https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64748
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
??? threadprivate? That doesn't look even remotely similar to the deviceptr
clause, threadprivate in OpenMP is a declarative clause you put on variables to
turn them into TLS vars.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64326
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
So fixed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65003
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64999
--- Comment #2 from Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com ---
From a cursory look the problem is that the regexp expects line 66 but the
actual output is line 65. Looking at the code line 66 seems correct. However
if the code is built with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65000
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65003
Bug ID: 65003
Summary: [5 Regression] -fsection-anchors ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65003
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57822
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #6)
Note that the output of this test on powerpc-apple-darwin9 r220529 is
3 38
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60898
--- Comment #16 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Is anyone working on this one?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65003
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64936
pierreblavy at yahoo dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64963
Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andi-gcc at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64999
--- Comment #5 from Dominik Vogt vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---
Just noticed that all function offsets in the stack traces are broken. On
s390x, only even offsets are valid, but all the numbers are odd, e.g.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64326
--- Comment #8 from tbsaunde at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: tbsaunde
Date: Tue Feb 10 14:49:07 2015
New Revision: 220585
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220585root=gccview=rev
Log:
cap frequency in make_forwarder_block
In the testcase the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64748
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #3)
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
??? threadprivate? That doesn't look even remotely similar to the deviceptr
clause,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64999
--- Comment #1 from Dominik Vogt vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---
These entries looks screwed to me:
-- snip --
32: 1024 [32: 1024] @ ...
#0x8000c44b ...allocatePersistent1K ... mprof_test.go:43
#0x8000c595 ...TestMemoryProfiler ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64326
tbsaunde at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64999
--- Comment #4 from Dominik Vogt vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---
The stack traces in gdb look good:
line 64:
#0 __go_new (td=td@entry=0x8010c8e8 __go_td_S1_xAN5_uint81024ee,
size=size@entry=1024) at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65002
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Seems estimate_function_body_sizes, in particular the ipa_load_from_parm_agg,
assumes that the function has SSA form properly updated, but since the bounded
pointers stuff changes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64963
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65010
Bug ID: 65010
Summary: ppc backend generates unnecessary signed extension
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65012
Bug ID: 65012
Summary: [5 Regression] systemd fails to build at least on
ppc64el, powerpc, arm-inux-gnueabihf and aarch64 with
-flto (ICE)
Product: gcc
Version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65011
Bug ID: 65011
Summary: misleading error message for target attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65012
--- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose doko at gcc dot gnu.org ---
/bin/bash ./libtool --tag=CC --mode=link gcc -pipe -Wall -Wextra -Wno-inline
-Wundef -Wformat=2 -Wformat-security -Wformat
-nonliteral -Wlogical-op -Wsign-compare
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57822
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Feb 11 04:29:06 2015
New Revision: 220606
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220606root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-02-10 Jerry DeLisle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64953
--- Comment #12 from manuel.reimer at gmx dot de ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #11)
We don't have your hardware and we don't have the full code to your
application, so we aren't going to be able to help you debug this.
The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64994
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55926
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64953
manuel.reimer at gmx dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #14 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18649
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61838
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65004
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64670
--- Comment #11 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #10)
Having #pragma implementation in LogListener.cc is sufficient:
The real-world LogListener.o has (full output as it is short):
...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64953
Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56645
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50351
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64670
--- Comment #10 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #9)
In the real code, one has something like the following, which I tried to
mimic in the test case. If I understood your comment correctly,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64982
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64963
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yeah, we was copying section as long as it was part of decl more or less by
accident than by design. I suppose keeping section (or not clonning at all)
makes sense. What about
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60244
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64994
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Feb 10 17:20:01 2015
New Revision: 220589
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220589root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/64994
* constexpr.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57775
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65000
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64982
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Tue Feb 10 16:38:31 2015
New Revision: 220587
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220587root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR ipa/64982
* cgraphunit.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64985
--- Comment #2 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Confirmed, but please do _not_ use this pragma, it's essentially untested
and is guaranteed to be a disaster performance-wise...
This comment is only for the configuration
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64961
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
No it isn't the same.
Foo1 is a public member of bar::Bar ([class]/2 For purposes of access
checking, the injected-class-name is treated as if it were a public member
name.)
Ba is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64670
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64994
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64963
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I think we should try to keep older gcc behavior, unless there is a strong
reason to change that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64999
--- Comment #6 from Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com ---
The odd addresses are most likely a symptom of the libbacktrace library. It
should probably be considered a bug. I'm guessing that it's because of the
--pc in the static function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57119
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64953
manuel.reimer at gmx dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64670
--- Comment #12 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #11)
Because log.o has due to the vptr sanitizer:
U typeinfo for LogListener
And why isn't that reference satisfied by the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63293
--- Comment #6 from collison at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: collison
Date: Tue Feb 10 08:17:09 2015
New Revision: 220574
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220574root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-02-10 Michael Collison michael.colli...@linaro.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64909
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63676
--- Comment #3 from collison at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: collison
Date: Tue Feb 10 08:05:35 2015
New Revision: 220572
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220572root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-02-10 Michael Collison michael.colli...@linaro.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64995
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: doko at gcc dot gnu.org
seen with trunk 20150210 on x86_64-linux-gnu
$ g++ -c -g -O2 World.cc
World.cc: In function 'void passTime()':
World.cc:23:6: internal compiler error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64909
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64670
--- Comment #9 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #8)
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #5)
Updated test case (part 1/2): [main file] compile with g++ -fsanitize=vptr
so the #pragma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64590
Dâniel Fraga fragabr at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
Rainer Emrich rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64995
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Started with r218515.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64984
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64988
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64994
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64995
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64990
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64963
James Greenhalgh jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|aarch64-none-elf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64996
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64992
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57822
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
Something such as
! { dg-do run }
! PR58722
program testit
use ISO_FORTRAN_ENV
implicit none
integer, parameter :: j(size(real_kinds)+4)=[REAL_KINDS, [4, 4, 4, 4]]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63652
--- Comment #2 from clyon at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I saw them pass at r219958, but fail again at r219959 as reported here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-01/msg02204.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64996
Bug ID: 64996
Summary: UBsan check optimized out by -O
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: sanitizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
--- Comment #26 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Instead of the #undef mkdir you'd IMHO better just use (mkdir) (filename)
in the second case.
Anyway, if you've posted your patch to gcc-patches, you should be pinging it
until it is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64997
alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
--- Comment #30 from Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yes, this patch slipped under my radar. It would be good if you - Rainer -
would have pinged on it. As far as I recalled I awaited at that time a full
patch by Rong on this subject.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64953
Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
--- Comment #31 from Rainer Emrich rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de ---
(In reply to Kai Tietz from comment #30)
Yes, this patch slipped under my radar. It would be good if you - Rainer -
would have pinged on it. As far as I recalled I awaited at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64909
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Feb 10 11:48:47 2015
New Revision: 220580
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220580root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-02-10 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64909
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64988
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
--- Comment #27 from Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #26)
Instead of the #undef mkdir you'd IMHO better just use (mkdir) (filename)
in the second case.
Anyway, if you've posted your patch to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64963
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64967
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I was wondering if anyone even still uses
--enable-symvers=gnu-versioned-namespace
I don't think it is worthwhile to support the dual ABI with the versioned
namespace, since using
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64967
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64994
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
markus@x4 test % cat nsGfxScrollFrame.ii
class TimeStamp {
public:
constexpr TimeStamp() : mValue() {}
int mValue;
};
class A {
class B;
A(bool);
};
class C {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
--- Comment #29 from Rainer Emrich rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de ---
Am 10.02.2015 12:12, schrieb jakub at gcc dot gnu.org:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
--- Comment #28 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64997
Bug ID: 64997
Summary: [AArch64] Illegal EON on SIMD registers
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
--- Comment #28 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg02137.html
?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64967
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Or drop the gnu-versioned-namespace support altogether.
Anyway, if you don't, bumping it to _8 and always using the new ABI sounds like
a good plan to me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64998
Bug ID: 64998
Summary: -shared -static-libasan does not actually link libasan
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64963
--- Comment #4 from James Greenhalgh jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The warning message given by the kernel build is:
WARNING: net/ipv4/built-in.o(.text.unlikely+0x10c): Section mismatch in
reference from the function ip_auto_config.part.6()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64999
Bug ID: 64999
Summary: s390x libgo test failure in TestMemoryProfiler
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: go
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64936
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64913
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63347
--- Comment #13 from Bernd Schmidt bernds at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Ugh, I see. I think the old method of just advancing should work with c6x -
IIRC SCHED_GROUP_P isn't used there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64961
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Clang gives exactly the same error.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64995
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Feb 10 13:37:54 2015
New Revision: 220581
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220581root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-02-10 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64961
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
And I think the code is invalid. If you want to define the function, don't use
a protected access path.
1 - 100 of 176 matches
Mail list logo
