https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66148
Thomas Preud'homme thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66142
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Slightly improved variant of #c6 testcase:
struct A { float x, y; };
struct B { struct A u; };
void bar (struct A *);
float
f1 (struct B *x, int y)
{
struct A p;
p.x = 1.0f;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66272
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66272
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Started with r214006.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66265
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66277
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66277
--- Comment #2 from Paul Menzel paulepanter at users dot sourceforge.net ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
Seems to be a user error. Just read man page of cpp and gcc, the former
accepts (besides options) just two arguments,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66274
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66276
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66277
Bug ID: 66277
Summary: [regression] cpp-5: fatal error: too many input files
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55095
--- Comment #10 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I've started looking into this. Unfortunately, int_const_binop_1 doesn't say
whether an overflow occurred for e.g. 10 30. So what we need to do is
something akin to what I did
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66275
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66148
--- Comment #5 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2015-05-25, at 3:21 AM, thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Here the REG_EQUAL does not match the value that is set: the 32 most
significant bits are zero. Which is why combine decide that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65979
--- Comment #28 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz glaubitz at physik dot
fu-berlin.de ---
It doesn't bootstrap because the D compiler fails the compare test. This
happens both on gcc-4.8 and gcc-4.9, here's the excerpt from 4.8 [1]:
Comparing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65979
--- Comment #27 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz glaubitz at physik dot
fu-berlin.de ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #25)
So, if I understand correctly ...
- 4.9.something doesn't bootstrap because of something unknown
It doesn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66142
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66215
--- Comment #18 from Miroslav Benes mbenes at suse dot cz ---
I confirm that v4 of the proposed patch works for me. Tested on simple
userspace program similar to the one in the bug description and on the kernel
module where I stumbled upon the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66215
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I'm still missing (untested):
-dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/$subdir/*.\[cS\]]] \
+dg-runtest [lsort [prune [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/$subdir/*.\[cS\]] \
+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65945
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66278
Bug ID: 66278
Summary: Missed auto-vectorization of an array subtraction
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66278
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55095
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66279
Andrey Vihrov andrey.vihrov at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #35620|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66265
--- Comment #2 from Mark gougolith at gmail dot com ---
Yes thank you, it all makes sense unfortunately...it is all buried in -O2...
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 12:50 AM, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66279
Bug ID: 66279
Summary: Input/output asm operand is not loaded inside a
constructor with a virtual base class
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66274
--- Comment #2 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon May 25 17:49:28 2015
New Revision: 223649
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223649root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/66274
* config/i386/i386.c (print_reg):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66280
Bug ID: 66280
Summary: internal compiler error: in
vect_get_vec_def_for_operand, at
tree-vect-stmts.c:1322
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66280
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66274
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66280
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66252
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Tobler andreast at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I see the same failures on sparc-solaris 10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66281
Bug ID: 66281
Summary: [C++14][Variable templates] internal compiler error:
in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:12022
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66252
--- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson mikpelinux at gmail dot com ---
Started with r67:
fc6cc27b3f46a6f70f610ec93a1c5e68d83c933b is the first bad commit
commit fc6cc27b3f46a6f70f610ec93a1c5e68d83c933b
Author: rguenth
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66270
Nathan Sidwell nathan at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66280
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
repro.ii: In function ‘void fn1()’:
repro.ii:16:1: error: definition in block 7 follows the use
fn1 ()
^
for SSA_NAME: vect_patt_56.19_117 in statement:
vect_inter_high_132
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66181
--- Comment #11 from Andreas Tobler andreast at gcc dot gnu.org ---
For the record from my side:
sparc-solaris and arm*-*-freebsd* are also affected. Applying the line from #6
cures the bootstrap on arm. But sparc-solaris is still broken, 66252
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66282
Bug ID: 66282
Summary: Missing x86 floating point conversion on explicit
casts violates C standard
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66282
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I think 4.9 and above implement this semantics.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66284
Bug ID: 66284
Summary: std::reference_wrapper is transparent to
std::function::target_type
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66283
Bug ID: 66283
Summary: [ICE] [IA64] verify type mis-diagnosis: type variant
differs by TYPE_NO_FORCE_BLK
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66252
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson mikpelinux at gmail dot com ---
Still occurs with trunk @ r223652.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66215
--- Comment #20 from Dominik Vogt vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---
I'll remove -O0 from the list of torture test options so that the list of
hotpatch torture tests is only defined in one place.
42 matches
Mail list logo