http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58398
--- Comment #6 from Bernd Edlinger ---
OK, this patch was posted at:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg01260.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58438
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58438
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58439
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58332
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jan.sm...@alcatel-lucent.co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58423
zhenqiang.chen at linaro dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhenqiang.chen at linaro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57589
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot com
Resolution|F
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57589
--- Comment #5 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Sep 17 02:04:49 2013
New Revision: 202642
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202642&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/57589
* config/rs6000/driver-rs6000.c (elf_platform): Revert
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58437
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini ---
In particular I'm thinking this change:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2009-08/msg00073.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58440
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey M. Birnbaum ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #1)
> Dup.
>
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 58437 ***
Cool, I actually did a search before submitting the bug but I did not find
anything a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58437
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56875
--- Comment #2 from Jan-Benedict Glaw ---
This is gas's tc-vax.c:
3158 if ((is_absolute) && (expP->X_op != O_big))
3159 {
3160 /* If nbytes > 4, then we are scrod
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58440
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58437
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jmbnyc at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58440
Bug ID: 58440
Summary: There seems to be a major performance regression in
std::sort performance
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58437
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||chris at bubblescope dot net
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58439
--- Comment #1 from Jan Smets ---
Oh, and compile with -O2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58439
Bug ID: 58439
Summary: ICE verify_cgraph_node failed
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58208
--- Comment #13 from Tammy Hsu ---
Hi Mikael,
My last comment probably is not clear enough. The import (testcase) I built on
RHEL 5.5 crashes on RHEL 5.5, but if I ran it on Fedora 19, it works.
So if you take the import you built on CentOS 5.8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58438
Bug ID: 58438
Summary: [4.9 Regression ICE: in check_rtl, at lra.c:2036
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58438
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
During profiled bootstrap:
/var/tmp/gcc_build_dir/./prev-gcc/xg++ -B/var/tmp/gcc_build_dir/./prev-gcc/
-B/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ -nostdinc++
-B/var/tmp/gcc_build_dir/prev-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libs
t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58438
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
markus@x4 gcc % cat test.ii
enum gimple_code {};
struct A {
gimple_code code;
};
struct B {
A gsbase;
};
int **a;
int b, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l, m, n, o;
gimple_code c, p;
class C {
virtual unsi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58437
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
I can't reproduce this. I tried compiling with -O3 (with 4.4, 4.7 and 4.8)
after commenting out either of the 2 sort lines, and I see roughly the same
execution times (maybe a few % difference, but nowhere near
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58437
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
Less confusing testcase:
#include
#include
using namespace std;
int main()
{
const int num = 1000;
vector v; v.reserve(num);
for(int i=0;i!=num;++i) v.push_back(-i);
sort(v.begin(), v.end());
}
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56875
--- Comment #1 from Jan-Benedict Glaw ---
The `gas' bug seems to only show up on 32bit host platform. Creating a
cross-gas on a amd64 systems seems to always result in "correct" VAX binary
output, even for old 2.21 releases. (Will further check th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58413
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
A patch with the testcase for the bit-field issue has been posted:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg01212.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58437
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
Ah forget my last message, I understand now you are really interested in how
long it takes to reverse-sort an already sorted vector. Indeed it does take
much longer with 4.6+ than with 4.4.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58437
Bug ID: 58437
Summary: Sorting value in reverse order is much slower compare
to gcc44
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58433
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Valery Weber from comment #2)
> But the std says:
>
>
>
> 4.5.6.3 When fi nalization occurs
> ...
> 2 A nonpointer, nonallocatable object that is not a dummy argument or
> functio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58435
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58431
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Jakub,
That doesn't make *any* sense. r202489 simply *avoids* doing any jump
threading in certain cases. If that change is indeed the trigger, then the
root cause is going to be a latent bug elsewhere.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58418
--- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
*** Bug 58431 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58342
Bug 58342 depends on bug 58340, which changed state.
Bug 58340 Summary: [4.9 regression] gcc/cp/pt.c:7064:1: internal compiler
error: in propagate_threaded_block_debug_into, at tree-ssa-threadedge.c:623
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58435
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58435
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini ---
Reduced:
template
struct same { static const bool value = false; };
template
struct same { static const bool value = true; };
template class F, typename T> struct apply
{ typedef F type; };
template usin
||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #1 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Valery Weber from comment #0)
> I get memory leaks with the FINAL for the following code and
> gcc version 4.9.0 20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58340
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58431
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
-fdisable-tree-phicprop2 lets it pass (the dumps appear identical before and
after this pass, but with verbose dumps we see some memory PHIs disappear)
-fdisable-tree-cddce2 also lets it pass, with larger differ
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58431
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58356
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58356
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Benson ---
Thanks for fixing!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58433
--- Comment #2 from Valery Weber ---
But the std says:
4.5.6.3 When fi nalization occurs
...
2 A nonpointer, nonallocatable object that is not a dummy argument or function
result is finalized immediately before it would become undefi ned d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58356
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Mon Sep 16 18:01:59 2013
New Revision: 202633
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202633&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-09-16 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/58356
* class.c (ge
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58436
Bug ID: 58436
Summary: [4.9 Regression][OOP] ICE (segfault) in
generate_finalization_wrapper for CLASS(*)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keyword
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58434
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58436
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58434
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58273
--- Comment #7 from André Wöbbeking ---
Thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58435
Daniel Frey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||d.frey at gmx dot de
--- Comment #1 from Da
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41933
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 41933, which changed state.
Bug 41933 Summary: [c++0x] lambdas and variadic templates don't work together
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41933
What|Removed |Added
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58405
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58416
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Mon, 16 Sep 2013, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> It looks wrong for DFmode move instructions to not preserve a IEEE defined
> flag. I suppose it would be also wrong to not preserve t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58420
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
The ubsan vla-bound patch contains a thinko, it should be fixed by this patch
(forgot to check for TYPE_NAME != NULL):
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg01209.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58419
--- Comment #3 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Zhendong Su from comment #2)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1)
> > It is caused by r202468.
>
> So it may have been a dup of 58418?
Yes, it is a duplication.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58418
--- Comment #2 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Mon Sep 16 15:12:22 2013
New Revision: 202630
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202630&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-09-16 Vladimir Makarov
PR middle-end/58418
* lra-cons
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48097
--- Comment #11 from Jack Howarth ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #10)
>
> what's the expectation/status here?
>
> I see that these test-cases still fail on x86_64-darwin12, with the latest
> XCode tools.
These failures are still pres
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50370
Johnny Willemsen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jwillemsen at remedy dot nl
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58435
Bug ID: 58435
Summary: Applying a type transformation to a list: const
ignored
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58406
--- Comment #9 from vincent.legoll at gmail dot com ---
OK I reproduced it again, and it is a duplicatre from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58006
I verified that by just recompilking the offending file without the
-ftree-parallelize-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57134
--- Comment #5 from Alan Modra ---
r200086 fixed Anton's first testcase but then he found another one. See
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg00983.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58434
Bug ID: 58434
Summary: no automatic deallocation with trunk
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58416
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> where *movdf_internal simply doesn't properly preserve sNaN.
>
> It looks wrong for DFmode move instructions to not preserve a IEEE defined
> flag. I suppose it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57134
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
I suppose this has been fixed by r200086 ?
: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: valeryweber at hotmail dot com
Dear All
I get memory leaks with the FINAL for the following code and
gcc version 4.9.0 20130916 (experimental) (GCC).
Is that a bug?
V
cat tmp.f90
module mod
type t
integer,allocatable,dimension(:)::i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58432
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58398
--- Comment #5 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #4)
> Yes, this seems OK. We probably do not want to be too ken about optimizing
> around ifuncs.
Yes, the problem is that the resolver function just looks
like an alia
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58398
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
Yes, this seems OK. We probably do not want to be too ken about optimizing
around ifuncs.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58432
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58417
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
But that eventually causes infinite recursions through instantiate_scev.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58398
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot
de
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58417
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sebpop at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58256
--- Comment #11 from Chen Gang ---
It seems, I am really really a newbie !!
1. after append "-gstabs+", can let gdb work well.
2. can use the internal dump_file (dump_start/dump_end) to analyze all
information (although I still don't know how to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58405
--- Comment #2 from semicontinuity at yandex dot ru ---
Now I cannot reproduce that as well..
It seems that I've compiled it with -ffixed-r30 -ffixed-r31 (different from
original intention) - in this case it produces this kind of assembly .
Still,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58432
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58432
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
markus@x4 gcc % cat test.ii
struct {
int prefix;
int dir_idx;
} *a;
int b;
void fn1() {
int *c, *d;
for (; b; b++)
if (d[b]) {
c[b] = d[b];
a[0].dir_idx = 0;
}
}
markus@x4 gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58432
Bug ID: 58432
Summary: [4.9 Regression] ICE: in insert_value_copy_on_edge,
at tree-outof-ssa.c:233
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58416
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i?86-*-*
--- Comment #2 from Richard Bie
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41933
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu.org|
--- Comment #13 from Paolo Carlin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58417
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58417
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Summary|Incorrect
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58421
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58355
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #2)
> Draft patch:
... regtests cleanly.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58368
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Schwab ---
r202345 has been reverted.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58368
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58256
--- Comment #10 from Chen Gang ---
Created attachment 30826
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30826&action=edit
(sorry, it is cc1 issue) It is the related command line for cc1 and the summary
work flow for gcc-4.8.0 and gcc-4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58430
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58426
Martin Husemann changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58431
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
89 matches
Mail list logo
