public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug tree-optimization/58627] [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite
2013-10-05 8:04 [Bug tree-optimization/58627] New: [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite markus at trippelsdorf dot de
@ 2013-10-05 8:04 ` markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2013-10-09 7:14 ` [Bug c++/58627] " markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (8 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: markus at trippelsdorf dot de @ 2013-10-05 8:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58627
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf <markus at trippelsdorf dot de> ---
Created attachment 30957
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30957&action=edit
testcase
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/58627] New: [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite
@ 2013-10-05 8:04 markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2013-10-05 8:04 ` [Bug tree-optimization/58627] " markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (9 more replies)
0 siblings, 10 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: markus at trippelsdorf dot de @ 2013-10-05 8:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58627
Bug ID: 58627
Summary: [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost
testsuite
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: markus at trippelsdorf dot de
Crash happened during compilation of the boost testsuite.
It's hard to reduce the testcase, because it appears to be a bug in the
garbage-collector.
[With --enable-checking=release]
% g++ -O0 -std=c++11 -c test.ii
test.ii: In member function ‘boost::chrono::duration<Rep, Period>&
boost::chrono::duration<Rep, Period>::operator--() [with Rep = double; Period =
boost::ratio<1l>]’:
test.ii:3207:286: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
[gcc-4.8.1 is fine]
% /usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-bin/4.8.1/g++ -O2 -std=c++11 -c test.i
%
[Backtrace with --enable-checking]
% gdb --args /var/tmp/gcc_test/usr/local/bin/g++ -w -O0 -std=c++11
-Wfatal-errors -c test.ii -pipe -o /dev/null
Reading symbols from /var/tmp/gcc_test/usr/local/bin/g++...done.
(gdb) run
Starting program: /var/tmp/gcc_test/usr/local/bin/g++ -w -O0 -std=c++11
-Wfatal-errors -c test.ii -pipe -o /dev/null
[New process 20470]
process 20470 is executing new program:
/var/tmp/gcc_test/usr/local/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.9.0/cc1plus
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to process 20470]
0x0000000000c8e9f8 in tree_class_check_failed (node=<optimized out>,
cl=<optimized out>, file=0xff512d "../../gcc/gcc/c-family/c-common.h",
line=1063,
function=0xff514f "c_tree_chain_next") at ../../gcc/gcc/tree.c:9223
9223 ../../gcc/gcc/tree.c: No such file or directory.
(gdb) bt
#0 0x0000000000c8e9f8 in tree_class_check_failed (node=<optimized out>,
cl=<optimized out>, file=0xff512d "../../gcc/gcc/c-family/c-common.h",
line=1063,
function=0xff514f "c_tree_chain_next") at ../../gcc/gcc/tree.c:9223
#1 0x00000000006807f1 in tree_class_check (__class=<optimized out>,
__f=<optimized out>, __l=<optimized out>, __g=<optimized out>, __t=<optimized
out>,
__class=<optimized out>, __f=<optimized out>, __l=<optimized out>,
__g=<optimized out>) at ../../gcc/gcc/tree.h:2732
#2 c_tree_chain_next (t=<optimized out>) at
../../gcc/gcc/c-family/c-common.h:1063
#3 gt_ggc_mx_lang_tree_node (x_p=<optimized out>) at ./gt-cp-tree.h:158
#4 0x000000000067f79a in gt_ggc_mx_lang_tree_node (x_p=<optimized out>) at
./gt-cp-tree.h:706
#5 0x0000000000680ba3 in gt_ggc_mx_tinst_level (x_p=<optimized out>) at
./gt-cp-tree.h:124
#6 0x000000000057b363 in gt_ggc_mx_pending_template (x_p=<optimized out>) at
./gt-cp-pt.h:44
#7 0x00000000008dfa6b in ggc_mark_root_tab (rt=<optimized out>) at
../../gcc/gcc/ggc-common.c:133
#8 ggc_mark_roots () at ../../gcc/gcc/ggc-common.c:152
#9 0x000000000072d91b in ggc_collect () at ../../gcc/gcc/ggc-page.c:2077
#10 0x000000000079f9c3 in cgraph_finalize_function (decl=<optimized out>,
no_collect=<optimized out>) at ../../gcc/gcc/cgraphunit.c:456
#11 0x000000000065c3fc in expand_or_defer_fn (fn=0x7fffeeb57500) at
../../gcc/gcc/cp/semantics.c:3949
#12 0x0000000000574935 in instantiate_decl (d=0x7fffeeb57500, defer_ok=<error
reading variable: Cannot access memory at address 0x0>,
expl_inst_class_mem_p=<optimized out>)
at ../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:19406
#13 0x0000000000577738 in instantiate_pending_templates (retries=<optimized
out>) at ../../gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:19493
#14 0x00000000005b9454 in cp_write_global_declarations () at
../../gcc/gcc/cp/decl2.c:4065
#15 0x0000000000aa2196 in compile_file () at ../../gcc/gcc/toplev.c:560
#16 0x0000000000aa1f67 in do_compile () at ../../gcc/gcc/toplev.c:1893
#17 toplev_main (argc=16, argv=0x7fffffffe028) at ../../gcc/gcc/toplev.c:1969
#18 0x00007ffff74d3a6e in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6
#19 0x00000000004e090d in _start ()
>From gcc-bugs-return-431121-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sat Oct 05 08:15:12 2013
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-431121-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 27203 invoked by alias); 5 Oct 2013 08:15:11 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 27123 invoked by uid 48); 5 Oct 2013 08:15:06 -0000
From: "olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/58625] std::signbit always converts to double
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2013 08:15:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-58625-4-PwHCmxwYJp@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-58625-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-58625-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-10/txt/msg00265.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1695
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idX625
--- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo <olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #1)
> Weird that nobody noticed for so much time.
Probably not everybody is practicing the neurotic habit of checking the asm
output for every bit and piece ;)
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #2)
> Well, now I see this can be certainly a correctness issue, for eg very small
> negative long doubles. Thus I think we should certainly do the change anyway
> for 4.9. For c_std I'm afraid we have to add overloads (I think, essentially
> copy over the corresponding bits of c_global without constexpr). Can you
> send a patch to the libstdc++-v3 mailing list? And, please, double check
> isnan and isinf. Thanks!
Yes, I can do that. But how to check this in a target independent way? Tree
dump and check whether the correct builtin names appear?
There's another place in file libstdc++-v3/include/c_std/cmath:
template<typename _Tp>
inline typename __gnu_cxx::__enable_if<__is_arithmetic<_Tp>::__value,
int>::__type
signbit(_Tp __f)
{
typedef typename __gnu_cxx::__promote<_Tp>::__type __type;
return __builtin_signbit(__type(__f));
}
I guess that this is supposed to be used when C++ code pulls in <math.h> and
uses the C macro signbit instead of std::signbit. It doesn't happen on my SH /
newlib cross config -- I get something like ((sizeof(x) == sizeof(float)) ?
__signbitf(x) : __signbitd(x)). But if on some config it does happen, then the
problem would be the same, thus requiring signbit (and friends) overloads as
it's done for sqrt etc in the same file, right?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/58627] [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite
2013-10-05 8:04 [Bug tree-optimization/58627] New: [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2013-10-05 8:04 ` [Bug tree-optimization/58627] " markus at trippelsdorf dot de
@ 2013-10-09 7:14 ` markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2013-10-10 11:50 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: markus at trippelsdorf dot de @ 2013-10-09 7:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58627
Markus Trippelsdorf <markus at trippelsdorf dot de> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Component|tree-optimization |c++
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf <markus at trippelsdorf dot de> ---
Started with r198099.
The following patch apparently "fixes" the issue:
diff --git a/gcc/cp/class.c b/gcc/cp/class.c
index c587e55ac681..9547da539c57 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/class.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/class.c
@@ -7436,7 +7436,6 @@ resolve_address_of_overloaded_function (tree target_type,
if (same_type_p (target_fn_type, static_fn_type (instantiation)))
matches = tree_cons (instantiation, fn, matches);
- ggc_free (targs);
}
/* Now, remove all but the most specialized of the matches. */
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/58627] [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite
2013-10-05 8:04 [Bug tree-optimization/58627] New: [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2013-10-05 8:04 ` [Bug tree-optimization/58627] " markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2013-10-09 7:14 ` [Bug c++/58627] " markus at trippelsdorf dot de
@ 2013-10-10 11:50 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-11-05 14:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-10-10 11:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58627
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/58627] [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite
2013-10-05 8:04 [Bug tree-optimization/58627] New: [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2013-10-10 11:50 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2013-11-05 14:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-11-28 7:08 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-11-05 14:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58627
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|P3 |P1
Version|unknown |4.9.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/58627] [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite
2013-10-05 8:04 [Bug tree-optimization/58627] New: [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2013-11-05 14:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2013-11-28 7:08 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-12-09 19:11 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
` (4 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-11-28 7:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58627
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2013-11-28
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Seems the crash is because we ggc_free (targs); but it is still reachable.
While
pop_tinst_level has been called and thus it isn't reachable from
current_tinst_level, it is reachable from pending_templates
(in particular last_pending_template->tinst->next->next->decl is a TREE_LIST
with
TREE_VALUE set to the TREE_VEC targs we ggc_free).
fn_type_unification has:
struct pending_template *old_last_pend = last_pending_template;
struct tinst_level *old_error_tinst = last_error_tinst_level;
...
/* We can't free this if a pending_template entry or last_error_tinst_level
is pointing at it. */
if (last_pending_template == old_last_pend
&& last_error_tinst_level == old_error_tinst)
ggc_free (tinst);
so it avoids ggc_free on tinst (the TREE_LIST with TREE_VALUE set to targs),
but unfortunately this technique isn't usable in the
resolve_address_of_overloaded_function caller, because last_pending_template
and
current_tinst_level are static vars in pt.c and this is in class.c.
So perhaps add some bool * argument to fn_type_unification through which it
could optionally tell the caller whether it is safe to ggc_free targs
(set to last_pending_template == old_last_pend && last_error_tinst_level ==
old_error_tinst if non-NULL)? Jason?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/58627] [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite
2013-10-05 8:04 [Bug tree-optimization/58627] New: [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2013-11-28 7:08 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2013-12-09 19:11 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2013-12-10 8:26 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: paolo.carlini at oracle dot com @ 2013-12-09 19:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58627
Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> ---
*** Bug 59436 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/58627] [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite
2013-10-05 8:04 [Bug tree-optimization/58627] New: [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2013-12-09 19:11 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2013-12-10 8:26 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-12-12 13:36 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-12-10 8:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58627
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 31407
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31407&action=edit
gcc49-pr58627.patch
Untested fix.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/58627] [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite
2013-10-05 8:04 [Bug tree-optimization/58627] New: [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2013-12-10 8:26 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2013-12-12 13:36 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-12-29 9:27 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-12-29 9:29 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-12-12 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58627
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/58627] [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite
2013-10-05 8:04 [Bug tree-optimization/58627] New: [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2013-12-12 13:36 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2013-12-29 9:27 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-12-29 9:29 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-12-29 9:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58627
Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
CC| |trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|FIXED |---
--- Comment #9 from Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I've re-run the boost-testsuite today and there were a number
of new ICEs. All turned out to be PCH related. For example
(checking=release compiler):
...
==17975== Invalid read of size 8
==17975== at 0x504951: lookup_page_table_entry(void const*) [clone
.lto_priv.3354] (in /usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.9.0/cc1plus)
==17975== by 0xAEEE89: ggc_set_mark(void const*) (in
/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.9.0/cc1plus)
==17975== by 0x12438A1: gt_ggc_mx_lang_tree_node(void*) (in
/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.9.0/cc1plus)
==17975== by 0x1246A78: gt_ggc_mx_tree_statement_list_node(void*) (in
/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.9.0/cc1plus)
==17975== by 0x1244EAE: gt_ggc_mx_lang_tree_node(void*) (in
/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.9.0/cc1plus)
==17975== by 0x1243A5A: gt_ggc_mx_lang_tree_node(void*) (in
/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.9.0/cc1plus)
==17975== by 0x1243A5A: gt_ggc_mx_lang_tree_node(void*) (in
/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.9.0/cc1plus)
==17975== by 0x1243A5A: gt_ggc_mx_lang_tree_node(void*) (in
/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.9.0/cc1plus)
==17975== by 0x1244EE9: gt_ggc_mx_lang_tree_node(void*) (in
/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.9.0/cc1plus)
==17975== by 0x1244F29: gt_ggc_mx_lang_tree_node(void*) (in
/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.9.0/cc1plus)
==17975== by 0x1243D11: gt_ggc_mx_lang_tree_node(void*) (in
/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.9.0/cc1plus)
==17975== by 0x1246353: gt_ggc_mx_lang_decl(void*) (in
/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.9.0/cc1plus)
==17975== Address 0x80 is not stack'd, malloc'd or (recently) free'd
==17975==
In file included from ../boost/throw_exception.hpp:39:0,
from ../boost/smart_ptr/shared_ptr.hpp:31,
from ../boost/shared_ptr.hpp:17,
from ../boost/test/tools/assertion_result.hpp:24,
from ../boost/test/tools/old/impl.hpp:20,
from ../boost/test/test_tools.hpp:32,
from ../boost/math/tools/test.hpp:16,
from ../libs/math/test/pch_light.hpp:10:
../boost/exception/exception.hpp: In member function ‘void
boost::exception_detail::clone_impl<T>::rethrow() const [with T =
boost::exception_detail::error_info_injector<std::logic_error>]’:
../boost/exception/exception.hpp:473:17: internal compiler error: Segmentation
fault
}
^
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate
>From gcc-bugs-return-438679-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sun Dec 29 09:27:26 2013
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-438679-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 5506 invoked by alias); 29 Dec 2013 09:27:26 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 5453 invoked by uid 48); 29 Dec 2013 09:27:22 -0000
From: "trippels at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/59436] [4.9 Regression] FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++200x/stdc++.cc (test for excess errors)
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2013 09:27:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-59436-4-MAPWJYECJH@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-59436-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-59436-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-12/txt/msg02334.txt.bz2
Content-length: 480
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idY436
Bug 59436 depends on bug 58627, which changed state.
Bug 58627 Summary: [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idX627
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED |---
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/58627] [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite
2013-10-05 8:04 [Bug tree-optimization/58627] New: [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite markus at trippelsdorf dot de
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2013-12-29 9:27 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2013-12-29 9:29 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-12-29 9:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58627
Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #10 from Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Ah, I see PR59436 is more appropriate.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-12-29 9:29 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-10-05 8:04 [Bug tree-optimization/58627] New: [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2013-10-05 8:04 ` [Bug tree-optimization/58627] " markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2013-10-09 7:14 ` [Bug c++/58627] " markus at trippelsdorf dot de
2013-10-10 11:50 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-11-05 14:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-11-28 7:08 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-12-09 19:11 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2013-12-10 8:26 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-12-12 13:36 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-12-29 9:27 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-12-29 9:29 ` trippels 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).