:15:24PM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
* ipa-devirt.c (odr_subtypes_equivalent_p): Fix formating.
(compare_virtual_tables): Be smarter about skipping typeinfos;
do sane
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51628
--- Comment #24 from Sven sven.koehler at gmail dot com ---
Comment #4 mentions typedef int myint __attribute__((aligned(1)));
That shouldn't even work. The GCC documentation on Type Attributes mentions
that The aligned attribute can only
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65342
--- Comment #7 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #6)
Created attachment 35001 [details]
workaround
You might like to consider this patch that effectively reverts r210201 for
Darwin. This
Okay everywhere.
Thanks, David
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:36:24PM +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:08:50PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
On 2015.03.10 at 08:56 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65342
--- Comment #10 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com ---
permitted? (i.e. modifying %1, which is an input operand)
Yes. You're outputting assembly, practically anything goes.
Me again :)
I enhanced my patch because it was not generalized for instructions with N
delay_slots.
Selim
try_merge_patch2
Description: try_merge_patch2
Hi Richard and Eric,
On Mon, 9 Mar 2015 15:30:31, Richard Biener wrote:
Reg-tested on x86_64 successfully and ARM is still running.
ARM completed without regressions meanwhile.
Is it OK for trunk?
Looks ok to me apart from
/* Check for cases of unaligned fields that must be split. */
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358
James Greenhalgh jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65342
--- Comment #6 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 35001
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35001action=edit
workaround
You might like to consider this patch that effectively reverts r210201 for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65286
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 10 13:43:44 2015
New Revision: 221322
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221322root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/65286
* config/rs6000/t-linux:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64999
--- Comment #43 from Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com ---
I'm getting confused. I think I need to talk about one thing at a time.
You say that libbacktrace is returning incorrect line numbers. That obviously
needs to be fixed. When does
Hi,
I'm still working on a private backend on gcc 4.9.2. My processor provides
instructions with 2 delay slots. I'm well aware that this feature is very
uncommon and not fully tested. Nevertheless I submit the problem and the
solution I've found.
The bug is located in the function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65342
--- Comment #9 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com ---
As far as fixing the real underlying problem goes, I'm not so familiar with the
darwin support that I can state with certainty that you need to fix movdi_low
and friends.
It might help
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65286
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44563
--- Comment #26 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Mar 10 12:44:01 2015
New Revision: 221321
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221321root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-03-09 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
On 9 March 2015 at 10:56, Tim Shen wrote:
I guess this patch doesn't break abi compatibility, so if everything
is Ok, I'm gonna patch it to 4.9 too.
It doesn't change the ABI directly, but it does change the layout of
the match_results' data on the heap. It mean that instantiations of
e.g.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65367
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Reduced:
int
foo (char *p)
{
return *((const char *) ) - *p;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65342
--- Comment #8 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org ---
BTW, is:
(define_insn movdi_low_st
[(set (mem:DI (lo_sum:DI (match_operand:DI 1 gpc_reg_operand b,b,b)
(match_operand 2 Y,,)))
(match_operand:DI 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65366
--- Comment #1 from Jan Kratochvil jan.kratochvil at redhat dot com ---
[patch] PR other/65366: Fix gdbhooks.py for GDB with Python3
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-03/msg00502.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44563
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44563
--- Comment #27 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 10 Mar 2015, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44563
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44563
--- Comment #28 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #27)
On Tue, 10 Mar 2015, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44563
Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65286
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 10 13:52:48 2015
New Revision: 221323
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221323root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/65286
* config/rs6000/t-linux:
On 03/10/2015 08:07 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
On 03/10/2015 04:59 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 03/10/2015 07:10 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
-/* Remove any copies of empty classes. We check that the RHS
- has a simple form so that TARGET_EXPRs and non-empty
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25672
Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.8/4.9/5 Regression] |[4.8/4.9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65333
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 65332 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65332
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
On Tue, 10 Mar 2015, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Hi fellow developers,
I'm happy to inform you that the move of Newlib/Cygwin from the src CVS
repository to the new, combined GIT repository is now final.
I note that this repository includes the include/ directory, in its larger
binutils-gdb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65380
Bug ID: 65380
Summary: [5 Regression] LTO: ICE in add_symbol_to_partition_1,
at lto/lto-partition.c:158
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65333
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
On 03/10/2015 05:18 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
I suspect every compiler relies on this requirement in certain
cases otherwise copying would require making use of temporary
storage. Here's an example:
Thanks, this example is indeed not already undefined by effective types,
nor 6.2.6.1p6.
An
Hi Jakub,
I have one more question :)
This testcase seems to be correct... or not?
#pragma omp declare target
extern int G;
#pragma omp end declare target
int G;
int main ()
{
#pragma omp target update to(G)
return 0;
}
If yes, then we have a problem that the decl of G in
In this testcase we refer to an alias template specialization where the
arguments to the alias-template are non-dependent, but some of the
arguments to the underlying class template are dependent, so we need to
check at both levels.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit
Since nullptr always converts to false it doesn't make much sense to
recommend using 'true' instead.
Committed to CVS.
Index: porting_to.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-5/porting_to.html,v
retrieving revision 1.6
On 03/10/2015 11:43 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
+h3Return by converting move constructor/h3
+
+pGCC 5 implements
+a href=http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#1579;DR
1579/a
+which means that in a function like:/p
+
+precode
+ X
+ foo()
+ {
+Y y;
+return y;
+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25672
--- Comment #42 from Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Tue Mar 10 16:37:53 2015
New Revision: 221326
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221326root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/25672
* configure.ac: Do not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65127
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
So it seems current_class_ptr is no longer just NULL or a PARM_DECL, but can
be also ADDR_EXPR of a PLACEHOLDER_EXPR. Dunno if the right
Hi
On 9 March 2015 at 17:07, Yvan Roux yvan.r...@linaro.org wrote:
Hi,
As added in the PR, this issue is also present on 4.9 branch and
affects at least arm-linux-gnueabihf target (as reported in PR61207).
I've backported it in the 4.9 branch with the attached patch. The
difference with
On Mon, 9 Mar 2015, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
I committed this patch to gcc-5/changes.html to mention the new go and
gofmt programs.
Thanks for doing this, Ian. I committed a small markup fix on
top of it.
Gerald
Index: changes.html
1 - 100 of 264 matches
Mail list logo
