http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49847
--- Comment #35 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 25 Feb 2014, law at redhat dot com wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49847
--- Comment #34 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com ---
OK.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60319
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Feb 25 08:57:42 2014
New Revision: 208112
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208112root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-02-25 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60291
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60291
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60319
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
Stefan stefan at schweter dot it changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||stefan at schweter dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59626
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59313
--- Comment #9 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ro
Date: Tue Feb 25 09:27:25 2014
New Revision: 208114
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208114root=gccview=rev
Log:
Skip gfortran.dg/erf_3.F90 and gfortran.dg/round_4.f90 on
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58015
--- Comment #8 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ro
Date: Tue Feb 25 09:27:25 2014
New Revision: 208114
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208114root=gccview=rev
Log:
Skip gfortran.dg/erf_3.F90 and gfortran.dg/round_4.f90 on
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59198
--- Comment #11 from Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org ---
A correct version of the patch of comment#6 to varasm.c is:
Index: gcc/varasm.c
===
*** gcc/varasm.c(revision 208048)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60336
Bug ID: 60336
Summary: va_start corrupts 6-th argument in case of empty type
used before the format string
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60314
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60337
Bug ID: 60337
Summary: s390: Function arguments are not aligned
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60337
--- Comment #1 from Dominik Vogt vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---
Created attachment 32209
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32209action=edit
test program
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55426
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59626
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59626
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60337
--- Comment #2 from Dominik Vogt vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---
(libffi does not honour the alignment either.)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60337
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ABI,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55426
--- Comment #7 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Tue Feb 25 10:20:40 2014
New Revision: 208116
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208116root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/55426
* config/arm/arm.h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55426
--- Comment #8 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Tue Feb 25 10:25:26 2014
New Revision: 208117
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208117root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/55426
* config/arm/arm.h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55426
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60291
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Status now the same as 4.7 on the 4.8 branch (thus only the long-term
regression
against 4.4 remains).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59626
--- Comment #10 from David Kredba nheghathivhistha at gmail dot com ---
There is preprocessed source in closed as duplicate of this error:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56088.
I will attach one from program cp.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60183
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Feb 25 10:47:21 2014
New Revision: 208118
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208118root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-02-25 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60221
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Feb 25 10:47:21 2014
New Revision: 208118
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208118root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-02-25 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60291
--- Comment #19 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Feb 25 10:47:21 2014
New Revision: 208118
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208118root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-02-25 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60183
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60221
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60071
--- Comment #4 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Oleg, any news on this?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59626
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to David Kredba from comment #10)
There is preprocessed source in closed as duplicate of this error:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56088.
I will attach
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43053
--- Comment #1 from Mark Wielaard mark at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Same inconsistency with current g++ (GCC) 4.9.0 20140219 (experimental)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57936
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57936
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57369
Mark Wielaard mark at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60071
--- Comment #5 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Sorry, not yet, but it's on my desk/mind. I'll try to come up with something
this week. In the worst case we'll have to remove the problematic patterns, I
guess.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56740
Mark Wielaard mark at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55641
Mark Wielaard mark at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55641
--- Comment #6 from Mark Wielaard mark at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Note that if we add:
const foo g(x);
It comes out with just one const_type added:
[60]variable
name (string) g
decl_file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59626
--- Comment #12 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 32210
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32210action=edit
Unreduced testcase
Here's the unreduced testcase:
markus@x4 coreutils % gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60337
--- Comment #4 from Dominik Vogt vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---
It's the same on x86 I suppose
Well, the test program works fine on my amd64 box i.e. the alignment is
correct in all three functions (I guess foo() needs more int args to force
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
Jmaescraig margaretnemon at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||margaretnemon
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60276
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Feb 25 12:42:59 2014
New Revision: 208119
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208119root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-02-25 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59626
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #12)
Created attachment 32210 [details]
Unreduced testcase
Here's the unreduced testcase:
markus@x4 coreutils % gcc -std=gnu99
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59626
--- Comment #14 from David Kredba nheghathivhistha at gmail dot com ---
For me it is fixed too, tested it by reveision 207938, cp compiles fine with
-flto=4 -fuse-linker-plugin. It crashes later at link time but that is
something completely
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59626
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59198
--- Comment #12 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com paul.richard.thomas
at gmail dot com ---
Dear Tobias,
I think that I have see the light! In a particularly uninteresting
part of our Board Meeting, I took a look at the Doxygen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60327
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The dealII ICE is
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x005c9ef7 in vecinline_summary, va_gc, vl_embed::operator[] (
this=0x0, ix=7796) at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60338
Bug ID: 60338
Summary: Segfault when compiling with many non-existing
includes under 32 bit arch
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60328
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53808
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53808
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #6)
I just tried to reproduce the bug before checking my patch in for 4.9, and
couldn't; my patch seems to make no difference to the cgraph
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60328
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Feb 25 18:53:45 2014
New Revision: 208152
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208152root=gccview=rev
Log:
DR 1286
PR c++/60328
* pt.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53808
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Feb 25 18:54:48 2014
New Revision: 208153
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208153root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR lto/53808
* class.c (clone_function_decl):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53808
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36043
Arthur O'Dwyer arthur.j.odwyer at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60336
Mikael Pettersson mikpelinux at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpelinux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59195
Cary Coutant ccoutant at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59198
--- Comment #13 from Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com from comment #12)
Wrong! That doesn't do it at all.
Paul
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60317
--- Comment #5 from Vladimir Makarov vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Tue Feb 25 20:34:44 2014
New Revision: 208155
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208155root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-02-25 Vladimir Makarov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60328
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55877
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55877
--- Comment #10 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Feb 25 21:19:06 2014
New Revision: 208157
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208157root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/55877
* decl2.c (no_linkage_error):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60065
Volker Reichelt reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60311
Volker Reichelt reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60339
Bug ID: 60339
Summary: gnat weird DW_AT_abstract_origin
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60336
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60336
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |target
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60071
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60339
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60280
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59992
Alexandre Oliva aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aoliva
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59992
--- Comment #9 from Alexandre Oliva aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 32213
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32213action=edit
avoid quadratic behavior for the removal of useless values
This is the first of the two
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56926
Emma ai.emma.me at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ai.emma.me at gmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59992
--- Comment #10 from Alexandre Oliva aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 32214
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32214action=edit
preserve permanent values in a separate table
vt_initialize still took way too long in
/configure --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk
--enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.9.0 20140225 (experimental) [trunk revision 208111] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -O1 -c small.c
$ gcc-trunk -O0 -fcheck-data-deps -c small.c
$ gcc-4.6.4 -O1 -fcheck-data
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16602
--- Comment #14 from Sebastian Unger sebunger44 at gmail dot com ---
So how do I go about re-opening this? Or should I raise a new one?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60155
--- Comment #7 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 25-Feb-14, at 1:36 AM, law at redhat dot com wrote:
It really feels like this is papering over the real problem, namely
that
get_pressure_class_and_nregs simply doesn't handle things
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60280
--- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Wed Feb 26 01:49:35 2014
New Revision: 208165
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208165root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/60280
* tree-cfgcleanup.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16602
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Sebastian Unger from comment #14)
So how do I go about re-opening this? Or should I raise a new one?
Maybe you should raise it in the C standards mailing/news
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16602
--- Comment #16 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com ---
It is *not a bug*, and so should remain closed, and no new bug should be
opened. See the explicit not the array type wording already quoted.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16602
--- Comment #17 from Sebastian Unger sebunger44 at gmail dot com ---
Well, it is a bug. The question is whether it is a bug in GCC or in the
standard. I will raise it in the mailing list as suggested, but GCC could of
course again lead the way and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31887
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57936
Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wschmidt at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60341
Bug ID: 60341
Summary: ICE compiling Nonmem 6.2.0
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60341
--- Comment #2 from Steve Chapel steve.chapel at a2pg dot com ---
Created attachment 32216
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32216action=edit
included source code file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60341
--- Comment #1 from Steve Chapel steve.chapel at a2pg dot com ---
Created attachment 32215
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32215action=edit
source code file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60280
bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60155
--- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com ---
Rather than special case TRAP_IF, I think we just need to walk through the
pattern. If we find no assignments or 1 assignment, then we assert.
note_stores, or walking similar to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60341
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58675
--- Comment #8 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amodra
Date: Wed Feb 26 04:41:53 2014
New Revision: 208166
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208166root=gccview=rev
Log:
Apply mainline r207798
PR target/58675
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57936
--- Comment #6 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com ---
Bill, the ppc64-abi-dfp-1.c ICE is cured by the patch committed for pr58675 on
the trunk. Now committed to ibm-4.8.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57935
--- Comment #3 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amodra
Date: Wed Feb 26 04:41:53 2014
New Revision: 208166
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208166root=gccview=rev
Log:
Apply mainline r207798
PR target/58675
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60148
--- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 32217
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32217action=edit
Substantial patch
This patch is larger then it looks due to my editor judiciously
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52015
Roman roman.vasiliev at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roman.vasiliev at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60317
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
96 matches
Mail list logo
