https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> Though, there is another issue, for the nelts 2 vectors
> simplify_vector_constructor created code is actually larger than old code.
> And, it might be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|jakub at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Hmm, I don't think it is fully correct. Let me dig in a bit.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92801
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
You're repeating mistakes fromm the past. The "dumb" approach works for a
single
benchmark (mcf) but isn't at all usable for anything in the real world which
means it is of no use for GCC (when factoring
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92800
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Note there's people from Marvell working on the same thing, posting design docs
(some privately to me though). gobl...@marvell.com was working on this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92799
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39751
--- Comment #11 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko ---
Original test case from c#0 crash in trunk
gcc version 10.0.0 20191204 (experimental) [trunk revision 278972] (GCC)
$ g++ -fpreprocessed -fsyntax-only a.ii
a.ii:5:1: error: types may not be defined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91582
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
Part 2 of the patch series was committed in r278983. Part 1 and part 3 are
still waiting for review and approval:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-11/msg00429.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91582
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Thu Dec 5 01:28:11 2019
New Revision: 278983
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278983=gcc=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/91582 - missing heap overflow detection for strcpy
gcc/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92815
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||56456
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92815
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92815
Bug ID: 92815
Summary: spurious -Wstringop-overflow writing into a flexible
array of an extern struct
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92814
Bug ID: 92814
Summary: missing -Wstringop-overflow writing into a dynamically
allocated flexible array member
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83495
Christian Biesinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cbiesinger at google dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87241
Christian Biesinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cbiesinger at google dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82026
Christian Biesinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cbiesinger at google dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69094
Christian Biesinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cbiesinger at google dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68700
Christian Biesinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cbiesinger at google dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68159
--- Comment #17 from Christian Biesinger ---
Sorry, rather, none of these testcases seem to crash anymore but the one from
comment 0 still does not demangle.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88827
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68159
Christian Biesinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cbiesinger at google dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36941
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88827
--- Comment #1 from Joseph S. Myers ---
Author: jsm28
Date: Wed Dec 4 23:26:10 2019
New Revision: 278976
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278976=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix C handling of use of lvalues of incomplete types (PR c/36941, PR c/88827).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36941
--- Comment #9 from Joseph S. Myers ---
Author: jsm28
Date: Wed Dec 4 23:26:10 2019
New Revision: 278976
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278976=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix C handling of use of lvalues of incomplete types (PR c/36941, PR c/88827).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84668
Christian Biesinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cbiesinger at google dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92813
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92453
Christian Biesinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cbiesinger at google dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92813
Bug ID: 92813
Summary: sprintf result not used by strlen pass
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89671
Christian Biesinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cbiesinger at google dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92812
Bug ID: 92812
Summary: Implement P1975R0: Fixing the wording of parenthesized
aggregate-initialization
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88629
Christian Biesinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cbiesinger at google dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85309
Christian Biesinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cbiesinger at google dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81682
Christian Biesinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cbiesinger at google dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70517
Christian Biesinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cbiesinger at google dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91661
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The following variant of the patch in comment#3 regtests cleanly and handles
more complex cases, like
integer, parameter :: b(a(1)+a(2)) = 3
Index: gcc/fortran/decl.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
--- Comment #17 from Martin Sebor ---
The patch below avoids the warning. Unfortunately, as a result of bug 92666,
it triggers another bogus warning during bootstrap.
Index: gcc/c-family/c-common.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92811
Bug ID: 92811
Summary: Odd optimisation differences with lambdas
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92797
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Tim Ruehsen from comment #1)
> BTW, llvm-cxxfilt does not show this behavior.
Could it because it does not implement the D demangler?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92810
Bug ID: 92810
Summary: Compiling GCC go for aarch64_be-marvell-linux-gnu
fails
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92661
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92661
--- Comment #12 from Peter Bergner ---
Author: bergner
Date: Wed Dec 4 19:53:26 2019
New Revision: 278973
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278973=gcc=rev
Log:
Do not define builtins that overload disabled builtins.
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92801
--- Comment #2 from Christoph Müllner
---
Yes, our current approach is all or nothing (i.e. all uses of a struct are
changed or none).
Optimizing individual uses of a type would allow a more tailored optimization.
We decided to defer such an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92775
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92775
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
nable-plugin --enable-initfini-array --with-isl
--enable-offload-targets=nvptx-none --without-cuda-driver
--enable-gnu-indirect-function --enable-cet --with-tune=native
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 10.0.0 20191204 (experimental) [trunk revision 278958] (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92807
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 47424
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47424=edit
A patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92801
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92807
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92808
Bug ID: 92808
Summary: GCC sets BTI flag in .note.gnu.property section even
though not all functions are compiled with BTI
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92798
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92767
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92807
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92807
Sunil Pandey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Untested fix:
--- gcc/tree-ssa-forwprop.c.jj 2019-12-03 20:21:30.554464396 +0100
+++ gcc/tree-ssa-forwprop.c 2019-12-04 17:48:36.351450274 +0100
@@ -2283,11 +2283,11 @@ simplify_vector_constructor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92798
--- Comment #2 from Christian N ---
To be honest, I'm not sure when and why it came to be. The build instructions
are partially from an old project and weren't cleaned properly. The immediate
code base actually only uses scoped enums. The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92807
Bug ID: 92807
Summary: gcc generate extra move for the snippet code
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92007
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92176
--- Comment #6 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #5)
>
> I'll investigate this problem more.
Hi, Andreas. The rtlanal code (!lra_in_progress) was added to GCC since the
first patch introducing LRA. As I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92805
ripero84 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ripero84 at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92007
--- Comment #19 from Arseny Solokha ---
I believe this is fixed on both affected branches for over a month, thus the PR
can be closed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92806
Bug ID: 92806
Summary: Suboptimal diagnostic for concept that depends on
non-bool value
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81178
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Huh, trunk now accepts the program.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92738
--- Comment #13 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #12)
> People who have problems can then enable
I meant disable, of course.
> that option for
> the specific files they have the problems with.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Reduced testcase with -O2 -mavx:
typedef double v4df __attribute__((vector_size (32)));
typedef double v2df __attribute__((vector_size (16)));
v2df
foo (v4df x, double *p, v2df y)
{
return (v2df) { x[3],
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92805
Bug ID: 92805
Summary: gfortran: blanks within literal constants should not
be allowed
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92738
--- Comment #12 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #11)
> Would using -frepack-arrays solve this issue? I proposed making that the
> default a while back. It would do any repacking that is necessary at call
> sites rather
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92804
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||9.2.1
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92804
Bug ID: 92804
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE trying to use concept as a
nested-name-specifier
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92791
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
We have in the documentation:
For a named pattern, the condition may not depend on the data in
the insn being matched, but only the target-machine-type flags.
The compiler needs to test these
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92773
--- Comment #6 from Charles-Antoine Couret
---
Ok with a friend we identified a bit more what is the issue.
So in fact I built (manually):
$ gcc -Wall sound/soc/codecs/tas5756m.i -o sound/soc/codecs/tas5756m.o
In that case, no output and it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92798
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
-fshort-enums is an ABI-changing option, which means you should recompile the
entire toolchain including the standard libraries.
Why are you using it anyway? In C++ you can specify a fixed underlying
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85463
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 47421
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47421=edit
test-case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
Bug ID: 92803
Summary: [10 Regression] error: type mismatch in
'vec_perm_expr' since r278764
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 47420
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47420=edit
test-case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92802
Bug ID: 92802
Summary: Struct field reordering
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92538
--- Comment #4 from Christoph Müllner
---
Early tests with this pass showed that a bunch of SPEC CPU2017 benchmarks
benefit from this. For example, the written-once global variable TTSize of
sjeng
is eliminated by this pass.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92801
Bug ID: 92801
Summary: Drop unused struct fields
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92800
Bug ID: 92800
Summary: IPA escape analysis for structs
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92791
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So:
struct S { S (void *a, bool b) : x (a), y (b) {} void *x; bool y; };
void bar (S);
void
foo (void *x)
{
S sbuf_it (x, x == nullptr);
bar (sbuf_it);
}
with -O2 -m32 -march=i686 -mtune=i586
gives the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92799
Bug ID: 92799
Summary: ICE: in get, at cgraph.h:1339
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92591
--- Comment #6 from Roman Zhuykov ---
Patches are still testing. Arm (both 32 and 64 bit) cross compilers are OK,
and I want to test some additional scenarios for powerpc. Probably I'll post
patches next week.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92798
Bug ID: 92798
Summary: -fshort-enums can break iterators of std::map
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92775
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.5.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92775
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
That means the get_array_descr_info langhook wasn't updated I guess.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92775
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Burgess ---
I ran a bisect and this is the commit where GCC stops producing the DWARF I
would expect to see:
In GIT:
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=47e6a59aedf4b114c2b4865c97a91a7b700cd991
In SVN:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92773
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Hmm, compilation finishes instantly for me. I tried, -O2, -Os and -O3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92797
--- Comment #1 from Tim Ruehsen ---
BTW, llvm-cxxfilt does not show this behavior.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92773
Charles-Antoine Couret changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #47408|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92797
Bug ID: 92797
Summary: cplus_demangle() produces huge amount of output (on
trunk)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92796
Bug ID: 92796
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in lra_assign, at
lra-assigns.c:1646 on powerpc64le-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92795
Bug ID: 92795
Summary: Another slowness issue in the demangler (on trunk)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92743
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92791
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92794
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92794
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92754
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92754
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Wed Dec 4 12:19:55 2019
New Revision: 278961
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278961=gcc=rev
Log:
Fortran] PR92754 - fix an issue with resolving intrinsic functions
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
