http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55714
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||piotr5 at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55716
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aph at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55716
Bug #: 55716
Summary: [4.8 Regression] gjavah crashes
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55717
Bug #: 55717
Summary: [4.8 Regression] ICE in form_sum, at reload.c:5400
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55717
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55716
Mark Wielaard mark at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55718
Bug #: 55718
Summary: [4.8 Regression] ICE in gen_reg_rtx, at emit-rtl.c:866
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55718
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55719
Bug #: 55719
Summary: [4.8 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55719
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55719
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55716
--- Comment #2 from Mark Wielaard mark at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17 10:16:20
UTC ---
Hmmm, it might be that it is picking up the wrong bootclasspath in this case.
By default it tries to use System.getProperty(sun.boot.class.path) which I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55716
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17
10:20:36 UTC ---
Created attachment 28983
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28983
diff
There is no rt.jar present anywhere in either the non-working
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55716
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17
10:23:35 UTC ---
Those changes are likely:
2011-09-09 Andrew John Hughes ahug...@redhat.com
PR classpath/45526: Produce header files for
any inner
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55719
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17
10:27:42 UTC ---
Created attachment 28984
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28984
autoreduced testcase
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55718
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55718
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17
10:40:30 UTC ---
Reduced testcase:
extern char temp[];
short ansi_value[256];
void terminal_state(void)
{
static const char *puc[] = { , , =, , ?, 0};
int
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55672
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55717
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17
11:03:28 UTC ---
Reducing...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54781
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17
11:25:53 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Sounds more like a latent issue to me. Yes, removing invalid MEM_EXPRs would
be ok - but where do we dispatch to the tree
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17
12:14:18 UTC ---
Ok, I'm confused by the following:
bb 3: (loop 1 header)
# lxp_1 = PHI 0(2), lxp_24(12)
t_9 = pol_x[lxp_1];
_10 = (long int) lxp_1;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54781
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55710
--- Comment #7 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2012-12-17 13:54:20 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
I have now much confidence that our production code (based on GCC 4.7.2) fails
due to bug 55015. Fortunately there is a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55720
Bug #: 55720
Summary: [C++11] Linkage errors of static data member
initializers with lambdas
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55720
Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55059
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17
14:47:37 UTC ---
So, where do we stand with this? Can GDB be changed to cope with this, or do
you think it isn't valid DWARF?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53737
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54781
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17
14:55:59 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Dec 17 14:55:53 2012
New Revision: 194554
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=194554
Log:
2012-12-17
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55717
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17
15:06:45 UTC ---
Created attachment 28985
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28985
autoreduced testcase
Autoreduced testcase, fails with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55717
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17
15:38:04 UTC ---
(gdb) up
#1 0x00c03eb8 in form_sum (mode=SImode, x=0x702a5e88,
y=0x702a5eb8) at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55686
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steven
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54781
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55719
Andreas Krebbel krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55717
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721
Bug #: 55721
Summary: -mabi=64 compilation results in unknown UNSPEC note
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55722
Bug #: 55722
Summary: failed static_assert won't trigger a second time
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55722
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17
18:30:55 UTC ---
Either compilation should stop completely on the first failed static_assert so
that the second call is not diagnosed, or the second call should trigger
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55717
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721
--- Comment #2 from Steve Ellcey sje at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17 18:55:30
UTC ---
Thanks for the pointer.
Unfortunately, this note also happens when compiling testsuite_abi during the
libstdc++ testsuite, that is where I first noticed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55723
Bug #: 55723
Summary: SLP vectorization vs loop: SLP more efficient!
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17
19:00:17 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Thanks for the pointer.
Unfortunately, this note also happens when compiling testsuite_abi during the
libstdc++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55724
Bug #: 55724
Summary: Default type of a template value is not working
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50148
--- Comment #5 from Matt Hargett matt at use dot net 2012-12-17 19:12:11 UTC
---
Just verified this still happens in 4.7 and trunk.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55724
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Default type of a template |[C++11]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55243
--- Comment #28 from Rolf Ebert rolf.ebert.gcc at gmx dot de 2012-12-17
19:25:30 UTC ---
Created attachment 28988
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28988
Backport of gjl's patch to 4.7
I had to backport Georg's patch to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55724
--- Comment #1 from Ed Catmur ed at catmur dot co.uk 2012-12-17 19:25:39 UTC
---
It's not entirely clear in the standard, but my understanding of 14.8.2p5 is
that default template argument substitution is contemporaneous to template
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55723
vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|SLP vectorization vs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55724
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54818
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55672
--- Comment #4 from Vladimir Makarov vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17
21:39:28 UTC ---
If stack_realign_p is true, frame_pointer_needed is also true. So we can use
fp to eliminate frame but i386.c::x86_can_eliminate prohibits it.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55243
--- Comment #29 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-17
22:53:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #24)
What I don't understand is what is bad with Rolf's proposal of defining
STAMP?
We simply don't need to stamp anything
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55498
--- Comment #2 from Matt Hargett matt at use dot net 2012-12-17 23:34:08 UTC
---
Would iterating during LTO work in this instance, or would it need to happen
during early IPA?
is stage3 too late for the IPA-CP enhancement you mention?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55208
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55725
Bug #: 55725
Summary: Anonymous access returned from library-level function
is finalized too early, RM 3.10.2(10/2 or 10.3/3)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54814
Bernd Schmidt bernds at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #28900|0 |1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55726
Bug #: 55726
Summary: assignment of a scalar to a vector
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55208
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55684
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-18
07:47:42 UTC ---
*** Bug 55208 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
61 matches
Mail list logo