http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55466
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-11-26 16:36:10
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Hmm, I suppose this is because we no longer merge symbols that are not part
of
symtab, but
used only for debugging
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55474
Bug #: 55474
Summary: global-buffer-overflow in lto-wrapper.c
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55475
Bug #: 55475
Summary: heap-buffer-overflow in fortran/error.c
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55485
Bug #: 55485
Summary: stack-buffer-overflow in sem_ch8.adb
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55496
Bug #: 55496
Summary: False positive -Werror=uninitialized
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54795
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55474
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55371
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-11-28 19:29:25
UTC ---
Also
/export/gnu/import/git/gcc/libgfortran/intrinsics/unpack_generic.c: In function
‘unpack_internal’:
/export/gnu/import/git/gcc/libgfortran/intrinsics
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55519
Bug #: 55519
Summary: [asan] False positive -Wmaybe-uninitialized
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55466
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55466
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-11-29 19:07:23
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Created attachment 28829 [details]
Proposed fix
I suppose something across these lines should do the trick. I am not sure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55466
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-11-29 19:08:28
UTC ---
This patch:
diff --git a/gcc/lto-symtab.c b/gcc/lto-symtab.c
index 0b0cdac..295fd37 100644
--- a/gcc/lto-symtab.c
+++ b/gcc/lto-symtab.c
@@ -443,10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55533
Bug #: 55533
Summary: Can't bootstrap libsanitizer
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55533
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2
Bug #: 2
Summary: --enable-gold=default doesn't work with in-tree
binutils
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53860
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
Bug #: 6
Summary: gcc/exec-tool.in isn't parallel build safe in combined
tree
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55470
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Enable both ld and gold in |Support -fuse
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50829
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50829
--- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-01 22:22:28
UTC ---
Also see PR 44551.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55569
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-03 15:19:33
UTC ---
It is caused by revision 193241:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2012-11/msg00188.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55577
Bug #: 55577
Summary: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C failures
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55564
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mjambor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55564
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55583
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55592
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55597
Bug #: 55597
Summary: [4.8 Regression] internal compiler error: in
plus_constant, at explow.c:88
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55597
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55597
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55597
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-05 17:28:11
UTC ---
It is generated by
(gdb) bt
#0 set_unique_reg_note (insn=0x719a07e0, kind=REG_EQUAL,
datum=0x71ab4460) at /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55597
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-05 17:55:51
UTC ---
Does this patch
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
index a24e407..b496490 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
+++ b/gcc/config
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55606
Bug #: 55606
Summary: sorry, unimplemented: non-trivial designated
initializers not supported
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55597
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-06 00:21:55
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
I think it is better to fixup all sites where equivalent is used:
It works. Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55606
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-06 00:29:07
UTC ---
why does
struct foo x = {
i: 0
};
work?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55606
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-06 00:30:11
UTC ---
BTW, clang works fine:
[hjl@gnu-6 tmp]$ /opt/llvm.old/bin/clang -c i.c
i.c:6:5: warning: use of GNU old-style field designator extension
[-Wgnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55606
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-06 00:32:46
UTC ---
[hjl@gnu-6 tmp]$ cat i.cc
struct foo {
char x[128];
unsigned* i;
};
struct foo x = {
.i = 0
};
[hjl@gnu-6 tmp]$ /opt/llvm.old/bin/clang -c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55606
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-06 00:35:38
UTC ---
This works:
[hjl@gnu-6 tmp]$ cat i.cc
struct foo {
char x[128];
unsigned* i;
};
struct foo x = {
foo,
.i = 0
};
[hjl@gnu-6 tmp]$ g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55597
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55615
Bug #: 55615
Summary: [4.8 Regression] Failed to bootstrap with
--with-arch=core2 --with-cpu=atom
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55466
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-07 13:02:12
UTC ---
I am testing this patch:
---
diff --git a/gcc/lto-symtab.c b/gcc/lto-symtab.c
index 0b0cdac..295fd37 100644
--- a/gcc/lto-symtab.c
+++ b/gcc/lto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55127
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55466
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-07 18:49:10
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
This patch:
diff --git a/gcc/lto-symtab.c b/gcc/lto-symtab.c
index 0b0cdac..295fd37 100644
--- a/gcc/lto-symtab.c
+++ b
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52857
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55374
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-08 17:05:51
UTC ---
[hjl@gnu-6 gcc]$ cat /tmp/bad.cc
#include new
int
main ()
{
int *buf = new int(30);
buf[30]=1;
return 0;
}
[hjl@gnu-6 gcc]$ ./release/usr/gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55374
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55374
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55279
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-09 15:33:53
UTC ---
Any passes which allocate a table for maximum number of registers
can't deal with new pseudo registers. But there is nothing to
check and enforce it.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55279
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-10 01:05:09
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
(In reply to comment #7)
(In reply to comment #5)
Why can't cse_reg_info_table() be modified to intercept
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55640
Bug #: 55640
Summary: --with-build-config=bootstrap-lto doesn't work with go
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55640
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55466
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55644
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55533
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55672
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-18 15:11:38
UTC ---
This is what we changed in reload for stack realignment:
diff --git a/gcc/reload1.c b/gcc/reload1.c
index f28b01c..9b81062 100644
--- a/gcc/reload1.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55672
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-18 19:42:59
UTC ---
LRA doesn't handle HARD_FRAME_POINTER_IS_FRAME_POINTER at all.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55672
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |rtl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55739
Bug #: 55739
Summary: asan doesn't work on common symbols
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55739
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-19 13:42:12
UTC ---
If upper address or size of the common symbol is
available to ASAN at compile time as a special
symbol generated by assembler/linker, will it
help?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55739
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-19 16:58:34
UTC ---
The symbol size is always available at link-time or run-time.
We just never find a use for it in program itself. We can add
relocations for foo@BOUND
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #36 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-20 17:31:04
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #34)
(In reply to comment #33)
Using--with-build-config=bootstrap-asan should do that for you.
Seems like I'm doing something
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #38 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-20 17:49:44
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #37)
H.J.,
How are you working around PR55371 in your
--with-build-config=bootstrap-asan builds?
I configure GCC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55374
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-20 19:24:49
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
After applying your patch, I now get to the errors below any known
workaround ?
../../gcc/libiberty/regex.c:4497: error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55374
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-20 19:58:44
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
Thanks now bootstrap completes.
It seems to me that libgfortran is not built with -fsanitize=address despite
--with-build
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
Bug #: 55792
Summary: Bad memory access with profiledbootstrap and LTO
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-12-22 20:12:50
UTC ---
ASAN:SIGSEGV
=
==19402== ERROR: AddressSanitizer: SEGV on unknown address 0x0008 (pc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55838
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-01 18:06:37
UTC ---
(const_int 129 [0x81]) isn't considered as a valid
const int for QImode.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55838
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-01 18:53:32
UTC ---
The original regression was introduced by
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2004-05/msg00653.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55838
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-01 23:02:02
UTC ---
This patch avoids using (const_int 129 [0x81]) as step in QImode:
diff --git a/gcc/loop-iv.c b/gcc/loop-iv.c
index 50b7536..aafaae4 100644
--- a/gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55844
Bug #: 55844
Summary: -fsanitize=address -Os -fno-omit-frame-pointer
-mno-omit-leaf-frame-pointer -m64 doesn't work
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-03 19:03:25
UTC ---
I got
==23584== ERROR: AddressSanitizer: heap-buffer-overflow on address
0x7f03d1089238 at pc 0xb9284a bp 0x7fffbd507b60 sp 0x7fffbd507b58
READ of size 1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-04 23:57:55
UTC ---
Created attachment 29085
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29085
A patch to move lto_global_var_decls to lto/lto.c
With this patch, I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-05 16:47:08
UTC ---
The page is freed since there is nothing in it:
#0 set_page_table_entry (p=0x71ab8000, entry=0x0)
at /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/ggc-page.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-07 15:40:16
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
It's a global, why should it get collected?
Because it is empty when ggc_collect is called.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55470
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-07 22:13:33
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Created attachment 29085 [details]
A patch to move lto_global_var_decls to lto/lto.c
With this patch, I got
lto1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-07 23:30:15
UTC ---
For the testcase at
https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/documents/jc1.ltrans23.o.xz?attredirects=0d=1
[hjl@gnu-6 gcc]$ ./lto1 -quiet -dumpdir ./ -dumpbase jc1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #14 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-08 01:19:29
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
For the testcase at
https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/documents/jc1.ltrans23.o.xz?attredirects=0d=1
[hjl@gnu-6 gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #16 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-08 17:12:57
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #15)
So I'm still not sure what HJ means with it's collected. GC roots are
never collected. HJ, should your patch fix anything
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #17 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-09 00:22:18
UTC ---
gimple_location is duplicated by:
#1 0x00751f32 in gimple_copy (stmt=0x7fffe8d75a00)
at /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/gimple.c:2205
#2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #19 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-09 16:11:06
UTC ---
The BLOCK tree node is cleared by
(gdb) bt
#0 0x00336b4882ee in __memset_sse2 () from /lib64/libc.so.6
#1 0x00545fdf in clear_marks
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #20 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-09 17:12:45
UTC ---
we put the remapped block in line_table:
#0 0x0101d8cf in get_combined_adhoc_loc (set=0x77ffc000,
locus=968541695, data=0x7fffe8d6fe60
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #22 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-09 18:37:10
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #21)
Remapped blocks are supposed to be linked into the BLOCK tree of the
It didn't happen.
destination. What's the backtrace
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #23 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-09 22:51:36
UTC ---
The old BLOCK came from
(gdb) bt
#0 remap_block (block=0x7fffd690, id=0x7fffd840) at
/export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/tree-inline.c:624
#1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #31 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-10 17:03:13
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #30)
LTO profiled-bootstrap revals:
/space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/gcc/reginfo.c: In function 'reg_scan':
/space/rguenther/src/svn
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #32 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-10 19:36:08
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #30)
LTO profiled-bootstrap revals:
/space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/gcc/reginfo.c: In function 'reg_scan':
/space/rguenther/src
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55953
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48766
--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-14 15:48:41
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
Created attachment 29161 [details]
gcc48-pr48766.patch
Untested fix. Seems in the previous option processing the negative
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54767
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55739
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-14 22:11:16
UTC ---
Created attachment 29165
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29165
A prototype
If as, ld and ld.so provide size info via symbol@size, we
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55739
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-15 02:19:55
UTC ---
There are already
R_386_SIZE32 38 word32 Z + A
R_X86_64_SIZE32 32 word32 Z + A
R_X86_64_SIZE64 33
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56006
Bug #: 56006
Summary: [4.8 Regression] Many guality testsuite failures
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55739
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-17 16:40:48
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
There are already
R_386_SIZE32 38 word32 Z + A
R_X86_64_SIZE32 32 word32 Z
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55739
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-17 16:48:53
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
(In reply to comment #8)
Their support has been checked into glibc and binutils.
Can address sanitizer use them?
What
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55739
--- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-17 16:57:29
UTC ---
Size relocation means that all instances of
# __beg:
.quadcommon_data
# __size:
.quadcommon_data@size
# __size_with_redzone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56030
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||54040
101 - 200 of 7228 matches
Mail list logo
