http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
--- Comment #19 from Joel Sherrill joel at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-12-13
19:10:10 UTC ---
Time to close this?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
--- Comment #20 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2011-12-13
19:40:19 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
Time to close this?
Not until the patch gets applied to gcc-4.6 branch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
--- Comment #18 from Vincent Riviere vincent.riviere at freesbee dot fr
2011-08-02 07:30:06 UTC ---
I have applied your patch to GCC 4.6.1 and it worked fine on all the software
I'm used to compile. You should apply it to the 4.6 branch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
--- Comment #16 from Bernd Schmidt bernds at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-05-04
20:24:19 UTC ---
Author: bernds
Date: Wed May 4 20:24:15 2011
New Revision: 173393
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=173393
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
--- Comment #17 from Vincent Riviere vincent.riviere at freesbee dot fr
2011-05-04 23:59:00 UTC ---
For me the bug seems to be fixed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
--- Comment #11 from Joel Sherrill joel at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-04-07
11:44:54 UTC ---
In both cases, I built gcc + newlib multilib + rtems multilib to ensure the
entire software base was built with and without the patch.
$ m68k-rtems4.11-gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
Bernd Schmidt bernds at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #23890|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
--- Comment #13 from Joel Sherrill joel at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-04-07
15:28:39 UTC ---
Not a problem to redo.. just CPU time and if you don't use it, you lose it. :-D
I am repeating some information so it is all in one post.
In both cases, I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
--- Comment #14 from Bernd Schmidt bernds at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-04-07
15:35:34 UTC ---
From the test results you posted, it appears to have been
+WARNING: program timed out.
+FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/fp-int-convert-double.c -O2 -flto execution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
--- Comment #15 from Joel Sherrill joel at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-04-07
15:44:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
From the test results you posted, it appears to have been
+WARNING: program timed out.
+FAIL:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
--- Comment #8 from Vincent Riviere vincent.riviere at freesbee dot fr
2011-04-06 17:07:26 UTC ---
Excellent! Your patch fixes both testcases here.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
--- Comment #9 from Bernd Schmidt bernds at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-04-06
17:28:43 UTC ---
Any chance you can run the testsuite before/after the patch? m68k is
problematic due to lack of a simulator.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
--- Comment #10 from Joel Sherrill joel at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-04-06
17:52:00 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
Any chance you can run the testsuite before/after the patch? m68k is
problematic due to lack of a simulator.
I can test with RTEMS
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
Bernd Schmidt bernds at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
--- Comment #6 from Vincent Riviere vincent.riviere at freesbee dot fr
2011-04-02 12:13:57 UTC ---
Created attachment 23850
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23850
Testcase
Here is my simplified testcase. It looks weird, but I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
Vincent Riviere vincent.riviere at freesbee dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
Joel Sherrill joel at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47612
--- Comment #3 from Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com 2011-02-04 21:27:40
UTC ---
It's similar to PR 46878 in that this is also CC0 related, but it is different
code that is splitting up the CC0 setter and the CC0 user. My sources do
include
20 matches
Mail list logo