https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86794
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
||2018-09-09
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hp at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #14 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
I'll build the gcc-8 branch too before
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86794
--- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Author: hp
Date: Sun Sep 9 18:13:18 2018
New Revision: 264184
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264184=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/86794
* config/mmix/mmix.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85666
--- Comment #13 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Author: hp
Date: Sun Sep 9 18:12:14 2018
New Revision: 264183
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264183=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/85666
* config/mmix/mmix.c (mmix_assemble_integer):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85666
--- Comment #12 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Author: hp
Date: Sun Sep 9 18:05:48 2018
New Revision: 264182
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264182=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/85666
* config/mmix/mmix.c
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hp at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
(Note: no cross-binutils or anything needed, just gcc sources and a native
gcc-4.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86779
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86772
Bug 86772 depends on bug 86779, which changed state.
Bug 86779 Summary: Cris port needs updating for CVE-2017-5753
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86779
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86779
--- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Author: hp
Date: Wed Sep 5 23:14:42 2018
New Revision: 264134
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264134=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/86779
* config/cris/cris.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85666
--- Comment #11 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #10)
> Created attachment 44180 [details]
> patch to mmix.c
>
> Builds libgcc. More late this weekend, I hope.
I now see the assertion in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85666
--- Comment #10 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Created attachment 44180
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44180=edit
patch to mmix.c
Builds libgcc. More late this weekend, I hope.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85666
--- Comment #9 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #8)
> I don't think that comment is accurate.
Of course it isn't accurate *now*, but it explains why the code looks as it is.
I see the "phase-computing" code in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85666
--- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Thank you for your interest in the MMIX port.
(In reply to Wilco from comment #3)
> (In reply to Sergei Trofimovich from comment #1)
>
> > #define MMIX_CFUN_NEEDS_SAVED_EH_RETURN_ADDRESS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85726
--- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Created attachment 44107
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44107=edit
test-case
||2018-05-09
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hp at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hp at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
See the attached test-case, ready to drop into testsuite/gcc.dg.
The suboptimization results in separate div and mod sequences
across all architectures where division
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85666
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hp at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
In the gcc-8.1.0 tarball, the file NEWS contains, near the top:
"As of this time no releases of GCC 8 have yet been made."
further down:
"Disclaimer: GCC 8 has not been r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85186
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
I forgot to mention that this is likely a regression since gcc-4.7-era, but I
haven't proved that elsewhere than on the original target (not x86_64-linux /
sse2).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85186
--- Comment #3 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Created attachment 43836
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43836=edit
case 4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85186
--- Comment #2 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Created attachment 43835
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43835=edit
case 3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85186
--- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Created attachment 43834
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43834=edit
case 2
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hp at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 43833
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43833=edit
original
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80433
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71208
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53203
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71571
--- Comment #15 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to David B. Robins from comment #12)
> Note that it does still need -fno-inline.
I almost missed.
> I know why it doesn't crash with -O0: there is a text-section constant
> inserted after
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71571
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71571
--- Comment #14 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Author: hp
Date: Mon Jun 20 20:02:03 2016
New Revision: 237616
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237616=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/71571
* g++.dg/torture/pr71571.C: New test.
Added:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71571
--- Comment #13 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Author: hp
Date: Mon Jun 20 20:01:20 2016
New Revision: 237615
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237615=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/71571
* config/cris/cris.c (cris_asm_output_mi_thunk):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71571
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71571
--- Comment #11 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to David B. Robins from comment #10)
> My apologies, I saw the example you pointed at was from torture/ but
> missed/forgot that you had also wanted the new test there. I moved the file
> to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71571
--- Comment #9 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #8)
> all that's "stopping" optimizations.
Bad choice of words, I meant "all that's needed to stop optimizations from
making choices that would not expose
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71571
--- Comment #8 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to David B. Robins from comment #7)
> I have verified that the pr71571.C test case attached does expose the bug on
> trunk and that it passes with the above fix.
Great, thanks for the report
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71571
--- Comment #5 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to David B. Robins from comment #0)
> Runs of "make check-gcc-c++ RUNTESTFLAGS=--target_board=cris-sim"
> with/without the fix do not differ in passes/failures.
But that doesn't use -fpic or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71571
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Created attachment 38728
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38728=edit
fix to be committed, pending test
Here's the patch I'll eventually test and commit.
Unfortunately, it may be a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71571
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71571
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71208
--- Comment #5 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
JFTR: I have a feeling there's a (non-build-machinery) target-specific bug here
too, one that trigs a binutils bug. In any case, I have to build gcc for
myself to avoid a back-and-forth game of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71208
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Hmmm. I have problems building gcc-6.1.0 for mmix, by the methods that has
worked in the past and to the best of my knowledge are the official ones.
First, from a separate directory, I build and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71208
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54882
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
--- Comment #14 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Created attachment 37917
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37917=edit
Reduced ldm.i
For cris-elf, repeat with "./cc1 -fpreprocessed -march=v10 -Os
-fno-strict-aliasing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
--- Comment #13 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #12)
Sorry for the double comments, looks like I have issued with Chrome on top of
all.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
--- Comment #12 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Sudip from comment #10)
> So you are suggesting to bisect trunk and
> build gcc and then use that gcc to compile cris allmodconfig to see if that
> bisect was good or bad?
That's what
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
--- Comment #11 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Sudip from comment #10)
> So you are suggesting to bisect trunk and
> build gcc and then use that gcc to compile cris allmodconfig to see if that
> bisect was good or bad?
That's what
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
--- Comment #9 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Sorry, this is a reload bug and I can't give it my undivided attention within
the coming month.
Reload ties itself in a knot and calls back into the movdi expander asking it
to reload a in=(reg:DI 11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
--- Comment #8 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Supposedly viable workarounds: omit "-fno-omit-frame-pointer" or use "-O2".
(required and necessary options for observation; omitting any of the
"-f"-options compiles succcessfully: "-Os -march=v10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
--- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
This is a regression for the gcc-5 branch compared to the gcc-4_9-branch at
r233942 (not seeing the error for the same options as observed on the
gcc-5-branch).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Sudip from comment #3)
> A gentle ping..
> Any idea when this might get resolved.
>
> regards
> sudip
I thought I'd get to it this week, but didn't. Maybe the next week.
Thanks for your
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66004
--- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #6)
> HP, I think I need bit more analysis here. Do you know what inline decision
> actually causes the trouble?
Um, no. I have barely even tracked regression,
||2015-11-29
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hp at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Thanks for the report
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49429
--- Comment #20 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Alexandre Oliva from comment #19)
> Would you guys with access to the affected platforms please let me know in
> case revision 229696, just installed in the trunk, regresses this?
Yes, I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55035
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com
---
||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Mentioned as SPARC-breaking in PR55035#11.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 55035 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67055
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66004
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66486
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66486
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||mmix-knuth
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65913
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66004
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #3)
Something supposedly very good happened recently, because:
r223225 18369501023
I'll just have to find out what caused that 50
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66004
--- Comment #3 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Something supposedly very good happened recently, because:
r223225 18369501023
I'll just have to find out what caused that 50% cut! The test-case is
unchanged.
If the cause
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hp at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Target: cris-elf
Before and including r222872, this test passed.
After and including r222878, this test fails:
Running /tmp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66004
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hp at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-linux-gnu
Target: cris-elf
For r221618
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66004
--- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
At r222180: 40068917595
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64986
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2015-02-13 00:00:00 |2015-4-16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65665
--- Comment #8 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #5)
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
Hello.
I've just sent patch to mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65665
--- Comment #5 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
Hello.
I've just sent patch to mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg00108.html
May I ask you for testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54005
--- Comment #16 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #14)
Can we close this?
No. IIUC, we're still/again using __atomic_is_lock_free with alignment deduced
from the current object rather
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62259
--- Comment #8 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #4)
Yeah... up until now, CRIS was the only port that this was an issue for.
And JFTR, the resolution to this PR doesn't solve the similar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65665
--- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The cutnpasted backtrace was from revision 221841.
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, lto
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hp at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Host: x86_64-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65089
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64986
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54005
--- Comment #15 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #14)
Can we close this?
I can't say now, sorry, but will be back on this in a week.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64467
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65093
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65093
--- Comment #2 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hp
Date: Thu Feb 19 19:30:03 2015
New Revision: 220821
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220821root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR testsuite/65093
* testsuite/26_numerics
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65093
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |testsuite
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hp at gcc dot gnu.org
Host: x86_64-linux-gnu
Target: cris-elf
This test used to pass. Since a commit in the range
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61548
--- Comment #29 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #28)
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #27)
Does the following patch fix the problem?
Yes! Full regtest is underway
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64467
--- Comment #10 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #9)
To wit, at r220506 still see:
assertion !t.isctype('\n', t.lookup_classname(blank,
blank+sizeof(blank)/sizeof(blank[0])-1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61548
--- Comment #25 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 34695
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34695action=edit
Assembly file showing the duplicate label
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61548
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64467
--- Comment #9 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
To wit, at r220506 still see:
assertion !t.isctype('\n', t.lookup_classname(blank,
blank+sizeof(blank)/sizeof(blank[0])-1)) failed: file
/tmp/hpautotest-gcc1/gcc/libstdc++-v3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61548
--- Comment #28 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #27)
Does the following patch fix the problem?
Yes! Full regtest is underway but this particular FAIL is fixed. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64467
--- Comment #8 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hm, considering the recently-applied patch at r220392, why does my autotester
still see these fail at r220396?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64368
--- Comment #26 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #25)
Great, thanks for confirming it. As you say, let's leave this open for now
in case HP or Rainer still sees some of these failures
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64638
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Keywords: build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hp at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: torvald at gcc dot gnu.org
Host: x86_64-linux-gnu
Target: cris-elf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64638
--- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Forgot to say the obvious: committer in CC is singled out only because of the
context of the error message.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64638
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64552
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||cris-elf
-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: hp at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Created attachment 34414
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34414action=edit
Observe crash with ./cc1 -quiet -fpreprocessed unwind-dw2.i -O2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62250
--- Comment #11 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hp
Date: Thu Jan 8 21:59:26 2015
New Revision: 219365
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219365root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR testsuite/62250
* lib/target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62250
--- Comment #10 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hp
Date: Thu Jan 8 21:57:49 2015
New Revision: 219364
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219364root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR testsuite/62250
* lib/target
301 - 400 of 1057 matches
Mail list logo
