http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47750
Bernhard Reutner-Fischer aldot at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29882
Bernhard Reutner-Fischer aldot at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182
--- Comment #30 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
08:07:15 UTC ---
Created attachment 26809
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26809
pr50182.C
Even the reduced testcase is orders of magnitude longer than what
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182
--- Comment #31 from oleg at smolsky dot net 2012-03-02 08:21:41 UTC ---
I don't think there is a need to actually check the result in this
benchmarkable fragment, so that will reduce the code a little. The only
thing that I was hitting is about
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182
--- Comment #32 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
08:28:34 UTC ---
For me, 4.1 is equally fast to 4.6 on my CPU and on the reduced testcase I've
attached (not clear if it models what the original benchmark did right or not),
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52460
Bug #: 52460
Summary: Misleading error message with templated c++ code
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182
--- Comment #33 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
09:13:52 UTC ---
After Jason's patch (which needs to be kept, it was a wrong-code bugfix), we
get out of the FE the addition in int type, while previously it was in unsigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52460
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=52455
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
09:33:08 UTC ---
This is a FAQ
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/VerboseDiagnostics#undefined_reference_to_.60S::a.27
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52458
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=45397
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
09:36:52 UTC ---
Another testcase (lightly based on PR50182), -O3 -mavx:
signed char a[1024], b[1024];
void
foo (void)
{
int i, s, t;
for (i = 0; i 1024; i++)
{ s =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45397
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
09:39:16 UTC ---
Note that once can't use signed type in the narrowing + of course, it needs to
be unsigned char addition to avoid overflows.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45397
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
09:48:17 UTC ---
Another testcase:
signed char a[1024], b[1024];
void
baz (void)
{
int i, s, t;
for (i = 0; i 1024; i++)
{ s = a[i]; t = b[i]; s += t + 0x12345600;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52459
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52457
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49069
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52458
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52452
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
11:00:17 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Mar 2 11:00:04 2012
New Revision: 184778
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184778
Log:
2012-03-02 Tobias Burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52411
--- Comment #11 from evrinoma at gmail dot com 2012-03-02 11:13:22 UTC ---
many thanks for help
the asterisk makefile detecting and using incorrect compilation flags
ifeq ($(OSARCH),linux-gnu)
ifeq ($(PROC),x86_64)
# You must have GCC 3.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52411
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48820
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52461
Bug #: 52461
Summary: [avr] XMEGA+EBI: RAMPZ clobbered while reading from
flash
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52461
Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52461
Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fbi.sr at gmx
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52458
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
12:39:03 UTC ---
It works ok if you do the conversion to the base class explicitly:
for (int x: static_caststd::vectorint(*this)) { }
I think the range-for code needs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52270
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
13:07:55 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Mar 2 13:07:46 2012
New Revision: 184784
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184784
Log:
2012-03-02 Tobias Burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52325
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
13:21:00 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Mar 2 13:20:52 2012
New Revision: 184785
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184785
Log:
2012-03-02 Tobias Burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52270
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52325
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52325
--- Comment #7 from Jos de Kloe kloedej at knmi dot nl 2012-03-02 13:50:59
UTC ---
Thanks for your (really) fast response and fix.
I'll keep my eye open for other details that might improve gfortran.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52462
Bug #: 52462
Summary: Several libgo tests FAIL intermittently: ../testdata
races
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52425
--- Comment #4 from Bernd Schmidt bernds at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
14:22:54 UTC ---
For some reason I can never reproduce sparc bugs with cross compilers. The
original testcase doesn't fail here; the reduced one fails but with a different
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46716
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8|[4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52458
--- Comment #5 from Alexey Kulentsov crimaniak at gmail dot com 2012-03-02
14:49:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
It works ok if you do the conversion to the base class explicitly:
Yes, I just make public inheritance so this problem is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50031
--- Comment #7 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
14:52:09 UTC ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Fri Mar 2 14:51:58 2012
New Revision: 184787
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184787
Log:
2012-03-02 Bill
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50969
--- Comment #6 from William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
14:52:09 UTC ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Fri Mar 2 14:51:58 2012
New Revision: 184787
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184787
Log:
2012-03-02 Bill
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52406
--- Comment #8 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
14:59:01 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Mar 2 14:58:55 2012
New Revision: 184789
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184789
Log:
2012-03-02 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52325
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
14:59:05 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Mar 2 14:58:58 2012
New Revision: 184790
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184790
Log:
2012-03-02 Tobias Burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52452
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
15:03:22 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
New Revision: 184778
Modified:
trunk/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
As it is far from being obvious what trunk means: At that point
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50031
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52406
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16464
Bernhard Reutner-Fischer aldot at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52457
Peter Bergner bergner at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51989
--- Comment #11 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-03-02 16:18:34 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Mar 2 16:18:25 2012
New Revision: 184796
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184796
Log:
/cp
2012-03-02
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52425
--- Comment #5 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2012-03-02
16:21:37 UTC ---
Reproduced with a vanilla gcc-4.6-20120224, configured
/tmp/gcc-4.6-20120224/configure --target=sparc64-unknown-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45988
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45988
--- Comment #6 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02 16:25:59 UTC
---
Created attachment 26811
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26811
profile on arenal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45988
--- Comment #5 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02 16:25:21 UTC
---
Created attachment 26810
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26810
profile on zingana
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45988
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|testsuite |target
--- Comment #7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52456
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52456
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-03-02 16:56:23 UTC ---
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2012-03-02 16:47:44 UTC ---
And the undesignated symbols
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52456
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bkoz at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52456
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-03-02
17:00:17 UTC ---
Indeed (sorry) the troublesome (ie, leading to FAIL) symbols seem the added
ones, on x86_64-linux too we have two undesignated and no FAIL.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46716
--- Comment #9 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02 17:03:44 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Fri Mar 2 17:03:36 2012
New Revision: 184802
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184802
Log:
PR target/46716
* config/i386/i386.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52456
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-03-02
17:03:22 UTC ---
(by the way, while we are at it, on x86_64-linux I also currently have 1
added, no FAIL, when building --enable-libstdcxx-time=rt, I suppose it's
fine)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52458
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
17:06:57 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
but this was a bug so I post it. It's pity MinGW updated only to 4.6.2.
The newest GCC release, 4.6.3, was only released yesterday!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52463
Bug #: 52463
Summary: libitm.c/memcpy-1.c FAILs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52383
Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49461
--- Comment #14 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
18:21:47 UTC ---
Author: mrs
Date: Fri Mar 2 18:21:41 2012
New Revision: 184809
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184809
Log:
2012-03-02 Jack
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52179
--- Comment #29 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
18:21:46 UTC ---
Author: mrs
Date: Fri Mar 2 18:21:41 2012
New Revision: 184809
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184809
Log:
2012-03-02 Jack
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49461
--- Comment #15 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
18:30:44 UTC ---
libjava is back to being pie in 4.6.4 and 4.7.0.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52179
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=52464
Bug #: 52464
Summary: When I compile my source codes with -O3 option, the
compiler fails. This does not occur if I use -O2
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52464
--- Comment #1 from bli at cs dot wisc.edu 2012-03-02 19:01:32 UTC ---
Please find the source code from the URL listed, or :
http://deweylab.biostat.wisc.edu/rsem/rsem-1.1.17.bug.tar.gz
Do the following to trigger the bug:
tar -xzf
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29589
Bernhard Kaindl bernhard.kaindl at thalesgroup dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27321
Bernhard Kaindl bernhard.kaindl at thalesgroup dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50335
Maxim Kuvyrkov mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31640
--- Comment #5 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02 20:56:50
UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Fri Mar 2 20:56:46 2012
New Revision: 184825
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184825
Log:
PR target/31640
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49486
--- Comment #3 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02 21:21:17
UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Fri Mar 2 21:21:13 2012
New Revision: 184829
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184829
Log:
PR target/49486
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51244
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #26191|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47030
Erik Toussaint eh.toussaint at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52457
Peter Bergner bergner at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48596
--- Comment #6 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
23:59:16 UTC ---
Author: kkojima
Date: Fri Mar 2 23:59:08 2012
New Revision: 184844
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184844
Log:
PR target/48596
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48806
--- Comment #2 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-02
23:59:17 UTC ---
Author: kkojima
Date: Fri Mar 2 23:59:08 2012
New Revision: 184844
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184844
Log:
PR target/48596
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52456
--- Comment #6 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-03-03 00:05:34 UTC ---
On 2-Mar-12, at 11:47 AM, paolo.carlini at oracle dot com wrote:
And the undesignated symbols are...? Is the issue recent?
Attached is the symbol diff. The
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52464
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52464
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|blocker |normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182
--- Comment #34 from oleg at smolsky dot net 2012-03-03 02:19:21 UTC ---
OK, here are some benchmark numbers for the test compiled verbatim with
g++41/g++463 -O2:
$ time ./test41
rv=4243767296
real0m6.063s
user0m6.058s
sys 0m0.001s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182
--- Comment #35 from oleg at smolsky dot net 2012-03-03 02:45:15 UTC ---
Here is a smaller version. BTW, I've noticed another regression in
optimization in v4.1 when using a const global...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182
--- Comment #36 from oleg at smolsky dot net 2012-03-03 02:59:11 UTC ---
Here is the code emitted by g++ 4.6.3 for smaller_test.cpp (attached to
the bug)
unsigned int test_constant proc near
mov r9d, cs:iterations
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36044
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
81 matches
Mail list logo