public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
@ 2011-05-27 13:50 ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-05-27 13:56 ` [Bug middle-end/49191] " richard.guenther at gmail dot com
` (15 more replies)
0 siblings, 16 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-05-27 13:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
Summary: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: ro@gcc.gnu.org
CC: ebotcazou@gcc.gnu.org, richard.guenther@gmail.com
Host: sparc-sun-solaris2.*
Target: sparc-sun-solaris2.*
Build: sparc-sun-solaris2.*
The new gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c test FAILs on Solaris/SPARC:
FAIL: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c scan-tree-dump-not optimized "memcpy"
FAIL: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized "MEM" 1
The dump looks like this:
;; Function get_int (get_int)
get_int (const void * p)
{
int w;
int D.1980;
<bb 2>:
__builtin_memcpy (&w, p_1(D), 4);
D.1980_2 = w;
return D.1980_2;
}
Rainer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/49191] gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
2011-05-27 13:50 [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-05-27 13:56 ` richard.guenther at gmail dot com
2011-05-27 14:10 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (14 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: richard.guenther at gmail dot com @ 2011-05-27 13:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
--- Comment #1 from richard.guenther at gmail dot com <richard.guenther at gmail dot com> 2011-05-27 13:53:57 UTC ---
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 3:50 PM, ro at gcc dot gnu.org
<gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
>
> Summary: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
> Product: gcc
> Version: 4.7.0
> Status: UNCONFIRMED
> Severity: normal
> Priority: P3
> Component: middle-end
> AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
> ReportedBy: ro@gcc.gnu.org
> CC: ebotcazou@gcc.gnu.org, richard.guenther@gmail.com
> Host: sparc-sun-solaris2.*
> Target: sparc-sun-solaris2.*
> Build: sparc-sun-solaris2.*
>
>
> The new gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c test FAILs on Solaris/SPARC:
>
> FAIL: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c scan-tree-dump-not optimized "memcpy"
> FAIL: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized "MEM" 1
>
> The dump looks like this:
>
> ;; Function get_int (get_int)
>
> get_int (const void * p)
> {
> int w;
> int D.1980;
>
> <bb 2>:
> __builtin_memcpy (&w, p_1(D), 4);
> D.1980_2 = w;
> return D.1980_2;
Is sparc a strict-alignment target? Then that's expected.
Hmm. Not sure we have a dg-effective-target strict-align ...
so you probably have to add some xfails.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/49191] gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
2011-05-27 13:50 [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-05-27 13:56 ` [Bug middle-end/49191] " richard.guenther at gmail dot com
@ 2011-05-27 14:10 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2011-05-28 14:59 ` danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2011-05-27 14:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> 2011-05-27 13:59:11 UTC ---
> Is sparc a strict-alignment target? Then that's expected.
It is.
> Hmm. Not sure we have a dg-effective-target strict-align ...
> so you probably have to add some xfails.
We probably should: we currently have 28 strict-alignment targets.
Rainer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/49191] gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
2011-05-27 13:50 [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-05-27 13:56 ` [Bug middle-end/49191] " richard.guenther at gmail dot com
2011-05-27 14:10 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2011-05-28 14:59 ` danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-07 13:12 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: danglin at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-05-28 14:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
John David Anglin <danglin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from John David Anglin <danglin at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-05-28 14:55:40 UTC ---
Also fails on hppa*-*-hpux*.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/49191] gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
2011-05-27 13:50 [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2011-05-28 14:59 ` danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-06-07 13:12 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-07 13:15 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: ramana at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-06-07 13:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-06-07 13:12:06 UTC ---
And arm-linux-gnueabi.
Ramana
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/49191] gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
2011-05-27 13:50 [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2011-06-07 13:12 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-06-07 13:15 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-08 17:38 ` sje at cup dot hp.com
` (10 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: ramana at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-06-07 13:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
--- Comment #5 from Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-06-07 13:13:59 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> And arm-linux-gnueabi.
Though on ARM I would expect this to pass once we can support unaligned
memcpy's for certain versions of the architecture.
Ramana
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/49191] gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
2011-05-27 13:50 [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2011-06-07 13:15 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-06-08 17:38 ` sje at cup dot hp.com
2011-06-08 17:51 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: sje at cup dot hp.com @ 2011-06-08 17:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
Steve Ellcey <sje at cup dot hp.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |sje at cup dot hp.com
--- Comment #6 from Steve Ellcey <sje at cup dot hp.com> 2011-06-08 17:35:43 UTC ---
What would be the best way to implement 'dg-effective-target strict-align'?
A target list would be the easiest but a program that can pass/fail based
on STRICT_ALIGNMENT would probably be more robust. I am not sure what such a
program would look like though. Like memcpy-3.c? I don't think we want the
dg-effective-target routines using -fdump flags like memcpy-3.c does.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/49191] gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
2011-05-27 13:50 [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2011-06-08 17:38 ` sje at cup dot hp.com
@ 2011-06-08 17:51 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-08 17:52 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-06-08 17:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-06-08 17:48:11 UTC ---
I meant (*p)++; instead of *p++; sorry.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/49191] gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
2011-05-27 13:50 [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2011-06-08 17:51 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-06-08 17:52 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-08 18:00 ` dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca
` (7 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-06-08 17:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-06-08 17:47:32 UTC ---
Perhaps something like:
union { int i; char c[8]; } u;
int
main ()
{
int *p;
asm volatile ("" : "=r" (p) : "0" (&u.c[1]));
*p++;
return 0;
}
compile+run and check for zero exit code? Perhaps __ia64__ should be
explicitly listed as strict alignment in addition to that, because I believe it
will
succeed there, just with annoying messages in dmesg.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/49191] gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
2011-05-27 13:50 [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2011-06-08 17:52 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-06-08 18:00 ` dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca
2011-06-08 18:13 ` sje at cup dot hp.com
` (6 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca @ 2011-06-08 18:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
--- Comment #9 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-06-08 17:59:18 UTC ---
> Perhaps something like:
> union { int i; char c[8]; } u;
> int
> main ()
> {
> int *p;
> asm volatile ("" : "=r" (p) : "0" (&u.c[1]));
> *p++;
> return 0;
> }
> compile+run and check for zero exit code? Perhaps __ia64__ should be
> explicitly listed as strict alignment in addition to that, because I believe it
> will
> succeed there, just with annoying messages in dmesg.
Same on hppa-linux. Kernel will fixup unaligned access.
Dave
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/49191] gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
2011-05-27 13:50 [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2011-06-08 18:00 ` dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca
@ 2011-06-08 18:13 ` sje at cup dot hp.com
2011-06-08 19:14 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: sje at cup dot hp.com @ 2011-06-08 18:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
--- Comment #10 from Steve Ellcey <sje at cup dot hp.com> 2011-06-08 18:12:40 UTC ---
How about compiling this with -Wcast-align and looking for a warning message:
char *y;
typedef char __attribute__ ((__aligned__(__BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT__))) c;
c *z;
void foo(void)
{
z = (c *) y;
}
I get a warning on IA64 but none on X86. The warning is coming from
c-typeck.c.
x.c: In function 'foo':
x.c:6:13: warning: cast increases required alignment of target type
[-Wcast-align]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/49191] gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
2011-05-27 13:50 [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2011-06-08 18:13 ` sje at cup dot hp.com
@ 2011-06-08 19:14 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-08 20:07 ` sje at cup dot hp.com
` (4 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-06-08 19:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2011.06.08 19:12:29
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #11 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-06-08 19:12:29 UTC ---
> I get a warning on IA64 but none on X86. The warning is coming from
> c-typeck.c.
>
> x.c: In function 'foo':
> x.c:6:13: warning: cast increases required alignment of target type
> [-Wcast-align]
The warning is predicated on STRICT_ALIGNMENT being nonzero so this seems to be
a good idea. You could add -Werror to get an error and test the exit code.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/49191] gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
2011-05-27 13:50 [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2011-06-08 19:14 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-06-08 20:07 ` sje at cup dot hp.com
2011-06-26 8:00 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: sje at cup dot hp.com @ 2011-06-08 20:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
--- Comment #12 from Steve Ellcey <sje at cup dot hp.com> 2011-06-08 20:07:04 UTC ---
Checking for a warning using check_no_compiler_messages seems as easy or easier
then checking the return code so I did that. I have submitted a patch to
gcc-patches.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-06/msg00673.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/49191] gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
2011-05-27 13:50 [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2011-06-08 20:07 ` sje at cup dot hp.com
@ 2011-06-26 8:00 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-27 17:58 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-06-26 8:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-06-26 07:58:23 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sun Jun 26 07:57:30 2011
New Revision: 175408
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175408
Log:
2011-06-26 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
PR tree-optimization/48377
* gcc.dg/vect/pr48377.c: Add dg-require-effective-target
non_strict_align.
2011-06-26 Steve Ellcey <sje@cup.hp.com>
PR middle-end/49191
* lib/target-supports.exp (check_effective_target_non_strict_align):
New.
* gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c: Add dg-require-effective-target non_strict_align.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr48377.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/49191] gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
2011-05-27 13:50 [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2011-06-26 8:00 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-06-27 17:58 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-27 18:10 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-08-20 15:58 ` sje at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-06-27 17:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-06-27 17:55:40 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jun 27 17:55:35 2011
New Revision: 175544
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175544
Log:
Backported from mainline
2011-06-26 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
PR tree-optimization/48377
* gcc.dg/vect/pr48377.c: Add dg-require-effective-target
non_strict_align.
2011-06-26 Steve Ellcey <sje@cup.hp.com>
PR middle-end/49191
* lib/target-supports.exp (check_effective_target_non_strict_align):
New.
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr48377.c
branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/49191] gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
2011-05-27 13:50 [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2011-06-27 17:58 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-06-27 18:10 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-08-20 15:58 ` sje at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-06-27 18:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.2
--- Comment #15 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-06-27 18:07:07 UTC ---
Thanks for the fix.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/49191] gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC
2011-05-27 13:50 [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2011-06-27 18:10 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-08-20 15:58 ` sje at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: sje at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-08-20 15:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
--- Comment #17 from Steve Ellcey <sje at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: sje
Date: Wed Aug 20 15:57:42 2014
New Revision: 214227
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214227&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-08-20 Steve Ellcey <sellcey@mips.com>
PR middle-end/49191
* lib/target-supports.exp (check_effective_target_non_strict_align):
Add function description.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-08-20 15:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-05-27 13:50 [Bug middle-end/49191] New: gcc.dg/memcpy-3.c FAILs on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-05-27 13:56 ` [Bug middle-end/49191] " richard.guenther at gmail dot com
2011-05-27 14:10 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2011-05-28 14:59 ` danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-07 13:12 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-07 13:15 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-08 17:38 ` sje at cup dot hp.com
2011-06-08 17:51 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-08 17:52 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-08 18:00 ` dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca
2011-06-08 18:13 ` sje at cup dot hp.com
2011-06-08 19:14 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-08 20:07 ` sje at cup dot hp.com
2011-06-26 8:00 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-27 17:58 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-27 18:10 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-08-20 15:58 ` sje at gcc dot gnu.org
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).