http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55718
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Krebbel krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
08:15:23 UTC ---
Author: krebbel
Date: Thu Jan 10 08:15:07 2013
New Revision: 195078
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195078
Log:
2013-01-10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55718
Andreas Krebbel krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55905
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45076
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10 08:43:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
With 4.7 I get instead of an ICE just the warning:
Same with curent 4.8 trunk:
dynamic_dispatch_6.f03:66:0: note: Skipping target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46952
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10 08:50:51 UTC ---
Further reducing the test case:
module m
type, abstract :: t
contains
procedure(inter), pass, deferred :: foo
end type
contains
subroutine
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55921
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
09:25:27 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 10 09:25:12 2013
New Revision: 195080
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195080
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55921
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression]|[4.6/4.7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55933
Bug #: 55933
Summary: Missing attachment download link
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55882
--- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
09:48:41 UTC ---
I have bootstrapped and tested the patch from comment #11 on
sparc64-linux (gcc63 on compile farm) and there were no issues
(actually
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55934
Bug #: 55934
Summary: [4.8 Regression] LRA inline asm error recovery
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55934
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55932
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55933
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
10:47:46 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
The best option would be to disable the useless patch viewer.
This gets my vote.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55923
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55929
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32306
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #34 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2013-01-10 11:26:23 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #33)
Can you sent it to review? You can also mention that it fixes issue 40362.
I had a closer look at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #35 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
11:37:08 UTC ---
For config/posix it is not that easy, because you can't assume that atomics are
available. You'd need to guard it with #ifdef HAVE_SYNC_BUILTINS and do
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46952
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #29139|0 |1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32927
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10 13:08:43
UTC ---
This has caused quite a bit of confusion lately with people installing ISL
instead of PPL for gcc-4.7.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #26 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
13:42:33 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 10 13:42:27 2013
New Revision: 195084
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195084
Log:
2013-01-10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52381
Timo Kreuzer timo.kreuzer at reactos dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #29140|0 |1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46952
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10 14:09:54 UTC ---
The following patch is equivalent in functionality to the one in comment 4, but
includes some minor cleanup (and regtests cleanly):
Index: gcc/fortran/resolve.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #28 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
14:11:43 UTC ---
Another possibility lies in DEBUG stmts which we do not consider at all ...
(in the checker, that is).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52381
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org 2013-01-10 14:12:54
UTC ---
Like __atomic_compare_exchange_n?
This will be usual difference of virtual call representation in ia64. The .cp
test is going fine?
Honza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55927
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2013-01-10 14:33:48 UTC
---
This will be usual difference of virtual call representation in ia64. The .cp
test is going fine?
Honza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55927
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org 2013-01-10 14:44:20
UTC ---
Yes, it does.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47203
Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55833
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
15:02:37 UTC ---
By unswitching on an exit test that exits to the enclosing loop we create
an unswitched loop that is now reached by what looks like an exit test
of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47136
Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
--- Comment #170 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
15:04:10 UTC ---
OK, here is updated memory use:
cgraph.c:863 (cgraph_allocate_init_indirect_info5905200: 0.1% 0:
0.0%6020160: 0.1% 0: 0.0%
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55345
Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55833
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
15:11:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
By unswitching on an exit test that exits to the enclosing loop we create
an unswitched loop that is now reached by what
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55833
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55833
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #29 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
15:28:38 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #27)
Created attachment 29141 [details]
updated checker
Also verify expressions. Bootstrapped ok, target libs building
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #30 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
15:34:39 UTC ---
LTO profiled-bootstrap revals:
/space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/gcc/reginfo.c: In function 'reg_scan':
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44061
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
15:35:40 UTC ---
I'm updating and testing the patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935
Bug #: 55935
Summary: [OOP] Fortran fronted has ADDR_EXPRs of FUNCTION_DECLs
with bogus BLOCK
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49213
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10 15:46:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
I want to emphasize again that the error I wanted to report was that gfortran
is rejecting valid structure constructor expressions (see
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49213
--- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10 16:06:51 UTC ---
In fact one also gets an ICE when replacing class(S) with type(S) in
comment 8 (already with an unpatched gfortran):
type :: S
integer :: n
end type
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2013-01-10
16:25:05 UTC ---
For the test gfortran.dg/class_array_15.f03, the ICE is triggered by the
statement:
allocate(b%cBh(1),source=defaultBhC)
(note that the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55927
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52448
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
16:49:26 UTC ---
Any progress with this?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55936
Bug #: 55936
Summary: Missed VRP optimization
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55683
--- Comment #15 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
16:58:35 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
The acutal ICE should be fixed. Martinj, I will leave the PR open
just to make you to double check that ipa-cp is doing
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #31 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-10 17:03:13
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #30)
LTO profiled-bootstrap revals:
/space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/gcc/reginfo.c: In function 'reg_scan':
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55899
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55929
--- Comment #3 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2013-01-10 17:30:36
UTC ---
Patch in testing:
Index: i386.md
===
--- i386.md (revision 195063)
+++ i386.md
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2013-01-10
17:35:13 UTC ---
(note that the test compiles with -fno-whole-file;-).
To be honest, this is not true for the other failing tests. Reduced
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55565
--- Comment #4 from Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
17:46:39 UTC ---
I compared the code generated by trunk with the generated code in rev 190339
which broke the test. The trunk code is more optimal than when the test
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55927
Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55565
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
17:53:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Bottom line, on trunk we avoid a branch and memory load/stores.
I agree the code is much better now. Only moving between
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55488
--- Comment #1 from wmi at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10 17:57:40 UTC ---
Author: wmi
Date: Thu Jan 10 17:57:34 2013
New Revision: 195092
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195092
Log:
2013-01-10 Wei Mi w...@google.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55264
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
18:02:35 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
Let me look into those...
Try the patch I attached to PR45375
I have updated to revision 195082 which I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55264
Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27338
Steve Ellcey sje at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sje at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54139
Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #32 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-10 19:36:08
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #30)
LTO profiled-bootstrap revals:
/space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/gcc/reginfo.c: In function 'reg_scan':
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55929
--- Comment #4 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10 19:49:34 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Jan 10 19:49:17 2013
New Revision: 195094
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195094
Log:
PR target/55929
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55929
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55672
--- Comment #10 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2013-01-10 20:23:49
UTC ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Thu Jan 10 20:07:55 2013
New Revision: 195095
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195095
Log:
2013-01-10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55565
--- Comment #6 from Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
20:28:33 UTC ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Thu Jan 10 20:28:26 2013
New Revision: 195097
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195097
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55565
Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49213
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10 20:39:58 UTC ---
The following patch makes comment 8 and 9 compile, but I'm not sure if the
generated code is correct:
Index: gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55934
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721
--- Comment #14 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-01-10 21:32:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
Here is another testcase that looks different then the others, it is cutdown
from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55937
Bug #: 55937
Summary: lto hides possible link issues
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55937
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-10
21:47:29 UTC ---
I think this is really invalid and the check (autoconf) should be changed
instead. What is happening is f is known to be used outside of the program.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55742
Sriraman Tallam tmsriram at google dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54300
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2013-01-10
22:35:06 UTC ---
Shorter test case for gfortran.dg/typebound_operator_*:
module i_field_module
implicit none
type :: i_field
integer :: i
end type
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2013-01-10
23:10:39 UTC ---
Note that if the 'class's are replaced with 'type's, the program compiles.
The assert also triggers if
class(i_field) ,intent(in) ::
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55938
Bug #: 55938
Summary: g++.dg/asan/deep-stack-uaf-1.C fails at r195092 on
darwin
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55938
Kostya Serebryany kcc at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
81 matches
Mail list logo
