https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tuliom at linux dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81232
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81058
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The following patch fixes the failures
--- ../_clean/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/avx512bw-vpmovswb-1.c
2017-06-08 15:14:40.0 +0200
+++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53896
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80775
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81232
Bug ID: 81232
Summary: compiler crashes for template function overload
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81221
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Jun 27 14:44:50 2017
New Revision: 249692
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249692=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/81221 fix namespace qualification for parallel mode
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80382
--- Comment #14 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 18:24:51 2017
New Revision: 249707
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249707=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80902
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 18:24:51 2017
New Revision: 249707
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249707=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80618
--- Comment #11 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 18:24:51 2017
New Revision: 249707
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249707=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81108
--- Comment #10 from Jeff Hammond ---
Thanks for the feedback. I agree that it is a huge amount of work to optimize
this.
For what it's worth, GCC and Clang perform about the same. Unfortunately, I do
not have the means to evaluate IBM XLF,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
--- Comment #8 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Michael Meissner from comment #4)
> I think for the problem of using __builtin_cpu_, we should issue a
> warning
> (not a fatal error) if the configured GLIBC is too old saying you need to link
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81169
--- Comment #5 from Even Rouault ---
Thanks. Fix confirmed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81192
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81026
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80187
--- Comment #6 from Tim Shen ---
Author: timshen
Date: Tue Jun 27 18:19:03 2017
New Revision: 249706
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249706=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/80187
* include/std/variant (variant::variant,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80692
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 18:24:51 2017
New Revision: 249707
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249707=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=73650
--- Comment #11 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 18:24:51 2017
New Revision: 249707
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249707=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61729
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 18:24:51 2017
New Revision: 249707
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249707=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77850
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 18:24:51 2017
New Revision: 249707
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249707=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80966
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 18:24:51 2017
New Revision: 249707
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249707=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81225
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72763
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81234
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|rejects-valid |diagnostic
Known to work|6.3.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72763
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72764
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81236
--- Comment #1 from Guillaume Racicot ---
Created attachment 41639
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41639=edit
The compiler output crashing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81236
--- Comment #2 from Guillaume Racicot ---
Created attachment 41640
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41640=edit
CPP file that trigger the crash
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81237
--- Comment #2 from Ravi ---
I noticed I neglected to mention the error message. Compiling the code with GNU
7.1 gives me the error:
test.o:(.data.rel.ro._ZTV1C[_ZTV1C]+0x38): undefined reference to `non-virtual
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81235
Bug ID: 81235
Summary: Realloc returns NULL while ti should not
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81194
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81237
Bug ID: 81237
Summary: Cannot link when class methods compiled with different
levels of vectorization
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81238
Bug ID: 81238
Summary: Target clone support does not make default clone
static.
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72801
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72852
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81236
Bug ID: 81236
Summary: Crash when calling a template member function from
generic lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81237
--- Comment #1 from Ravi ---
The markdown didn't work quite the way I thought it would... Let me know if the
format is unclear and I'll rework the initial message to make it clearer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81238
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81234
Bug ID: 81234
Summary: [regression] flexible array member not at end of
‘struct
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81233
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61729
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 17:11:01 2017
New Revision: 249700
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249700=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77850
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 17:11:01 2017
New Revision: 249700
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249700=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80382
--- Comment #13 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 17:11:01 2017
New Revision: 249700
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249700=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80692
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 17:11:01 2017
New Revision: 249700
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249700=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80966
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 17:11:01 2017
New Revision: 249700
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249700=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60818
--- Comment #28 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 17:11:01 2017
New Revision: 249700
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249700=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80429
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 17:11:01 2017
New Revision: 249700
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249700=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80618
--- Comment #10 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 17:11:01 2017
New Revision: 249700
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249700=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=73650
--- Comment #10 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 17:11:01 2017
New Revision: 249700
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249700=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80902
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 17:11:01 2017
New Revision: 249700
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249700=gcc=rev
Log:
Backports from trunk:
2016-08-15 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68491
--- Comment #11 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Andy Lutomirski from comment #9)
> I'm a bit late to the party, but this patch seems dubious to me.
> __get_cpuid_max() fails to distinguish between CPUs that have max level 0
> (although I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81234
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81108
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
With schedule(static) or schedule(dynamic) etc. I believe the compiler is not
allowed to do it, at least if it can't prove it won't be observable.
So, if you have
int cnt = 0;
#pragma omp parallel for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80164
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #10 from Jerry
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69111
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61022
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61022
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||realloc at outlook dot de
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69300
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80382
--- Comment #15 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 21:45:45 2017
New Revision: 249711
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249711=gcc=rev
Log:
Those two changes aren't actually applicable to 5. Sorry for the noise.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80966
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 27 21:45:45 2017
New Revision: 249711
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249711=gcc=rev
Log:
Those two changes aren't actually applicable to 5. Sorry for the noise.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81238
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 41641
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41641=edit
Proposed patch to fix the problem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
--- Comment #9 from Michael Meissner ---
Well in theory we could add yet another switch to enable/disable the warning,
but we have too many switches as it is.
Note, I've put a warning in my development version of the target_clones
patches, and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
--- Comment #10 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 41642
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41642=edit
Patch to add ppc_cpu_supports_hw target support for tests
BTW, the patch attached allows us to check whether
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81237
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Hmm, you are compiling the files with different levels of ABI.
-fabi-version=6 is specified in test.o but not test2.o .
Can you try with the same abi version and try again?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81235
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81204
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
dup of PR 81026?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81235
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Carl Johnson from comment #0)
> After debugging, I noticed that the crash is because function `realloc`
> returned NULL. As I know, there might be two situations when `realloc`
> returns NULL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81239
Bug ID: 81239
Summary: std::__cxx11::string& visible in gcc warning output
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81216
--- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> --- parser.c~ 2017-06-26 12:21:40.0 +0200
> +++ parser.c 2017-06-27 08:19:49.317629661 +0200
> @@ -12438,7 +12438,7 @@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81196
--- Comment #6 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #5)
> (In reply to amker from comment #4)
> > Hmm, the function can only be vectorized with "-march=skylake"?
>
> Er, it also vectorizes without any -march on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81209
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jun 27 08:18:10 2017
New Revision: 249680
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249680=gcc=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/81209
* ubsan.c (ubsan_encode_value): Initialize
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81233
Bug ID: 81233
Summary: --Wdiscarded-qualifiers and
Wincompatible-pointer-types missing important detail
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68491
--- Comment #10 from Christos Zoulas ---
On Jun 27, 4:26pm, gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org ("luto at kernel dot org") wrote:
-- Subject: [Bug target/68491] libgcc calls __get_cpuid with 0 level breaks o
| I'm a bit late to the party, but this patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81229
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with r248387.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81221
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Jun 27 16:19:16 2017
New Revision: 249697
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249697=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/81221 only run new test for check-parallel
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81221
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Jun 27 16:23:46 2017
New Revision: 249698
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249698=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/81221 fix namespace qualification for parallel mode
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68491
Andy Lutomirski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||luto at kernel dot org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81108
--- Comment #8 from Jeff Hammond ---
I tried with schedule(dynamic) and schedule(static,n) for n=1,8,100. None of
this made a positive difference. Is that expected? I'm happy to make any code
changes that don't break correctness and are still
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81221
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81234
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45976
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81214
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80779
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Alexander Ivchenko from comment #2)
> I made some progress a while back with that, mostly by adding
> __attribute__((bnd_legacy)) just as in Martin's patches. I don't like that
> approach though,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62046
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.2
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62046
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81223
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81223
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Slightly cleaned up testcase:
void bar ();
void
foo (int x)
{
struct S { char a[x]; } v;
bar (v);
}
Marek, your patch is preapproved with this testcase if it passes
bootstrap/regtest.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81216
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81209
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81207
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jun 27 07:22:14 2017
New Revision: 249677
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249677=gcc=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/81207
* gimple-fold.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81213
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62046
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Jun 27 09:00:52 2017
New Revision: 249682
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249682=gcc=rev
Log:
2017-06-27 Paolo Carlini
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81223
Bug ID: 81223
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in instrument_null at
gcc/ubsan.c:1230
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81219
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81216
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81216
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81216
--- Comment #13 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Tue Jun 27 07:16:29 2017
New Revision: 249676
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249676=gcc=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/81216
* parser.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81196
--- Comment #7 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to amker from comment #6)
> But below is necessary, right?
>
> /* { dg-require-effective-target vect_perm_short } */
Yes. Cool, I didn't remember we had exactly the right test :-)
Or you could
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64431
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81222
Bug ID: 81222
Summary: OpenMP 4.5 array reduction clause causes the program
to crash
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
1 - 100 of 154 matches
Mail list logo