http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52018
Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52048
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52048
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
09:02:33 UTC ---
Created attachment 26514
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26514
gcc47-pr52048.patch
Untested fix.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52051
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51450
--- Comment #2 from christophe.lyon at st dot com 2012-01-30 09:23:27 UTC ---
I noticed this about an official release; I am not sure which one it was when I
entered this report, but it is at least true for GCC-4.6.2.
I have just checked
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52050
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52043
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52045
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52041
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52039
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52038
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52037
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52035
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
09:34:37 UTC ---
We're writing a function decl:
function_decl 0x75b9b200 insert
type function_type 0x75b8cbd0
type void_type 0x75a36bd0 void
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52034
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
09:35:37 UTC ---
It's an RA issue I think - the RA isn't very clever when it comes to
coalescing pseudos with incoming or outgoing fixed regs.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52032
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52028
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52027
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52023
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52009
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30 09:43:04 UTC ---
Value numbering of stores appears to be a bit different than what I expected.
pr51879-9.c:
...
int z;
void
foo (void)
{
z = 5;
z = 5;
}
...
pr51879-9.c.028t.fre:
...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52046
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
10:05:46 UTC ---
Created attachment 26515
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26515
gcc47-pr52046.patch
Untested fix.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52043
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51483
--- Comment #7 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2012-01-30
10:51:11 UTC ---
Any chance this could be resolved before the 4.7.0 release? It would be a
shame if Ada support for m68k would be impossible due to something as lame as
FP
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52039
--- Comment #2 from Denis Excoffier g...@denis-excoffier.org 2012-01-30
11:14:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
How did you configure? Dup of PR51974?
.../configure --enable-languages=c,c++ --prefix=... --with-local-prefix=...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52027
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52027
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52037
--- Comment #8 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
12:12:31 UTC ---
Both TODO_update_ssa and TODO_update_ssa_only_virtuals are set. The assert
happens after IPA inline-transform. Probably happens because
if (!(todo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15846
--- Comment #4 from Arnaud Charlet charlet at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
12:15:54 UTC ---
Author: charlet
Date: Mon Jan 30 12:15:42 2012
New Revision: 183713
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183713
Log:
2012-01-30 Javier
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15846
Arnaud Charlet charlet at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52045
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
12:25:02 UTC ---
This is a case similar to PR22037, see execute_function_todo, passes calling
cleanup_tree_cfg need to expect to update SSA form.
bool cleanup =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51920
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
12:43:56 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Mon Jan 30 12:43:51 2012
New Revision: 183717
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183717
Log:
PR target/51920
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51920
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51528
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
13:26:48 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jan 30 13:26:45 2012
New Revision: 183720
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183720
Log:
2012-01-30 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52037
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2012-01-30 13:28:08 UTC
---
only virtuals may need updating here.
Less dangerous (considering other callers) might be to simply adjust
the code in inline-transform.
Obvious patch for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52032
Joseph Garvin joseph.h.garvin at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52032
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
13:38:07 UTC ---
But that's not how existing GCC attributes work.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52045
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
13:39:19 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jan 30 13:39:12 2012
New Revision: 183721
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183721
Log:
2012-01-30 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52045
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
13:40:32 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jan 30 13:40:24 2012
New Revision: 183722
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183722
Log:
2012-01-30 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52045
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52037
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52041
--- Comment #5 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30 13:47:06
UTC ---
I just bootstrapped r183695 (incl. Ada and Obj-C++) with
--enable-checking=release on i686-darwin9, using gcc4.6 as the bootstrap
compiler. What bootstrap
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52048
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
13:47:42 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jan 30 13:47:38 2012
New Revision: 183723
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183723
Log:
PR debug/52048
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52046
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
13:48:42 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jan 30 13:48:37 2012
New Revision: 183724
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183724
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52027
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
13:49:53 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jan 30 13:49:44 2012
New Revision: 183725
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183725
Log:
PR debug/52027
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52028
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
13:57:30 UTC ---
loop distribution splits the
for (;;)
{
...
if (K != k)
break;
K += 16;
}
loop into three portions, the first writing to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52013
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52048
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52046
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52027
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52052
Bug #: 52052
Summary: [Coarray] Properly handle coarray components of
derived types
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52028
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
14:16:51 UTC ---
Virtual SSA form is corrupt (and we don't detect that - bah).
bb 3:
# .MEM_723 = PHI .MEM_666(3), .MEM_661(D)(2)
# ivtmp.297_722 = PHI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52041
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2012-01-30
14:16:37 UTC ---
I just bootstrapped r183695 (incl. Ada and Obj-C++) with
--enable-checking=release on i686-darwin9, using gcc4.6 as the bootstrap
compiler. What
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52053
Bug #: 52053
Summary: SUM intrinsic is wrong for very large arrays
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52037
--- Comment #11 from Markus Trippelsdorf markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2012-01-30 14:20:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
only virtuals may need updating here.
Less dangerous (considering other callers) might be to simply adjust
the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51641
--- Comment #2 from Dodji Seketeli dodji at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
14:26:19 UTC ---
Author: dodji
Date: Mon Jan 30 14:26:12 2012
New Revision: 183726
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183726
Log:
PR c++/51641 - Lookup finds
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52053
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2012-01-30
14:28:13 UTC ---
This is not a bug: 16777216. == 2.0**24, then you can add 1.0 as much as you
like without changing the result.
If one want a bug here, it is a missed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50313
--- Comment #6 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
14:35:10 UTC ---
Author: ramana
Date: Mon Jan 30 14:35:05 2012
New Revision: 183727
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183727
Log:
Fix PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52054
Bug #: 52054
Summary: Value-numbering does not enter translated expressions
into the hash table
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52054
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46801
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50313
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52053
--- Comment #2 from François Willot francois.willot at cmm dot ensmp.fr
2012-01-30 14:41:58 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
This is not a bug: 16777216. == 2.0**24, then you can add 1.0 as much as you
like without changing the result.
If
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #22 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2012-01-30
14:42:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #21)
That gdb session in comment 18 makes no sense, owns_lock can't call trylock.
Your sources don't match your lib.
I thought
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52053
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
14:48:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
REAL(KIND=4) :: a(20,1000,1000)
If you want to reduce problems due to the accumulation of rounds, you should
increase the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51641
--- Comment #3 from Dodji Seketeli dodji at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
14:55:50 UTC ---
I have inadvertently committed this in trunk (4.7) even though it wasn't a
regression. I have now reverted it, and queuing it for 4.8 when stage 1 opens
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51500
--- Comment #11 from gee jojelino at gmail dot com 2012-01-30 15:10:48 UTC ---
Comment on attachment 26513
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26513
proposed patch for handling thiscall r3
@@ -505,6 +508,23 @@
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52053
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52041
Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
/mp --with-system-zlib
--enable-checking=release --with-cloog=/opt/mp --enable-cloog-backend=isl
--enable-lto
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.7.0 20120130 (experimental) [trunk revision 183725] (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52028
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51795
--- Comment #28 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-01-30
15:52:00 UTC ---
As a matter of fact, I'm not able to prove that things can go wrong with the
normal Schrage when x == m - 1, at least given our other conds (eg, a m).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52028
--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
15:51:34 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jan 30 15:51:23 2012
New Revision: 183730
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183730
Log:
2012-01-30 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50176
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50176
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
16:06:03 UTC ---
Created attachment 26517
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26517
patch
I've tried to implement a hack for this in fwprop (debug insn
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52041
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51649
--- Comment #9 from Tom Tromey tromey at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30 16:25:25
UTC ---
Author: tromey
Date: Mon Jan 30 16:25:11 2012
New Revision: 183732
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183732
Log:
PR libstdc++/51649:
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51500
--- Comment #12 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2012-01-30 16:39:04
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
+ *(unsigned int*) __tramp[24] = 0x8304244c; /* xchgl 4(%esp),%ecx*/ \
Don't use this insn, it implies lock prefix and costs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51835
--- Comment #3 from jye2 at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30 16:59:21 UTC ---
Author: jye2
Date: Mon Jan 30 16:59:14 2012
New Revision: 183733
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183733
Log:
2012-01-30 Bin Cheng bin.ch...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7625
--- Comment #7 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-01-30 17:00:45 UTC ---
On 1/29/2012 5:39 PM, steven at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Perhaps this should be closed as WONTFIX?
This enhancement should be done. It appears both the
32 and 64-bit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46057
John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51835
--- Comment #4 from jye2 at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30 17:22:08 UTC ---
Author: jye2
Date: Mon Jan 30 17:22:04 2012
New Revision: 183734
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183734
Log:
2012-01-30 Bin Cheng bin.ch...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51753
--- Comment #1 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-01-30 17:26:47 UTC ---
I'm uncertain if this is a code generation issue or a problem on the gdb side.
The problem still occurs unchanged with gdb
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51906
--- Comment #23 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2012-01-30
18:04:44 UTC ---
The 30_threads/recursive_mutex/try_lock/1.cc execution test on darwin11 built
with gcc trunk against Xcode 4.2.1 shows...
(gdb) break main
Breakpoint
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52042
--- Comment #1 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2012-01-30
18:21:09 UTC ---
Note that darwin11 leverages the PIC default on darwin to create pie
executables by defaulting the linker to -pie when targeting 10.7 or later. The
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52041
--- Comment #10 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30 18:22:12
UTC ---
the stage3 tree-ssa-strlen.o fails with -fcompare-debug failure (length).
An incomplete analysis ... run out of time...
The first mismatched tree dump is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44581
John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51753
--- Comment #2 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2012-01-30 18:47:21
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
I'm uncertain if this is a code generation issue or a problem on the gdb
side.
The problem still occurs unchanged with gdb 7.4.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48501
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52055
Bug #: 52055
Summary: load of 64-bit pointer reads 64 bits even when only 32
are used
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52042
m...@gcc.gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mrs at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51500
--- Comment #13 from Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30 19:20:16
UTC ---
Right the following sequence seems to be better IMHO:
pop %eax
push %ecx
push %eax
mov __ctx, %eax
call fun
pop %ecx
mov %ecx, %(esp)
ret
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52056
Bug #: 52056
Summary: Code optimization sensitive to trivial changes
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52041
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
19:26:10 UTC ---
The addition of # DEBUG lines in the dumps as well as some changes in D.
numbers are expected and correct in between the dumps, but the SSA_NAME
versions
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52036
--- Comment #7 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2012-01-30 19:28:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
(In reply to comment #3)
However compilation still fails if pi is given internal linkage by
declaring it static,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52041
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
19:36:33 UTC ---
Can't reproduce the -fcompare-debug failure with a cross from x86_64-linux to
x86_64-darwin on the provided tree-ssa-strlen.i btw., though of course the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51500
--- Comment #14 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2012-01-30 19:58:43
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
Right the following sequence seems to be better IMHO:
pop %eax
push %ecx
push %eax
mov __ctx, %eax
call fun
pop %ecx
mov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52057
Bug #: 52057
Summary: dropping const in assignment gives only a warning
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52009
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30 20:09:10 UTC ---
Created attachment 26518
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26518
tentative patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51450
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-30
20:18:31 UTC ---
Looks like there are two different places in configure which test -fno-rtti and
-fno-exceptions:
One around line 28658 (which does not use
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52058
Bug #: 52058
Summary: [4.7 regression] bootstrap fails on HAVE_cc0:
combine.c: 'do_SUBST_LINK' defined but not used
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52039
--- Comment #3 from Denis Excoffier g...@denis-excoffier.org 2012-01-30
20:29:45 UTC ---
Tried again, using:
- gmp-5.0.2, like last week
- make with no -j option
Same result (ie gcc/gimplify.o differs).
Also, Xcpde 4.2.1 uses:
% /usr/bin/gcc
1 - 100 of 153 matches
Mail list logo
