http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14792
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14541
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52205
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52213
Bug #: 52213
Summary: Add chunk of memory if array is size is divisable with
8
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52214
Bug #: 52214
Summary: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr44706.C
-std=gnu++* scan-tree-dump-not fnsplit Splitting
function
Classification: Unclassified
Product:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52215
Bug #: 52215
Summary: [4.7 Regression] FAIL:
ext/profile/mutex_extensions_neg.cc (test for excess
errors)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52212
Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52213
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-12
13:44:17 UTC ---
Please provide *complete* testcases, this code is missing stdio.h and
string.h, since you already wrote it so it compiles why should we have to add
headers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52215
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-12
13:57:32 UTC ---
It makes no sense unless the signature of __atomic_compare_exchange_n is
different when -m32 is used!
Looking into it ...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52190
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-12
14:02:42 UTC ---
The docs for __atomic_compare_exchange_n say:
True is returned if *desired is written into *ptr
but desired is not a pointer, that asterisk should go,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52213
--- Comment #2 from Jovica jovica.sabic at gmail dot com 2012-02-12 14:03:33
UTC ---
I know this should be undefined behaviour but i drew attention to it only
happens when there is a length divided by 8. That's why I wrote this bug, to
pay
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52215
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=52213
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-12
14:19:13 UTC ---
You ask for some memory, you get some memory of at least that size, you look at
bytes after the allocated memory and get weird behaviour. That's a bug in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52213
Jovica jovica.sabic at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52215
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52216
Bug #: 52216
Summary: [C++11][noexcept] Wrong exception deduction for some
forms of placement new
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52217
Bug #: 52217
Summary: [boehm-gc] revision 184100 causes segmentation fault
in mingw32
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48094
--- Comment #15 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-12 14:43:49
UTC ---
this var is a two element array consisting of two integer constants.
the var is marked 'preserve' (because it is read by the OBJC runtime, but not
referenced
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52212
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2012-02-12 15:02:22 UTC ---
My quoted phrase doesn't actually say that (nominated refers to the befriended
name). But 11 p4 can be applied here:
Access control is applied
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52212
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52212
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-12
15:08:14 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
Note that the same function was earlier made a friend of class E, and so can
see F. If you leave out the second friending, you get:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50076
--- Comment #6 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-12 15:20:50
UTC ---
Author: iains
Date: Sun Feb 12 15:20:46 2012
New Revision: 184140
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184140
Log:
gcc/testsuite:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50076
Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52205
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-12
15:33:17 UTC ---
Created attachment 26643
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26643
Tentative fix
Would you mind giving it a try on the Solaris 11 machine?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50981
--- Comment #37 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-12
15:46:18 UTC ---
Author: mikael
Date: Sun Feb 12 15:46:14 2012
New Revision: 184142
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184142
Log:
gcc/fortran/
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52217
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52218
Bug #: 52218
Summary: [4.7 Regression] libgo ftbfs on arm-linux-gnueabi
(unknown case for SETCONTEXT_CLOBBERS_TLS)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52219
Bug #: 52219
Summary: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: cxg2001
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52212
--- Comment #6 from Ivan Godard igodard at pacbell dot net 2012-02-12
17:14:34 UTC ---
I'll put in a report to clang. One of you guys is right- are you well enough
connected to jointly figure out who it is?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52219
--- Comment #1 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-12 17:16:53
UTC ---
OK on x86_64-darwin10 and i686-darwin9 @ 184085 ...
... test is running @184140 on i686-darwin9.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52212
--- Comment #7 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2012-02-12 17:18:38 UTC ---
I'd say that comment 3 and comment 5 are equivalent. Jonathan additionally
provided a way to fix the code.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52220
Bug #: 52220
Summary: FAIL: libitm.c++/eh-1.C execution test due to Xcode 4
weakref linker bug
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52221
Bug #: 52221
Summary: [libffi] r184021 needs to be fixed.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52212
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-12
17:47:47 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
I'd say that comment 3 and comment 5 are equivalent.
Agreed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52221
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52218
--- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com 2012-02-12 19:34:43
UTC ---
Please look at the test case for SETCONTEXT_CLOBBERS_TLS in libgo/configure.ac
and figure out why it fails on arm-linux-gnueabi. That test case should not
fail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52205
--- Comment #6 from Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com 2012-02-12 19:52:02
UTC ---
The patch fixes the test case and also passes some relevant Go tests.
Rainer, if OK, I'd like to leave it to you to comment on the patch and do a
full testsuite
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52126
fabien at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52219
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52205
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-12
20:24:56 UTC ---
The patch fixes the test case and also passes some relevant Go tests.
Great. For the records, it was also tested on 5 different versions of Solaris
8, 9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52214
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52215
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52219
--- Comment #3 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-12 21:05:11
UTC ---
acats gnat is clean on x86_64-darwin10 @184143 (and, I think, 184127).
perhaps a temporary glitch?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52219
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2012-02-12
21:16:10 UTC ---
What's in the log file?
splitting /opt/gcc/build_w/gcc/testsuite/ada/acats/tests/cxg/cxg2001.a into:
cxg2001.adb
BUILD cxg2001.adb
gnatmake
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52219
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2012-02-12
21:49:46 UTC ---
acats gnat is clean on x86_64-darwin10 @184143 (and, I think, 184127).
perhaps a temporary glitch?
Apparently!-(the tests pass without failure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14792
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2962
--- Comment #13 from owner at bugs dot debian.org 2012-02-12 22:09:22 UTC ---
Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this Bug report.
This is an automatically generated reply to let you know your message
has been
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2962
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2962
--- Comment #15 from owner at bugs dot debian.org 2012-02-12 22:24:21 UTC ---
Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this Bug report.
This is an automatically generated reply to let you know your message
has been
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31531
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-12
22:58:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
forwprop already handles:
int f(int a)
{
int b = ~a;
return b0;
}
It just needs to handle:
int f(unsigned a)
{
int
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50076
Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||howarth at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52120
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5
Bug #: 5
Summary: 4.6.2 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Assert_Failure
sinfo.adb:2947
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52223
Bug #: 52223
Summary: [4.5,4.6,4.7 regression] libffi's man page install
breaks with multilibs and overridden mandir
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52224
Bug #: 52224
Summary: [C++0x] Generic operator gets pulled into compile-time
expression
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31531
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-13
00:44:11 UTC ---
I have a patch which adds this optimization to fold. And a partial patch which
adds some of it to forwprop but that fails because we have to create a temp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44783
Gabriel Redner gredner at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gredner at gmail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52214
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31531
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-13
06:30:29 UTC ---
I have a full patch now which also handles PR 14792 once that folding is
included in fold.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14792
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2962
--- Comment #16 from owner at bugs dot debian.org 2012-02-13 06:36:24 UTC ---
Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this Bug report.
This is an automatically generated reply to let you know your message
has been
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52210
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=31531
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-13
07:46:45 UTC ---
Created attachment 26645
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26645
Patch which fixes the problem (well the fold-const.c is really only needed
63 matches
Mail list logo
