[Bug fortran/25620] Missed optimization with power

2006-09-04 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-09-04 14:17 --- Subject: Re: Missed optimization with power On Mon, 4 Sep 2006, jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk wrote: --- Comment #9 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2006-09-04 14:10 --- (In reply to comment #7) Looking

[Bug testsuite/27707] g++.dg/tree-ssa/ivopts-1.C fails

2006-09-09 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-09-09 20:37 --- Subject: Re: g++.dg/tree-ssa/ivopts-1.C fails On Sat, 9 Sep 2006, dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca wrote: --- Comment #7 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-09-09 18:45 --- Subject: Re

[Bug middle-end/29272] [4.2 Regression] memcpy optimization causes wrong-code

2006-09-30 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-09-30 11:46 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] memcpy optimization causes wrong-code On Sat, 29 Sep 2006, pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu wrote: --- Comment #7 from pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2006-09-29 22:13

[Bug middle-end/29272] [4.2 Regression] memcpy optimization causes wrong-code

2006-09-30 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-09-30 11:47 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] memcpy optimization causes wrong-code On Sat, 29 Sep 2006, mrs at apple dot com wrote: --- Comment #8 from mrs at apple dot com 2006-09-29 23:15 --- If it is a VAR_DECL

[Bug tree-optimization/29738] Missed constant propagation into loops

2006-11-06 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-11-06 12:04 --- Subject: Re: Missed constant propagation into loops On Mon, 6 Nov 2006, rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: --- Comment #2 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-06 11:51 --- Have you tried

[Bug tree-optimization/29738] Missed constant propagation into loops

2006-11-06 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-11-06 12:37 --- Subject: Re: Missed constant propagation into loops On Mon, 6 Nov 2006, rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz wrote: --- Comment #7 from rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz

[Bug tree-optimization/26388] Variable sized storage allocation should be promoted to stack allocation

2006-02-20 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-02-20 22:52 --- Subject: Re: Variable sized storage allocation should be promoted to stack allocation --- Comment #4 from falk at debian dot org 2006-02-20 22:35 --- This would be incredibly difficult to detect reliably

[Bug tree-optimization/25737] [4.1/4.2 Regression] ACATS tests c974001 and c974013 do not terminate with struct aliasing enabled

2006-03-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-03-23 13:43 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] ACATS tests c974001 and c974013 do not terminate with struct aliasing enabled On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: This shows a bunch of bugs actually: PTA

[Bug tree-optimization/27004] [4.1/4.2 Regression] Insane amount of memory needed at -O1 and above because of salias

2006-04-03 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #2 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-04-03 14:39 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] Insane amount of memory needed at -O1 and above because of salias On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, dberlin at dberlin dot org wrote: On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 13:43 +, bonzini at gnu dot org

[Bug tree-optimization/26763] [4.1 Regression] wrong final value of induction variable calculated

2006-04-03 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-04-03 16:59 --- Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong final value of induction variable calculated On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: (In reply to comment #6) I believe c-common.c:pointer_int_sum is wrong

[Bug tree-optimization/27039] [4.1/4.2 Regression] Unable to determine # of iterations for a simple loop

2006-04-05 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-04-05 10:13 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] Unable to determine # of iterations for a simple loop On Wed, 5 Apr 2006, rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz wrote: Subject: Re: Unable to determine # of iterations

[Bug tree-optimization/27039] [4.1/4.2 Regression] Unable to determine # of iterations for a simple loop

2006-04-05 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-04-05 10:28 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] Unable to determine # of iterations for a simple loop On Wed, 5 Apr 2006, rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz wrote: Umm. Correct :/ I guess the only way to fix

[Bug tree-optimization/27039] [4.1/4.2 Regression] Unable to determine # of iterations for a simple loop

2006-04-05 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-04-05 10:47 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] Unable to determine # of iterations for a simple loop would be much better here. The question is of course, if the programmer is allowed to write x + (size_t)-1

[Bug tree-optimization/23855] loop header should also be pulled out of the inner loop too

2006-04-10 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #17 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-04-10 08:10 --- Subject: Re: loop header should also be pulled out of the inner loop too On Mon, 9 Apr 2006, rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: (In reply to comment #14) (In reply to comment #11) I updated the patch

[Bug middle-end/26869] [4.1/4.2 Regression] Segfault in find_lattice_value() for complex operands.

2006-04-18 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-04-18 14:07 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] Segfault in find_lattice_value() for complex operands. On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, bonzini at gnu dot org wrote: richi: if bD.1520 does not have a default def because it is unused, your fix

[Bug middle-end/26643] [4.1 Regression] Linux matroxfb_probe miscompiled

2006-04-18 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #16 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-04-18 14:14 --- Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] Linux matroxfb_probe miscompiled --- Comment #15 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-04-18 14:12 --- running a 4.1 bootstrap. It's been in our SUSE tree for some while and so

[Bug middle-end/26869] [4.1/4.2 Regression] Segfault in find_lattice_value() for complex operands.

2006-04-18 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-04-18 15:03 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] Segfault in find_lattice_value() for complex operands. On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch wrote: I'll bootstrap test the obvious patch then. It's

[Bug tree-optimization/15911] VRP/DOM does not like TRUTH_AND_EXPR

2006-04-20 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #25 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-04-20 16:33 --- Subject: Re: VRP/DOM does not like TRUTH_AND_EXPR On Thu, 20 Apr 2006, law at redhat dot com wrote: Richard -- is there any chance you could pick up the ball on this PR? I really need to focus on some non-GCC

[Bug tree-optimization/26726] -fivopts producing out of bounds array refs

2006-04-27 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-04-27 16:09 --- Subject: Re: -fivopts producing out of bounds array refs On Thu, 27 Apr 2006, rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz wrote: Stripping useless type conversions during biv discovery and folding after

[Bug tree-optimization/27639] [4.1/4.2 regression] VRP miscompilation of simple loop

2006-05-17 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-05-17 13:22 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 regression] VRP miscompilation of simple loop On Wed, 17 May 2006, aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: --- Comment #10 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-17 13:18

[Bug tree-optimization/27639] [4.1/4.2 regression] VRP miscompilation of simple loop

2006-05-17 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #21 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-05-17 15:06 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 regression] VRP miscompilation of simple loop On Wed, 17 May 2006, rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: --- Comment #14 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-17 13:40

[Bug tree-optimization/27639] [4.1/4.2 regression] VRP miscompilation of simple loop

2006-05-17 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #22 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-05-17 15:06 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 regression] VRP miscompilation of simple loop On Wed, 17 May 2006, rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: --- Comment #8 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-17 13:11

[Bug tree-optimization/27882] [4.2 regression] segfault in ipa-inline.c, if (e-callee-local.disregard_inline_limits

2006-06-03 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-06-03 20:52 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 regression] segfault in ipa-inline.c, if (e-callee-local.disregard_inline_limits On Sat, 3 Jun 2006, tbm at cyrius dot com wrote: I was using revision 114238. Do you know if there has been a change

[Bug libstdc++/29286] [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should

2007-05-22 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #107 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-05-22 16:20 --- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should On Tue, 22 May 2007, mark at codesourcery dot com wrote: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: - we

[Bug libstdc++/29286] [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should

2007-05-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #124 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-05-23 09:35 --- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should On Tue, 22 May 2007, dberlin at dberlin dot org wrote: --- Comment #116 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org

[Bug libstdc++/29286] [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should

2007-05-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #126 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-05-23 14:43 --- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should On Wed, 23 May 2007, gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu wrote: --- Comment #125 from gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu

[Bug libstdc++/29286] [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should

2007-05-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #128 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-05-23 15:37 --- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should On Wed, 23 May 2007, ian at airs dot com wrote: --- Comment #127 from ian at airs dot com 2007-05-23 15:23

[Bug libstdc++/29286] [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should

2007-05-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #131 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-05-23 16:54 --- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should On Wed, 23 May 2007, ian at airs dot com wrote: --- Comment #130 from ian at airs dot com 2007-05-23 16:43

[Bug libstdc++/29286] [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should

2007-05-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #142 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-05-23 21:14 --- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should On Wed, 23 May 2007, mark at codesourcery dot com wrote: --- Comment #140 from mark at codesourcery dot com

[Bug libstdc++/29286] [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should

2007-05-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #144 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-05-23 21:48 --- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should On Wed, 23 May 2007, mark at codesourcery dot com wrote: rguenther at suse dot de wrote: void f(int *p

[Bug libstdc++/29286] [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should

2007-05-24 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #153 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-05-24 09:03 --- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should On Thu, 23 May 2007, gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu wrote: --- Comment #151 from gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu

[Bug libstdc++/29286] [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should

2007-05-24 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #154 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-05-24 10:07 --- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should On Wed, 23 May 2007, mark at codesourcery dot com wrote: Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement

[Bug libstdc++/29286] [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should

2007-05-24 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #155 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-05-24 10:11 --- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should On Thu, 24 May 2007, rguenther at suse dot de wrote: So I did some benchmarking with my two proposed patches

[Bug libstdc++/29286] [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should

2007-05-24 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #157 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-05-24 10:33 --- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] placement new does not change the dynamic type as it should On Thu, 24 May 2007, gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu wrote: --- Comment #156 from gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu

[Bug libmudflap/53952] [4.8 Regression] FAIL: libmudflap.c++/pass55-frag.cxx ( -O[123]) execution test

2012-11-29 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53952 --- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-11-29 09:26:31 UTC --- On Thu, 29 Nov 2012, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53952 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc

[Bug middle-end/55545] [4.8 Regression] Incredibly large compile-time performance regression on IA64 compiling 253.perlbmk

2012-12-04 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55545 --- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-12-04 09:00:29 UTC --- On Mon, 3 Dec 2012, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55545 Eric Botcazou ebotcazou

[Bug tree-optimization/55559] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Marshalling double through union with inlines, incorrect behavior with -O2

2012-12-04 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9 --- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-12-04 09:02:00 UTC --- On Mon, 3 Dec 2012, mpreda at gmail dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9 --- Comment #7 from Mihai

[Bug tree-optimization/53342] [4.8 Regression] rnflow.f90 is ~5% slower after revision 187340

2012-12-10 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 --- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-12-10 12:26:21 UTC --- On Mon, 10 Dec 2012, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc

[Bug target/55752] __builtin_ia32_ldmxcsr / __builtin_ia32_stmxcsr are not scheduling barriers

2012-12-20 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55752 --- Comment #2 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-12-20 13:07:20 UTC --- On Thu, 20 Dec 2012, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55752 --- Comment #1 from Uros

[Bug lto/55525] ICE: tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in array_ref_low_bound, at expr.c:6768

2013-01-07 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55525 --- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2013-01-07 14:55:31 UTC --- On Mon, 7 Jan 2013, ro at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55525 Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot

[Bug middle-end/50199] [4.7/4.8 Regression] wrong code with -flto -fno-merge-constants

2013-01-14 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50199 --- Comment #14 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2013-01-14 14:45:48 UTC --- On 1/11/13 5:02 PM, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50199 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot

[Bug go/55969] libgo fails to build on darwin

2013-01-14 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55969 --- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2013-01-14 18:23:21 UTC --- ian at airs dot com gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55969 --- Comment #3 from Ian Lance

[Bug tree-optimization/56094] Invalid line number info generated with tree-level ivopts

2013-01-24 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56094 --- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2013-01-24 18:37:30 UTC --- jakub at gcc dot gnu.org gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56094 --- Comment #6 from Jakub

[Bug tree-optimization/56094] Invalid line number info generated with tree-level ivopts

2013-01-24 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56094 --- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2013-01-24 19:30:54 UTC --- manu at gcc dot gnu.org gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56094 --- Comment #9 from Manuel López

[Bug rtl-optimization/55270] [4.8 Regression] ICE in get_loop_body, at cfgloop.c:823

2013-01-28 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55270 --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2013-01-28 13:39:28 UTC --- On Mon, 28 Jan 2013, mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55270 --- Comment #5 from Marek

[Bug rtl-optimization/55270] [4.8 Regression] ICE in get_loop_body, at cfgloop.c:823

2013-01-29 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55270 --- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2013-01-29 09:01:23 UTC --- On Mon, 28 Jan 2013, mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55270 --- Comment #10 from

[Bug middle-end/53073] [4.8 Regression] 464.h264ref in SPEC CPU 2006 miscompiled

2013-01-29 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53073 --- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2013-01-29 09:10:25 UTC --- On Mon, 28 Jan 2013, sje at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53073 Steve Ellcey sje at gcc dot

[Bug middle-end/56113] out of memory when compiling a function with many goto labels (50k )

2013-01-29 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113 --- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2013-01-29 09:52:12 UTC --- On Mon, 28 Jan 2013, steven at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113 --- Comment #9 from Steven

[Bug bootstrap/56128] [4.8 Regression] No way to disable build of libsanitizer

2013-01-30 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56128 --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2013-01-30 10:34:29 UTC --- On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56128 --- Comment #5 from Jakub

[Bug middle-end/56113] out of memory when compiling a function with many goto labels (50k )

2013-02-01 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113 --- Comment #25 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2013-02-01 08:48:32 UTC --- On Thu, 31 Jan 2013, steven at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56113 --- Comment #24 from

[Bug tree-optimization/58686] vect_get_loop_niters() fails for some loops

2013-10-13 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58686 --- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- congh at google dot com gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58686 --- Comment #2 from Cong Hou congh at google dot com --- I think

[Bug tree-optimization/19831] Missing DSE/malloc/free optimization

2013-10-29 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19831 --- Comment #18 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- On Fri, 25 Oct 2013, glisse at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19831 --- Comment #17 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug target/56865] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect Alignment of access forced using peeling 1

2013-10-29 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 --- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 29 Oct 2013, wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 --- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/58845] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Operator || and broken for vectors

2013-11-04 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58845 --- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- On Mon, 4 Nov 2013, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58845 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What

[Bug c++/58845] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Operator || and broken for vectors

2013-11-04 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58845 --- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- On Mon, 4 Nov 2013, glisse at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58845 --- Comment #8 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug preprocessor/58580] [4.8 Regression] preprocessor goes OOM with warning for zero literals

2013-11-06 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58580 --- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- On Wed, 6 Nov 2013, dodji at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58580 Dodji Seketeli dodji at gcc dot gnu.org changed

[Bug tree-optimization/59006] [4.9 Regression] internal compiler error: in vect_transform_stmt, at tree-vect-stmts.c:5963

2013-11-20 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59006 --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- On Wed, 20 Nov 2013, congh at google dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59006 Cong Hou congh at google dot com changed: What

[Bug middle-end/58941] [4.7 Regression] value modification on zero-length array optimized away

2013-11-27 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58941 --- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- On Wed, 27 Nov 2013, thomas.moschcau at web dot de wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58941 --- Comment #6 from Thomas Moschcau thomas.moschcau at web

[Bug tree-optimization/58253] IPA-SRA creates calls with different arguments that the callee accepts

2013-11-29 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58253 --- Comment #2 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- On Thu, 28 Nov 2013, jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58253 --- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/58253] IPA-SRA creates calls with different arguments that the callee accepts

2013-11-29 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58253 --- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- On Fri, 29 Nov 2013, jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58253 --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/59058] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu (affecting gcc 4.6 to trunk)

2013-12-03 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59058 --- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- jakub at gcc dot gnu.org gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59058 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What

[Bug middle-end/59409] [4.9 Regression] 253.perlbmk in SPEC CPU 2K is miscompiled

2013-12-07 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59409 --- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- hjl.tools at gmail dot com gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59409 --- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com

[Bug middle-end/59409] [4.9 Regression] 253.perlbmk in SPEC CPU 2K is miscompiled

2013-12-07 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59409 --- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- hjl.tools at gmail dot com gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59409 --- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com

[Bug middle-end/59409] [4.9 Regression] 253.perlbmk in SPEC CPU 2K is miscompiled

2013-12-09 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59409 --- Comment #20 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- On Mon, 9 Dec 2013, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59409 H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed: What

[Bug tree-optimization/59417] [4.9 Regression] ICE in determine_value_range, at tree-ssa-loop-niter.c:176

2013-12-10 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59417 --- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 10 Dec 2013, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59417 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug middle-end/59470] [4.8 Regression] libstdc++ miscompilation after r205709

2013-12-11 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59470 --- Comment #14 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- jakub at gcc dot gnu.org gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59470 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/59487] [4.9 Regression] When compiled with -fwhole-program rnflow.f90 runs up to 40% slower after r202826

2013-12-13 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59487 --- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- dominiq at lps dot ens.fr gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59487 --- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot

[Bug tree-optimization/52272] [4.7/4.8/4.9 regression] Performance regression of 410.bwaves on x86.

2013-12-17 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52272 --- Comment #22 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- On 12/17/13 9:29 AM, amker.cheng at gmail dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52272 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed

[Bug middle-end/35545] virtual call specialization not happening with FDO

2013-12-17 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35545 --- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35545 Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed

[Bug tree-optimization/50955] [4.7 Regression] IVopts incorrectly rewrite the address of a global memory access into a local form.

2013-12-18 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50955 --- Comment #18 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de --- amker.cheng at gmail dot com gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50955 bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed

[Bug tree-optimization/54200] copyrename generates wrong debuginfo

2012-08-09 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54200 --- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-08-09 08:05:51 UTC --- On Wed, 8 Aug 2012, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54200 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug target/20020] x86_64 - 128 bit structs not targeted to TImode

2012-08-15 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20020 --- Comment #40 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-08-15 09:29:02 UTC --- On Wed, 15 Aug 2012, chip at pobox dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20020 --- Comment #39 from Chip Salzenberg chip

[Bug middle-end/54146] Very slow compile with attribute((flatten))

2012-08-16 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146 --- Comment #51 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-08-16 14:06:06 UTC --- On Thu, 16 Aug 2012, stevenb.gcc at gmail dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146 --- Comment #50 from stevenb.gcc

[Bug middle-end/54146] Very slow compile with attribute((flatten))

2012-08-21 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146 --- Comment #56 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-08-21 07:55:14 UTC --- On Mon, 20 Aug 2012, steven at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146 Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot

[Bug tree-optimization/46590] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] long compile time with -O2 and many loops

2012-08-21 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46590 --- Comment #24 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-08-21 09:59:41 UTC --- On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, steven at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46590 Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot

[Bug rtl-optimization/54343] RTL postreload leaks DF memory

2012-08-22 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54343 --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-08-22 13:01:53 UTC --- On Wed, 22 Aug 2012, dnovillo at google dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54343 --- Comment #5 from dnovillo at google

[Bug tree-optimization/46590] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] long compile time with -O2 and many loops

2012-08-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46590 --- Comment #30 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-08-23 07:13:13 UTC --- On Wed, 22 Aug 2012, stevenb.gcc at gmail dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46590 --- Comment #29 from stevenb.gcc

[Bug middle-end/53695] [4.8 Regression] ICE: in dfs_enumerate_from, at cfganal.c:1221 with -O2 -ftracer and labels/gotos

2012-08-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53695 --- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-08-23 07:29:04 UTC --- On Wed, 22 Aug 2012, steven at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53695 Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot

[Bug middle-end/53695] [4.8 Regression] ICE: in dfs_enumerate_from, at cfganal.c:1221 with -O2 -ftracer and labels/gotos

2012-08-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53695 --- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-08-23 07:36:46 UTC --- On Wed, 22 Aug 2012, steven at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53695 --- Comment #9 from Steven Bosscher

[Bug middle-end/53695] [4.8 Regression] ICE: in dfs_enumerate_from, at cfganal.c:1221 with -O2 -ftracer and labels/gotos

2012-08-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53695 --- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-08-23 08:07:18 UTC --- On Thu, 23 Aug 2012, rguenther at suse dot de wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53695 --- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse

[Bug middle-end/53695] [4.8 Regression] ICE: in dfs_enumerate_from, at cfganal.c:1221 with -O2 -ftracer and labels/gotos

2012-08-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53695 --- Comment #14 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-08-23 08:10:15 UTC --- On Thu, 23 Aug 2012, stevenb.gcc at gmail dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53695 --- Comment #12 from stevenb.gcc

[Bug middle-end/53695] [4.8 Regression] ICE: in dfs_enumerate_from, at cfganal.c:1221 with -O2 -ftracer and labels/gotos

2012-08-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53695 --- Comment #17 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-08-23 09:19:04 UTC --- On Thu, 23 Aug 2012, steven at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53695 --- Comment #16 from Steven Bosscher

[Bug middle-end/53695] [4.8 Regression] ICE: in dfs_enumerate_from, at cfganal.c:1221 with -O2 -ftracer and labels/gotos

2012-08-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53695 --- Comment #18 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-08-23 09:22:54 UTC --- On Thu, 23 Aug 2012, rguenther at suse dot de wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53695 --- Comment #17 from rguenther at suse

[Bug middle-end/53695] [4.8 Regression] ICE: in dfs_enumerate_from, at cfganal.c:1221 with -O2 -ftracer and labels/gotos

2012-08-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53695 --- Comment #20 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-08-23 11:00:29 UTC --- On Thu, 23 Aug 2012, rguenther at suse dot de wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53695 --- Comment #17 from rguenther at suse

[Bug middle-end/53695] [4.8 Regression] ICE: in dfs_enumerate_from, at cfganal.c:1221 with -O2 -ftracer and labels/gotos

2012-08-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53695 --- Comment #21 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-08-23 11:22:19 UTC --- On Thu, 23 Aug 2012, rguenther at suse dot de wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53695 Btw, another idea would be to make

[Bug testsuite/54184] [4.8 Regression] gcc.dg/pr52558-1.c failure

2012-09-06 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54184 --- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-09-06 08:53:36 UTC --- On Wed, 5 Sep 2012, aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54184 Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug debug/54534] [4.7 Regression] Missing location for unused variable

2012-09-11 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54534 --- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-09-11 10:38:32 UTC --- On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54534 --- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka

[Bug middle-end/52173] internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed possibly caused by itm

2012-09-20 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52173 --- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-09-20 07:43:56 UTC --- On Wed, 19 Sep 2012, aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52173 Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc

[Bug tree-optimization/54345] jump threading leaks e-aux heap memory

2012-09-20 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54345 --- Comment #2 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-09-20 11:12:36 UTC --- On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, polacek at redhat dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54345 Marek Polacek polacek

[Bug tree-optimization/54634] [4.8 Regression] miscompilation with -O3 -ftree-loop-distribution

2012-09-20 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54634 --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-09-20 13:43:33 UTC --- On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54634 --- Comment #5

[Bug tree-optimization/54345] jump threading leaks e-aux heap memory

2012-09-24 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54345 --- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-09-24 08:52:06 UTC --- On Fri, 21 Sep 2012, polacek at redhat dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54345 --- Comment #3 from Marek

[Bug bootstrap/54876] [4.8 Regression] LTO bootstrap broken, streaming garbage-collected BLOCK

2012-10-09 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54876 --- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-10-09 18:35:53 UTC --- markus at trippelsdorf dot de gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54876 Markus Trippelsdorf

[Bug tree-optimization/54935] No way to do if converison

2012-10-15 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54935 --- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-10-15 15:43:25 UTC --- On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, joseph at codesourcery dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54935 --- Comment #3 from

[Bug tree-optimization/54965] [4.6 Regression] sorry, unimplemented: inlining failed in call to 'foo': function not considered for inlining

2012-10-18 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54965 --- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-10-18 10:58:56 UTC --- On Thu, 18 Oct 2012, siarhei.siamashka at gmail dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54965 --- Comment #3

[Bug lto/54966] Does LTO requires a larger inline-unit-growth?

2012-10-23 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54966 --- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-10-23 14:02:05 UTC --- On Tue, 23 Oct 2012, hubicka at ucw dot cz wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54966 --- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka

[Bug bootstrap/54659] [4.8 Regression] Bootstrap with --disable-nls broken under Windows

2012-10-26 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54659 --- Comment #2 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-10-26 12:05:14 UTC --- On Fri, 26 Oct 2012, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54659 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc

[Bug bootstrap/54659] [4.8 Regression] Bootstrap with --disable-nls broken under Windows

2012-10-26 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54659 --- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-10-26 12:36:30 UTC --- On Fri, 26 Oct 2012, dnovillo at google dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54659 --- Comment #3 from

[Bug middle-end/53708] [4.8 Regression] Many failures of the objc tests with -O3 -fnext-runtime and -m32

2012-10-30 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53708 --- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-10-30 17:10:52 UTC --- On Tue, 30 Oct 2012, bergner at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53708 Peter Bergner bergner

[Bug tree-optimization/55124] [4.8 Regression] ICE in find_or_generate_expression, at tree-ssa-pre.c:2803

2012-10-30 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55124 --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-10-30 17:12:46 UTC --- On Tue, 30 Oct 2012, vries at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55124 vries at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug middle-end/56231] warning traces have bogus line information when using LTO

2013-02-08 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56231 --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2013-02-08 09:07:09 UTC --- On Thu, 7 Feb 2013, manu at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56231 Manuel L?pez-Ib??ez manu

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >