https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80334
--- Comment #14 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Done, bug 87054.
The patch in comment 13 fails libstdc++-v3; the language-independent
get_object_alignment can't deal with unresolved template expressions, so using
the same logic you added to ivopts to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87054
Bug ID: 87054
Summary: misaligned asm output is turned into dereferenced
pointer-to-aligned
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
.cfi_endproc
.LFE0:
.size test, .-test
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 9.0.0 20180821 (experimental)"
.section.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
which Looks wrong.
expected: not folded, or evaluate to 7.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87034
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87052
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86837
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86519
--- Comment #19 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
which sparc machine was used to repeat the failure, and what's the configure
and make options?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87040
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87026
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87052
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87052
Bug ID: 87052
Summary: STRING_CST printing incomplete in Gimple dumps
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87051
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82076
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
I think the problem in this case is that a) the sanitizers don't instrument
calls to built-in functions like memcpy (the reason for the missing runtime
error in the case of -DN=3), and b) -Wstringop-overflow
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87051
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87050
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gerald at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87038
--- Comment #4 from Steinar H. Gunderson ---
Oh, it exists? Yes, if so, please count this as a request for enabling on
-Wextra.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87051
Bug ID: 87051
Summary: is_trivially_move_constructible wrongly gives `false`
for class with user-provided non-const copy
constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87047
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I suspect it is treating cost 0 as being free rather than unknown cost. And
the x86 backend is returning 0 cost for the upper multiple.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87047
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87038
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
This is Wjump-misses-init. Is this a request to make some other option
such as -Wall or -Wextra enable that option (rather than just -Wc++-compat
as at present)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86771
--- Comment #20 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #19)
> Well insn_cost() uses COSTS_N_INSNS (1) for instructions with unknown (zero)
> costs. That's a reasonable default and gives more accurate cost comparisons,
> eg.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87040
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|ppc64le-linux-gnu |powerpc*-*-*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87050
Bug ID: 87050
Summary: Bump wwwdocs to html5
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: web
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87008
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
Or just:
struct A { double a, b; };
struct B : A {};
double f(B x){
B y;
A*px=
A*py=
*py=*px;
return y.a;
}
MEM[(struct A *)] = MEM[(const struct A &)];
y_6 = MEM[(struct A *)];
y ={v}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70578
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79342
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87049
Bug ID: 87049
Summary: __clear_cache() prototype confusion
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87048
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||25829
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87048
Bug ID: 87048
Summary: [9 Regression] array_constructor_8.f90 failure on
armeb
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87008
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
struct A { double a, b; };
struct B : A {};
templatevoid cp(T,T const){a=b;}
double f(B x){
B y; cp(y,x);
B z; cp(z,x);
return y.a - z.a;
}
This is not quite equivalent because RTL manages to optimize
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25829
--- Comment #55 from Nicolas Koenig ---
Author: koenigni
Date: Tue Aug 21 18:48:59 2018
New Revision: 263750
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263750=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-08-21 Nicolas Koenig
Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/25829
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86499
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86499
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Tue Aug 21 18:37:23 2018
New Revision: 263749
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263749=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/86499
* parser.c (cp_parser_lambda_introducer): Give
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87047
Bug ID: 87047
Summary: gcc 7 & 8 - performance regression because of
if-conversion
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87014
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87014
--- Comment #10 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Tue Aug 21 16:38:17 2018
New Revision: 263745
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263745=gcc=rev
Log:
x86: Always update EH return address in word_mode
On x86, return address
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87014
--- Comment #9 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Tue Aug 21 16:27:22 2018
New Revision: 263744
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263744=gcc=rev
Log:
x86: Always update EH return address in word_mode
On x86, return address is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87044
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
See also https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-closed.html#1318 which requested
that custom references be put back, and was closed as Not A Defect.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87044
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87014
--- Comment #8 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Tue Aug 21 16:17:35 2018
New Revision: 263743
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263743=gcc=rev
Log:
x86: Always update EH return address in word_mode
On x86, return address is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87044
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This is correct: custom reference types are not supported at all, and never
will be. And that's not a bug. The container requirements in the standard
require X::reference to be X::value_type&, and the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87046
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87046
Bug ID: 87046
Summary: Incorrect vectorization of fma with -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86981
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87045
Bug ID: 87045
Summary: pointer to array of character
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86981
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Tue Aug 21 15:38:36 2018
New Revision: 263741
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263741=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/86981, Implement -Wpessimizing-move.
* c.opt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65043
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65043
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Tue Aug 21 15:25:17 2018
New Revision: 263739
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263739=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/65043
* call.c (standard_conversion): Set
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87044
Bug ID: 87044
Summary: stl_construct.h not interoperable with allocators with
custom reference types
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86924
--- Comment #3 from Mario Rohkrämer ---
Created attachment 44567
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44567=edit
Zipped temp output encoder.i by lupo...
This is the "-save-temps" output which user lupo... attached in comment 12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86924
--- Comment #2 from Mario Rohkrämer ---
Unfortunately, I do not have much experience in running a compile manually. I
only let the "media-autobuild suite" batch run.
https://github.com/jb-alvarado/media-autobuild_suite/
I would not know for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86945
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
C testcase:
void __attribute__((noinline,noipa))
foo(int id)
{
switch (id)
{
case (-__INT_MAX__ - 1)...-1:
__builtin_abort ();
default:;
}
}
int main()
{
foo(1);
return 0;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86945
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
With -fsanitize=undefined we get even at -O0
id= 1
: runtime error: signed integer overflow: 1 - -2147483647 cannot be
represented in type 'integer(kind=4)'
ierr1, OK =0 T
: runtime
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86945
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P4 |P2
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87043
Bug ID: 87043
Summary: maybe-uninitialized warning for initialized variable
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86943
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87042
Bug ID: 87042
Summary: UBSAN: poly-int.h:1095:5: runtime error: signed
integer overflow: 9223372036854775807 * 8 cannot be
represented in type 'long int'
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86936
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Note to GIMPLE [1][i_3(D)] is just address-computation and carries no
semantics so you can't assume that i_3(D) isn't negative and thus ends up
accessing "123". For the C testcase you of course can, but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86908
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Kostya Frumkin from comment #8)
> At the same time this design pattern (strategy) with placement-new is more
> efficient than with common new.
That's fine, but you can't use to access the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86932
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86926
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86924
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-w64-mingw32
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86922
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic, wrong-code
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86919
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86908
--- Comment #8 from Kostya Frumkin ---
> Either way you need to placement new the original type back again, otherwise
> the wrong destructor gets called on scope exit, which adds more undefined
> behaviour.
There should not be undefined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63303
--- Comment #19 from Marc Glisse ---
This seems fixed in gcc-8, no?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86917
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63303
--- Comment #18 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018, jvg1981 at aim dot com wrote:
> intptr_t pVal = ((uintptr_t) p)/(sizeof *p);
> intptr_t qVal = ((uintptr_t) q)/(sizeof *q);
Note that this can be expanded
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86914
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63303
Joshua Green changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvg1981 at aim dot com
--- Comment #17
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86909
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86908
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> > No, your program has undefined behaviour. To make it valid you either need
> > to use std::launder, or use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86997
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Don't write weird code?
Either of these works fine and is obvious what it is supposed to do:
NoDestructor b;
NoDestructor b{};
The original is weird. Is it trying to construct an 'a' object and pass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86997
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> Looks like a dup of PR 59389
Any easy workaround for it?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86850
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018, dcb314 at hotmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86850
>
> --- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
> Indeed it does look like vectorizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86771
--- Comment #19 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #16)
> (In reply to Wilco from comment #14)
> > Note there is also an issue with costs, if the cost is zero then it seems to
> > behave like infinite cost.
>
> 0 means
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86908
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86850
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
Indeed it does look like vectorizer code. Here are 20 frames,
found by using the UBSAN_OPTIONS=print_stacktrace=1 option:
../../trunk/gcc/vec.h:1688:5: runtime error: member call on null pointer of
type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86907
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86905
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86902
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86900
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87041
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86891
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87041
Bug ID: 87041
Summary: GCC 8 regression: -Wformat "reading through null
pointer" on unreachable code
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86860
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86877
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86991
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86875
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86990
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86869
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
#ifndef POINTERS_EXTEND_UNSIGNED
gcc_assert (GET_MODE (x) == to_mode || GET_MODE (x) == VOIDmode);
return x;
#else /* defined(POINTERS_EXTEND_UNSIGNED) */
scalar_int_mode pointer_mode, address_mode,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87040
Bug ID: 87040
Summary: ICE in extract_constrain_insn_cached, at recog.c:2218
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87039
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87039
Bug ID: 87039
Summary: [8/9 Regression] DW_OP_fbreg used without a frame base
on a C++ code w/ -fopenmp
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86864
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86860
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
So INVALID?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86853
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86850
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86847
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87038
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And for the goto case Clang says:
87038.c:2:13: warning: variable 'foo' is used uninitialized whenever 'if'
condition is true [-Wsometimes-uninitialized]
if (x == 0) goto lbl;
^~
1 - 100 of 126 matches
Mail list logo
