https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64980
--- Comment #18 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #17)
> > I think this updated patch fixes all mentioned test cases.
>
> Confirmed, bootstrapped and regtested cleanly.
>
> > but there are many regressions,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64980
--- Comment #17 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> I think this updated patch fixes all mentioned test cases.
Confirmed, bootstrapped and regtested cleanly.
> but there are many regressions, which would need to be fixed before
> it makes sense to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61538
Joshua Kinard changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.8.0 |4.9.3
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55701
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65071
--- Comment #1 from Mikhail Maltsev ---
A few more comments. I wrote that GCC 5.0 segfaults. That's actually not true,
I could not reproduce segfault on checked builds (only release version of
4.9.2), but never the less it's still ICE.
So, here
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64432
--- Comment #18 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Created attachment 34771
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34771&action=edit
A test case
Current results with attached test case.
$ ./a.out
KIND=1: 34 1 127
KIND=1: 34 1. 12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51017
--- Comment #10 from Alexander Peslyak ---
I decided to take a look at the generated code. Compared to 4.6.2, GCC 4.9.2
started generating lots of xorps, orps, andps, andnps where it previously
generated pxor, por, pand, pandn. Changing those w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64821
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65075
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64992
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse ---
W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65075
Bug ID: 65075
Summary: [5 Regression] constexpr regression
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51017
--- Comment #9 from Alexander Peslyak ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> Can you try GCC 4.9?
Yes. Bad news: things mostly became even worse. Same machine, same JtR
version, same test script as in my previous comment:
4.9.2 - 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64992
--- Comment #4 from Ishiura Lab Compiler Team ---
FYI, clang-3.6 -O3 seems to do the same optimization on "org.c" as well as on
"opt.c."
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65074
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 34770
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34770&action=edit
A patch
Please try this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65024
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> The ICE for the reduced test in comment 2 appeared between revisions
> r207428 (2014-02-03, OK) and r207996 (2014-02-21, ICE).
Started at r207986.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65073
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64833
--- Comment #3 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Hi Oleg!
Yes, I will simply run a manual build in the following days and just make sure
nothing is thrown away. I finally have my very own SH4 board now and I will set
it up in the upcoming week.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65074
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65074
Bug ID: 65074
Summary: [5 Regression] r220674 broke C++ PIEs
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64833
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo ---
Would it be possible for you to pull a precompiled source from the build via
the '-save-temps' option?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64833
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||sh*-*-*
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65073
Bug ID: 65073
Summary: dynamic character assignment gives wrong result
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53623
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
--- Comment #15 from H.J. Lu ---
A patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65072
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|Archlinux Kernel 3.16.3,|
|Intel x86_64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65059
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Thank you Honza, patch works for.
Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65072
uroc327 at cssbook dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uroc327 at cssbook dot de
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65072
Bug ID: 65072
Summary: Segfault when parsing dectlype in trailing return type
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65059
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka ---
Does the following help?
Index: ipa-comdats.c
===
--- ipa-comdats.c (revision 220606)
+++ ipa-comdats.c (working copy)
@@ -328,9 +328,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64548
--- Comment #4 from simon at pushface dot org ---
(In reply to Arnaud Charlet from comment #3)
> I would suggest you do not use 'private with' if you write your own runtime,
> since this isn't supported by the compiler when building the runtime.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64866
--- Comment #4 from simon at pushface dot org ---
(In reply to Arnaud Charlet from comment #2)
> Visibility in the Ada runtime do not follow standard Ada rules. In other
> words,
> the Ada runtime isn't implemented in Ada, but in a different diale
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64866
--- Comment #3 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Created attachment 34768
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34768&action=edit
Revised demonstrator
FreeRTOS packages moved under System, per Arno’s recommendation. Still fails.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53623
--- Comment #14 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 34767
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34767&action=edit
A backport patch for 4.8 branch
I am testing this patch now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65070
--- Comment #2 from Nadav Har'El ---
Hi,
What was the intention behind this "intentionally"? As I mentioned above, I
believe the tiny performance saving of not calling the syscall() function are
minimal, because if I understand correctly it's on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37336
--- Comment #29 from sourcery at rouson dot net ---
Good news.
Hopefully you saw the email about the tutorial proposals. Strangely ISC asks
for "1/2 page" CVs, which I interpret as half-page CVs (Karla was hoping they
meant 1-2 page, but I think
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64548
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64596
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64866
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64548
--- Comment #2 from simon at pushface dot org ---
See PR64866 for a similar problem/workround.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64866
--- Comment #1 from simon at pushface dot org ---
This bug appears to be triggered because the RTS contains freertos.ads with
private with Interfaces;
package FreeRTOS with Pure is
...
s-taprob.ads and s-tposen.ads start with
pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53623
--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #12)
> This regression is only fixed in 4.9 and should be backported to 4.8
> branch.
Unfortunately, r206418 introduced many regressions. Backport r206418
requires backporting a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37336
Bug 37336 depends on bug 59765, which changed state.
Bug 59765 Summary: [4.9/5 Regression] [OOP] ICE on valid with finalizable array
components
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59765
What|Removed |A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59765
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65070
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
It is intentionally written that way.
Why would you want to use linux specific code on an OS that isn't linux?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65071
Bug ID: 65071
Summary: ICE on valid, sizeof...() of template template
parameter pack in return type
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65024
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65064
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu ---
A patch is posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-02/msg00913.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60526
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53623
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65064
--- Comment #6 from Andreas Schwab ---
This works as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53623
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||brian at soulspark dot org
--- Comment #11 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64941
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65064
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #34759|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65064
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Component|rtl-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64980
--- Comment #16 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #14)
> Bernd, do you have a reliable way to test a patch, checking for aliasing
> violations?
No, all I can do is run the test suite on my armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65066
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65070
Bug ID: 65070
Summary: libgomp calls syscall instruction directly
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgom
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59845
ArshaGCC changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60898
--- Comment #21 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> patch fixing comment #7
This patch breaks bootstrap:
/bin/sh ./libtool --tag=FC --mode=compile /opt/gcc/p_build/./gcc/gfortran
-B/opt/gcc/p_build/./gcc/
-B/opt/gcc/gcc4.10p-220715p2/x86_64-apple
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64793
--- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo ---
Thanks!
If I'm not mistaken, it looks like there's an overall improvement of ~0.35%. I
think I'll go with it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65069
Bug ID: 65069
Summary: [SH] Calculate constants
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65068
Bug ID: 65068
Summary: Improve rewriting for address type induction variables
in IVOPT
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61309
--- Comment #5 from John Marino ---
hmmm, I added t-freebsd to the tmake list in libgcc/config.host for dragonfly.
I thought it would fix the problem but I'm still seeing hidden symbol errors
for __cpu_model
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65067
Bug ID: 65067
Summary: regression on accessing volatile bit field
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65066
Bug ID: 65066
Summary: [5 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault with -Wformat=2
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
64 matches
Mail list logo
