https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39374
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35011
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35011action=edit
gcc14:/home/amylaar/pr39374/pr39374-diff
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: alserkli at inbox dot ru
Created attachment 35013
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35013action=edit
preprocessed source
g++ (GCC) 5.0.0 20150311 (experimental)
=== e.cc ===
#include memory
auto f(int n){
return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65391
David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39374
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35012
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35012action=edit
gcc14:/home/amylaar/pr39374/pr39374-r14476
On 03/11/2015 07:27 AM, Robbert Krebbers wrote:
Dear Joseph,
On 03/10/2015 11:01 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
and did u.b.b2 = f (u.a); instead of u.b.b2 = u.a;, that would not be
undefined (see 6.8.6.4 and GCC PR 43784).
Thanks for the references, those are useful!
But what about long long on 32
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65242
--- Comment #14 from Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: meissner
Date: Wed Mar 11 16:57:41 2015
New Revision: 221350
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221350root=gccview=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2015-03-09 Michael Meissner
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 7:37 AM, Matthias Klose d...@ubuntu.com wrote:
current trunk fails to build on x86*-linux, when configured for x32 multilibs
because libmpx doesn't support these. Disable them.
ok for the trunk?
* Disable libmpx x32 multilib builds.
--- a/config-ml.in
+++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57059
Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc
On 2015-03-11 17:11:55 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 05:08:16PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2015-03-11 14:27:25 +0100, Robbert Krebbers wrote:
But what about long long on 32 bits machines. For example:
union {
long long a;
struct { char b1; long
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65391
--- Comment #2 from Aaron Sawdey acsawdey at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---
Asm for the test case as in the description (load/store of *o_ptr for every
update):
compute_object_gain:
ld 9,0(3)
li 10,0
std 10,0(4)
cmpdi
Hi,
PR ipa/65236
* cgraphunit.c (cgraph_node::expand_thunk): Enable return slot
opt.
This bugfix adds ipa-icf-6.C test which failed on 4.9 branch as
ipa-icf is not backported on that branch. Is the bugfix still
relevant and we can dropped the testcase ?
On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Michael Meissner
meiss...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
This patch fixes PR 65240, which was a latent bug that was introduced when I
added the -mupper-regs support to the PowerPC compiler. In the PowerPC
compiler, if you use -ffast-math, the compiler allows floating
On 2015-03-11 14:27:25 +0100, Robbert Krebbers wrote:
But what about long long on 32 bits machines. For example:
union {
long long a;
struct { char b1; long long b2; } b;
} u;
Will GCC perform similar optimizations as for the case of big structs? I
tried to play around with long
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65391
Bug ID: 65391
Summary: unnecessary load of conditionally updated pointer in
loop
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65177
--- Comment #14 from Sebastian Pop spop at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #13)
But you can need updates that extend beyond the scope of the SEME I would
think. That was my recollection from looking at ways to
On 11 March 2015 at 16:11, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
There is some PR about it in our bugzilla, and the conclusion is that
it is both invalid (in C only one union member can be active at any time,
we as extension allow type punning through unions etc.)
and we really don't want to support it.
I
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 05:31:01PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
(in C only one union member can be active at any time,
we as extension allow type punning through unions etc.)
I disagree that it is an extension. The standard does not say
that one union member can be active at any time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65310
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Mar 11 15:09:51 2015
New Revision: 221348
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221348root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-03-11 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65387
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65242
--- Comment #13 from Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org ---
My gut feeling is we don't want to change ?m to !m, because it might impact
floating point conversions - integer, where we need the DI mode in a floating
point register. In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65387
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
OK
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Bernd Edlinger
bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
Hi Jakub,
with my OPC UA Server, I observe a reproducible crash in
ScopedReport::AddThread: tctx==NULL
in if ((u32)rep_-threads[i]-id == tctx-tid).
Apparently, Dmitry has already fixed that in the obvious
This fixes a vectorizer testcase regression on powerpc where SRA
drops alignment info unnecessarily.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
Richard.
2015-03-11 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
PR tree-optimization/65310
* tree-sra.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65384
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
Jeff,
I completely agree. The example exposed a problematic alternative in
the pattern and I would like to fix a latent problem, in addition to
Mike's patch.
Thanks, David
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/11/15 08:44, David Edelsohn wrote:
On Mon, Mar
2015-03-11 18:59 GMT+03:00 H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 7:37 AM, Matthias Klose d...@ubuntu.com wrote:
current trunk fails to build on x86*-linux, when configured for x32 multilibs
because libmpx doesn't support these. Disable them.
ok for the trunk?
*
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 04:24:07PM +, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
Attached patch as text.
2015-03-11 Junmo Park junmoz.p...@samsung.com
* config/arm/cortex-a57.md (cortex_a57_crypto_simple): Add
crypto_sha256_fast.
(cortex_a57_crypto_complex): Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65177
--- Comment #15 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com ---
Basically the way this works is we record the SSA_NAMEs that are being
duplicated during block copying. For any duplicated SSA_NAME, if 1 instance
of it is live at a join point in
64317 is a P2 regression related to making the PIC register a pseudo
register on the x86 port.
Basically post-LRA we still have some redundant loads of the PIC
register from memory (it's spilled to memory as other objects are more
profitable to keep in registers). But of the set of ~10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65200
--- Comment #7 from Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jb
Date: Wed Mar 11 21:34:22 2015
New Revision: 221361
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221361root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR 65200 Handle EPERM in addition to EACCES.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65369
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor msebor at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The cause of the failing tests observed on RHEL 7.1 is in the second definition
of nettle's HAVE_NATIVE_64_BIT configuration macro:
$ grep HAVE_NATIVE_64_BIT config.*
config.h:#
On 03/06/2015 03:36 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
this is a regression about duplicate warnings with
-Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant. The regression is rather old, affects
4_8-branch too, and started when check_default_argument got a
perform_implicit_conversion_flags call which warns a first time,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65355
Pat Haugen pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pthaugen at gcc
Hi!
I committed the following in r221362:
commit 5121139d0e8b22290fc9e752b07752d8a1b70182
Author: tschwinge tschwinge@138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4
Date: Wed Mar 11 21:42:50 2015 +
No libstdc++ for nvptx.
The C++ front end insists to link against libstdc++ -- which we
Hi!
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 18:08:32 +0100, Bernd Schmidt ber...@codesourcery.com
wrote:
New patch below, [...]
... got committed. I now committed the following in r221363:
commit 83ba0e65833dd081db921f8c2b3277316590753c
Author: tschwinge tschwinge@138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40060
Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65388
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Mar 11 20:36:56 2015
New Revision: 221359
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221359root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/65388
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65395
Bug ID: 65395
Summary: compiler crash, -ftree-pre leads to SSA corruption
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64847
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Hi!
__has_{cpp_,}attribute builtin macros are effectively function-like macros
taking one argument (and the ISO preprocessor expands macros in the argument
which is IMHO desirable), but the traditional preprocessor has been crashing
on them or reporting errors.
As the hook uses cpp_get_token and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65127
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65394
Bug ID: 65394
Summary: r221327 causes gcc.dg/ipa/pr63569.c to fail
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62173
--- Comment #35 from Jiong Wang jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #34)
Any progress on this? This is a P1 PR, but no comments have been added for
more than a month...
from what I known:
Bin was working
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65242
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
2015-03-10 18:02 GMT+03:00 Georg-Johann Lay a...@gjlay.de:
This is just a small addendum to the option and specs handling:
- Document new avr-gcc command options
- Change -march= to -mmcu= in some test cases
- Add comfigure test to detect whether gas supports -mrmw and --mlink-relax.
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65392
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57059
Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65296
--- Comment #4 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: gjl
Date: Wed Mar 11 18:35:52 2015
New Revision: 221354
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221354root=gccview=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/65296
* configure.ac [avr]:
Hi!
Valgrind reported some memory leaks. record_builtin_type calls
just get_identifier on the name, and get_identifier never uses the original
string for storage, it always allocates it on its own, so using xstrdup
as get_identifier argument leaks the memory.
Bootstrapped/regtested on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65393
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
On March 11, 2015 2:32:18 PM CET, Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com wrote:
This patch fixes a pretty obvious typo: we couldn't possibly want to
test
whether a variable equals itself. PR c/54979 is an RFE for a warning
that
would detect such cases.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64366
--- Comment #2 from Vladimir Makarov vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I've reproduced the bug. As the bug is in LRA inheritance, it will take some
time to fix it. I hope to make a patch on next week.
On 11/03/15 19:14 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 06:09:11PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
This is a slightly-modified version of Ed's patch from
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-01/msg02357.html which I plan
to commit to CVS tomorrow.
Index: changes.html
On March 11, 2015 8:04:25 PM CET, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi!
Valgrind reported some memory leaks. record_builtin_type calls
just get_identifier on the name, and get_identifier never uses the
original
string for storage, it always allocates it on its own, so using xstrdup
as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65392
Bug ID: 65392
Summary: Bad mangled names in Debug Mode assertions
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
Priority:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63711
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
---
This is a slightly-modified version of Ed's patch from
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-01/msg02357.html which I plan
to commit to CVS tomorrow.
Index: changes.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-5/changes.html,v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65296
--- Comment #5 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: gjl
Date: Wed Mar 11 18:51:09 2015
New Revision: 221355
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221355root=gccview=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/65296
* configure.ac [avr]:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65393
Bug ID: 65393
Summary: std::thread shared_ptr inefficiency
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62173
--- Comment #34 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Any progress on this? This is a P1 PR, but no comments have been added for
more than a month...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63711
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 05:23:47PM +0300, Marat Zakirov wrote:
Hi all!
Currently !ASAN_GLOBALS disables red-zones for global variables but keeps
their checks. This simple patch disables these checks too.
I've noticed
UNRESOLVED: c-c++-common/asan/no-asan-check-glob.c -O0
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 06:09:11PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
This is a slightly-modified version of Ed's patch from
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-01/msg02357.html which I plan
to commit to CVS tomorrow.
Index: changes.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63500
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dushistov at
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 5:51 PM, David Wohlferd d...@limegreensocks.com wrote:
The reason I believe the order can change is this comment from i386.h:
/* Order in which to allocate registers. Each register must be
listed once, even those in FIXED_REGISTERS. List frame pointer
late and
Why does gcc allow you to specify clobbers using numbers:
asm ( : : r (var) : 0); // i386: clobbers eax
How is this better than using register names?
This makes even less sense when you realize that (apparently) the
indices of registers aren't fixed. Which means there is no way to know
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 4:41 PM, paul_kon...@dell.com wrote:
On Mar 11, 2015, at 7:19 PM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:58 PM, David Wohlferd d...@limegreensocks.com
wrote:
Why does gcc allow you to specify clobbers using numbers:
asm ( : : r (var)
On 3/11/2015 4:19 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:58 PM, David Wohlferd d...@limegreensocks.com wrote:
Why does gcc allow you to specify clobbers using numbers:
asm ( : : r (var) : 0); // i386: clobbers eax
How is this better than using register names?
This makes
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Michael Meissner
meiss...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 01:02:06PM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
I am concerned with the create_TOC_reference use for TARGET_TOC. Has
this been tested with big endian -mcmodel=small?
Yes, that was a problem.
On Mar 11, 2015, at 7:19 PM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:58 PM, David Wohlferd d...@limegreensocks.com
wrote:
Why does gcc allow you to specify clobbers using numbers:
asm ( : : r (var) : 0); // i386: clobbers eax
How is this better than
Snapshot gcc-4.9-20150311 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.9-20150311/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.9 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
On 03/11/2015 05:31 PM, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
I disagree that it is an extension. The standard does not say
that one union member can be active at any time.
The interpretation under which this is allowed in confirmed by
Note 95 of 6.5.2.3p3.
Effective types disallow to access a union member
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:58 PM, David Wohlferd d...@limegreensocks.com wrote:
Why does gcc allow you to specify clobbers using numbers:
asm ( : : r (var) : 0); // i386: clobbers eax
How is this better than using register names?
This makes even less sense when you realize that
On 3/11/2015 4:41 PM, paul_kon...@dell.com wrote:
On Mar 11, 2015, at 7:19 PM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:58 PM, David Wohlferd d...@limegreensocks.com wrote:
Why does gcc allow you to specify clobbers using numbers:
asm ( : : r (var) : 0); // i386:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65385
Bug ID: 65385
Summary: [libgomp] omp task untied test case fails
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgomp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65385
--- Comment #1 from Sebastian Huber sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de ---
Created attachment 35008
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35008action=edit
Test program.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65385
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
That test is completely bogus. The spec doesn't require untied tasks to change
threads at any point, it is strictly a may case. So the test is testing
something not required by the
On 03/03/2015 10:36 AM, Marat Zakirov wrote:
On 02/24/2015 03:49 PM, Marat Zakirov wrote:
On 02/20/2015 03:07 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 02:59:51PM +0300, Marat Zakirov wrote:
Here is simple patch that moves asan phase just behind sanopt for all
O0/O1/O2/O3 modes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65385
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
IMHO not, I view the untied clause purely as an optimization hint (and libgomp
parses it, but ignores it).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65386
Bug ID: 65386
Summary: [libgomp] omp task final test case fails
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgomp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65386
--- Comment #1 from Sebastian Huber sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de ---
Created attachment 35009
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35009action=edit
Test program.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65310
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 10 Mar 2015, pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65310
--- Comment #6 from Pat Haugen pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:39 AM, Zhouyi Zhou zhouzho...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Zhouyi Zhou yizhouz...@ict.ac.cn
In function setup_left_conflict_sizes_p, left conflict subnodes sizes
are computed in a down-to-up fashion through the regnodes foreast.
Speed up the process from prevent node
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65388
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #1)
That looks indeed.
I meant weird.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65388
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=65355
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=65387
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Oh, in my case stdc-predef.h comes from glibc thus the license comment should
be directed there. The GCC shipped stuff seems to have the runtime exception.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63175
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65365
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56917
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Mar 11 10:37:38 2015
New Revision: 221346
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221346root=gccview=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2014-12-04
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65388
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Ah, we have PR54979 for that already...
Marek, would you be interested to look at this in stage1?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65388
Bug ID: 65388
Summary: Wrong comparison in same_succ_def::equal()
tree-ssa-tail-merge.c:590
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65388
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65388
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65379
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65310
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Whoops - tested in the wrong tree. Can reproduce now - investigating.
On Tue, 10 Mar 2015, Marek Polacek wrote:
I'd like to backport the following patch that suppresses bogus ubsan errors.
I had to tweak the testcase a bit since 4.9 doesn't know
-fno-sanitize-recover.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for 4.9?
Ok.
Thanks,
Richard.
2015-03-10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65386
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The test looks bogus to me.
Citing the standard:
final task A task that forces all of its child tasks to become final and
included tasks.
None of the explicit tasks (final or not)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65387
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64683
--- Comment #9 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35010
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35010action=edit
libgo.log (nobootstrap build)
1 - 100 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
