Re: PR83648

On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: As Jakub pointed out for the case: void *f() { return __builtin_malloc (0); } The malloc propagation would set f() to malloc. However AFAIU, malloc(0) returns NULL (?) and the function shouldn't be marked as malloc ? Why not? Even for

Re: std::vector default default and move constructors

On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Marc Glisse wrote: On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, François Dumont wrote: - void _M_swap_data(_Vector_impl& __x) _GLIBCXX_NOEXCEPT + void + _M_swap_data(_Vector_impl_data& __x) _GLIBCXX_NOEXCEPT { std::swap(_M_start, __x._M_start);

Re: std::vector default default and move constructors

On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, François Dumont wrote: - void _M_swap_data(_Vector_impl& __x) _GLIBCXX_NOEXCEPT + void + _M_swap_data(_Vector_impl_data& __x) _GLIBCXX_NOEXCEPT { std::swap(_M_start, __x._M_start); std::swap(_M_finish, __x._M_finish);

Re: std::vector default default and move constructors

Hi     Here is an updated patch.     Tested under Linux x86_64.     Ok to commit ? François On 21/08/2017 21:15, François Dumont wrote: Following feedback on std::list patch this one had the same problem of unused code being deleted. So here is a new version. Ok to commit ? François On

Re: PR83648

On 11 January 2018 at 10:34, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > On 11 January 2018 at 04:50, Jeff Law wrote: >> On 01/09/2018 05:57 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: >>> >>> As Jakub pointed out for the case: >>> void *f() >>> { >>> return

[Bug libstdc++/83709] Inserting duplicates into an unordered associative containers causes the container to invalidate iterators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83709 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/83784] New: Missed optimization with bitfield

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83784 Bug ID: 83784 Summary: Missed optimization with bitfield Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: normal Priority:

[Bug tree-optimization/83781] [8 Regression] Bootstrap failed on x86 with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=corei7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83781 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Component|target

Re: [PATCH improve early strlen range folding (PR 83671)

On 01/10/2018 06:30 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 2:04 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: Bug 83671 - Fix for false positive reported by -Wstringop-overflow does not work at -O1, points out that the string length range optimization implemented as a solution for bug 83373

[Bug target/83781] [8 Regression] Bootstrap failed on x86 with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=corei7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83781 --- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Thu Jan 11 05:13:57 2018 New Revision: 256477 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256477=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/83781 - Bootstrap failed on x86 with --with-arch=corei7

[Bug middle-end/83653] [6/7/8 Regression] GCC fails to remove a can't-happen call on ia64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83653 --- Comment #5 from Matthew Wilcox --- Hi Aldy! Thanks for looking into this. Yes, I agree, there's no way that GCC can know this is a constant, but that *should* have been taken care of. Please pardon me copying and pasting from the original

Re: PR83648

On 11 January 2018 at 04:50, Jeff Law wrote: > On 01/09/2018 05:57 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: >> >> As Jakub pointed out for the case: >> void *f() >> { >> return __builtin_malloc (0); >> } >> >> The malloc propagation would set f() to malloc. >> However AFAIU, malloc(0)

[Bug tree-optimization/81703] memcpy folding defeats strlen optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81703 prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug tree-optimization/81703] memcpy folding defeats strlen optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81703 --- Comment #2 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: prathamesh3492 Date: Thu Jan 11 04:37:48 2018 New Revision: 256475 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256475=gcc=rev Log: 2018-01-11 Martin Sebor

[Bug tree-optimization/83501] [8 Regression] strlen(a) not folded after strcpy(a, "...")

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83501 --- Comment #8 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: prathamesh3492 Date: Thu Jan 11 04:37:48 2018 New Revision: 256475 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256475=gcc=rev Log: 2018-01-11 Martin Sebor

[Bug target/83768] ARM: wrong optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83768 --- Comment #2 from Sergey Organov --- 4.8.3 doesn't have the issue, and I don't have fast access to any 4.9. So presumably it has been fixed between 5.4.0 and 5.4.1... It'd still be nice to know if there is some optimization switch in 5.4.0

[Bug target/83781] [8 Regression] Bootstrap failed on x86 with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=corei7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83781 --- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor --- Created attachment 43094 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43094=edit Preliminary patch. I'm testing the attached patch.

[Bug target/83781] [8 Regression] Bootstrap failed on x86 with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=corei7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83781 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug target/83781] [8 Regression] Bootstrap failed on x86 with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=corei7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83781 --- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu --- On i686, it failed with --prefix=/usr/8.0.0 --enable-clocale=gnu --with-system-zlib --enable-shared --with-demangler-in-ld --enable-libmpx i686-linux --with-fpmath=sse

[Bug middle-end/83653] [6/7/8 Regression] GCC fails to remove a can't-happen call on ia64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83653 Aldy Hernandez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/83781] [8 Regression] Bootstrap failed on x86 with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=corei7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83781 --- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor --- The gcc/hsa-dump.c warning doesn't seem to correspond to the latest sources. hsa_seg_name() returns one of a number of short strings, the longest being "UNKNOWN_SEGMENT" but the warning says the %s argument

[Bug target/83781] [8 Regression] Bootstrap failed on x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83781 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/83781] [8 Regression] Bootstrap failed on x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83781 --- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor --- Created attachment 43093 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43093=edit x86_64-linux tests summary. My x864_64 bootstrap and regression test run of the patch succeeded with the attached test

[Bug c/83782] New: Inconsistent address for hidden ifunc in a shared library

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83782 Bug ID: 83782 Summary: Inconsistent address for hidden ifunc in a shared library Product: gcc Version: 7.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/83778] [8 regression] g++.dg/ext/altivec-cell-2.C fails starting with r256448

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83778 --- Comment #2 from David Malcolm --- Presumably we should simply strip the location from arg, though there are some places with: /* Call get_element_number to validate arg1 if it is a constant. */ if (TREE_CODE (arg1) == INTEGER_CST)

[Bug c++/83778] [8 regression] g++.dg/ext/altivec-cell-2.C fails starting with r256448

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83778 --- Comment #1 from David Malcolm --- It does look like an issue with r256448, but I haven't been able to reproduce it here yet. There are 3 in-tree copies of get_element_number, in 3 backends; each has 2 users per backend; they all look like:

[Bug fortran/79383] USE statement error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79383 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---

libgo patch committed: Fix handling of DW_FORM_strp for 64-bit DWARF

This libgo patch fixes the handling of DW_FORM_strp when using 64-bit DWARF. This is an early backport of https://golang.org/cl/84379, which will be in Go 1.11. Backporting now for AIX support in gccgo. Bootstrapped and ran Go testsuite on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline. Ian Index:

[Bug target/83781] [8 Regression] Bootstrap failed on x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83781 --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #0) > > r256454 is OK and r25646 failed. It may be caused by r256457. Oops. r256463 failed.

[Bug target/83781] [8 Regression] Bootstrap failed on x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83781 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||build, diagnostic Target|

Re: [PATCH improve early strlen range folding (PR 83671)

On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 2:04 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > Bug 83671 - Fix for false positive reported by -Wstringop-overflow > does not work at -O1, points out that the string length range > optimization implemented as a solution for bug 83373 doesn't help > at -O1. The root cause

[Bug c/83781] New: [8 Regression] Bootstrap failed on x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83781 Bug ID: 83781 Summary: [8 Regression] Bootstrap failed on x86 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug c++/83780] New: False positive alignment error with -fsanitize=undefined with virtual base

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83780 Bug ID: 83780 Summary: False positive alignment error with -fsanitize=undefined with virtual base Product: gcc Version: 7.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug middle-end/83721] [8 Regression] ICE: in generic_overlap, at gimple-ssa-warn-restrict.c:821

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83721 Aldy Hernandez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c++/83779] Trivial bounds error not detected with -fbounds-check

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83779 --- Comment #2 from Walter Spector --- Ah. Thank you.

Re: [PATCH 0/5] x86: CVE-2017-5715, aka Spectre

On 01/10/2018 06:14 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 02:08:48PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 11:18 AM, Eric Botcazou >> wrote: It's really just a couple of new primitives to emit a jump as a call and one to slam in a

Re: [PATCH 0/5] x86: CVE-2017-5715, aka Spectre

On 01/08/2018 07:23 AM, Alan Modra wrote: > On Sun, Jan 07, 2018 at 04:36:20PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: >> On 01/07/2018 03:58 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> This set of patches for GCC 8 mitigates variant #2 of the speculative >>> execution >>> vulnerabilities on x86 processors identified by

Re: [PATCH 0/3] Add __builtin_load_no_speculate

On 01/09/2018 08:29 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > I'm in two minds about that. There are certainly cases where you might > want to use the generic expansion as part of handling a case where you > have a more standard speculation barrier; in those cases you might want > to emit your

[Bug fortran/68241] [meta-bug] [F03] Deferred-length character

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68241 Bug 68241 depends on bug 82367, which changed state. Bug 82367 Summary: ICE with deferred length string allocate on non-deferred length argument https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82367 What|Removed

[Bug fortran/82367] ICE with deferred length string allocate on non-deferred length argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82367 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/82367] ICE with deferred length string allocate on non-deferred length argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82367 --- Comment #7 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Wed Jan 10 23:55:00 2018 New Revision: 256467 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256467=gcc=rev Log: 2018-01-10 Steven G. Kargl PR

[Bug middle-end/83758] ICE building gccgo on powerpc64le --with-cpu=power8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83758 Ian Lance Taylor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ian at airs dot com --- Comment #2

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 78344 ("ICE on invalid c++ code (tree check: expected tree_list, have error_mark in cp_check_const_attributes, at cp/decl2.c:1347")

Hi again, thus the below is a rather "dull" solution at the level of cplus_decl_attributes itself: cp_check_const_attributes is tweaked to check for error_mark_node at each outer iteration and consistently return a bool, which is then checked by the caller in order to possibly bail out (this

Re: [PATCH 0/3] Add __builtin_load_no_speculate

On 01/09/2018 03:47 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > On 05/01/18 13:08, Alexander Monakov wrote: >> On Fri, 5 Jan 2018, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: >>> This is quite tricky. For ARM we have to have a speculated load. >> >> Sorry, I don't follow. On ARM, it is surprising that

Re: [PATCH] Add PowerPC configuration option --with-long-double-format={ibm,ieee}

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Michael Meissner wrote: > This patch is next in my series of patches to enable us to configure the long > double type on PowerPC systems. This patch is only about the configuration > option. A future patch will contain the multilib support. In general we expect configure

[Bug fortran/82367] ICE with deferred length string allocate on non-deferred length argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82367 --- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Wed Jan 10 23:41:48 2018 New Revision: 256466 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256466=gcc=rev Log: 2018-01-10 Steven G. Kargl PR

Re: [PATCH 1/3] [builtins] Generic support for __builtin_load_no_speculate()

On 01/08/2018 02:03 PM, Bill Schmidt wrote: > > I agree 100% with this approach. I just wanted to raise the point in case > other architectures have different needs. Power can work around this > by just ignoring 4 of the 5 arguments. As long as nobody else needs > *additional* arguments, this

[Ada] Fix ICE on Component_Size clause with atomic type

The compiler aborts on the assignment to an array component if the component type is an atomic type and the array is subject to a Component_Size clause that is too large for atomic access on the target. A proper error message must be issued instead. Tested on x86-64/Linux, applied on the

Re: [PATCH 1/3] [builtins] Generic support for __builtin_load_no_speculate()

On 01/09/2018 10:11 AM, Bill Schmidt wrote: > On Jan 9, 2018, at 4:21 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) > wrote: >> >> On 08/01/18 16:01, Bill Schmidt wrote: >>> On Jan 8, 2018, at 8:06 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) >>> wrote: On 08/01/18

[Committed] PR Fortran/82367 -- Check for NULL pointer.

Thomas Koenig approved the patch in the PR. Regression tested on x86_64-*-freebsd 2018-01-10 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/82367 * resolve.c (resolve_allocate_expr): Check for NULL pointer. 2018-01-10 Steven G. Kargl PR

[Bug fortran/82367] ICE with deferred length string allocate on non-deferred length argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82367 --- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Wed Jan 10 23:26:15 2018 New Revision: 256464 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256464=gcc=rev Log: 2018-01-10 Steven G. Kargl PR

Re: [PATCH 1/3] [builtins] Generic support for __builtin_load_no_speculate()

On 01/08/2018 09:01 AM, Bill Schmidt wrote: > On Jan 8, 2018, at 8:06 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) > wrote: >> >> On 08/01/18 02:20, Bill Schmidt wrote: >>> Hi Richard, >>> >>> Unfortunately, I don't see any way that this will be useful for the ppc >>> targets. We

Re: PR83648

On 01/09/2018 05:57 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > > As Jakub pointed out for the case: > void *f() > { > return __builtin_malloc (0); > } > > The malloc propagation would set f() to malloc. > However AFAIU, malloc(0) returns NULL (?) and the function shouldn't > be marked as malloc ? This

Fix couple of -fdump-ada-spec issues on preprocessor macros

The -fdump-ada-spec currently generates invalid Ada for preprocessor macros containing floating-point constants and string concatenations. Tested on x86-64/Linux, applied on the mainline. 2018-01-10 Eric Botcazou c-family/ * c-ada-spec.c (dump_number): Add

[Bug middle-end/83758] ICE building gccgo on powerpc64le --with-cpu=power8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83758 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||iant at google dot com,

[PATCH] RISC-V: Add naked function support.

This adds naked function support to the RISC-V port. The basic structure was copied from other ports, so there should be nothing unexpected here. This was tested with a riscv64-linux build and make check. There were no regressions. I also hand checked the info docs to make sure the extend.texi

[Bug fortran/82367] ICE with deferred length string allocate on non-deferred length argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82367 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 CC|

[Bug fortran/83093] ICE in fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.c:2266

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83093 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/83093] ICE in fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.c:2266

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83093 --- Comment #7 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Wed Jan 10 22:50:28 2018 New Revision: 256461 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256461=gcc=rev Log: 2018-01-10 Steven G. Kargl Backport from

[Bug c++/83779] Trivial bounds error not detected with -fbounds-check

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83779 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- The manual says: "This is currently only supported by the Fortran front end, where this option defaults to false."

gcc-6-20180110 is now available

Snapshot gcc-6-20180110 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/6-20180110/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 6 SVN branch with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-6

Re: [PATCH] expandargv: fix check for dynamic allocation of argument vector

On 12/30/2017 12:46 PM, Daniel van Gerpen wrote: > > > When the code interpolates the contents of response files, the > argument vector is reallocated to the new size. This only works > if it was dynamically allocated once before -- we do not want to > mess with the argv memory given to us by

[Bug fortran/83093] ICE in fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.c:2266

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83093 --- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Wed Jan 10 22:35:00 2018 New Revision: 256459 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256459=gcc=rev Log: 2018-01-10 Steven G. Kargl Backport from

[Bug c++/83779] New: Trivial bounds error not detected with -fbounds-check

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83779 Bug ID: 83779 Summary: Trivial bounds error not detected with -fbounds-check Product: gcc Version: 5.4.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

Re: [PATCH] PR Fortran/83093 -- Check the type of character length

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 08:41:17AM +0200, Janne Blomqvist wrote: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 3:18 AM, Steve Kargl > wrote: > > When parsing code and implicit typing is used, the > > type of an entity used as a character length is not > > known until after

[Bug c++/83778] New: [8 regression] g++.dg/ext/altivec-cell-2.C fails starting with r256448

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83778 Bug ID: 83778 Summary: [8 regression] g++.dg/ext/altivec-cell-2.C fails starting with r256448 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[PATCH] Add PowerPC configuration option --with-long-double-format={ibm,ieee}

This patch is next in my series of patches to enable us to configure the long double type on PowerPC systems. This patch is only about the configuration option. A future patch will contain the multilib support. This patch needs the previous patch I submitted today (January 10th, 2018) applied

Re: [PATCH], Add checks for -mlong-double-128 in PowerPC ibm/float128 code

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 03:19:49PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote: > As I add support for making -mabi=ieeelongdouble default, I noticed some > issues > in building libstdc++ with the default for the code that supports the > -mlong-double-64 option. These tests add checks for -mlong-double-128

[Bug target/56010] Powerpc, -mcpu=native and -mtune=native use the wrong name for target 7450

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56010 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/83671] Fix for false positive reported by -Wstringop-overflow does not work at -O1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83671 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch Status|ASSIGNED

Re: [PR/middle-end 81897] make tree-ssa-uninit.c handle longer sequences

> OK. > > Sorry for mucking things up and making more work :( > Not at all. I didn't know PHIs were going to behave that way either ;-). Thanks for the review. Committed to trunk. Aldy

[Bug tree-optimization/83671] Fix for false positive reported by -Wstringop-overflow does not work at -O1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83671 --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Wed Jan 10 21:40:14 2018 New Revision: 256457 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256457=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/83671 - Fix for false positive reported by -Wstringop-overflow

[Bug middle-end/81897] [6/7 Regression] spurious -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81897 --- Comment #22 from Aldy Hernandez --- Author: aldyh Date: Wed Jan 10 21:39:20 2018 New Revision: 256456 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256456=gcc=rev Log: PR middle-end/81897 * tree-ssa-uninit.c

[Bug c++/83777] New: Invalid dependent initialization of a static data member.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83777 Bug ID: 83777 Summary: Invalid dependent initialization of a static data member. Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

Re: Implementing p0515 - spaceship operator

Hi Jakub, On 01/10/2018 10:32 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 10:24:00PM +0100, Tim van Deurzen wrote: On 01/10/2018 02:00 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 9 Jan 2018 10:56 p.m., "Tim van Deurzen" wrote: Just to confirm with you, it does make sense to conditionally

[Bug fortran/83093] ICE in fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.c:2266

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83093 --- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Wed Jan 10 21:31:43 2018 New Revision: 256455 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256455=gcc=rev Log: 2018-01-10 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/83093

Re: Implementing p0515 - spaceship operator

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 10:24:00PM +0100, Tim van Deurzen wrote: > On 01/10/2018 02:00 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > On 9 Jan 2018 10:56 p.m., "Tim van Deurzen" wrote: > > > > > > Just to confirm with you, it does make sense to conditionally > > parse the token for operator<=> in

Re: PR81703 and Martin's fix for PR83501

On 01/10/2018 11:42 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > Hi, > I have attached patch for PR81703 rebased on Martin's fix for PR83501 > posted here since both had considerable overlaps: > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-01/msg00180.html > > The patch passes bootstrap+test on

[Bug tree-optimization/83776] [5/6/7/8 Regression] missing -Warray-bounds indexing past the end of a string literal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83776 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Known to work|

Re: Implementing p0515 - spaceship operator

On 01/10/2018 02:00 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 9 Jan 2018 10:56 p.m., "Tim van Deurzen" wrote: Just to confirm with you, it does make sense to conditionally parse the token for operator<=> in libcpp (i.e. only when the cxx standard being used is >=2a)? I'm just wondering if

[Bug tree-optimization/83776] New: missing -Warray-bounds indexing past the end of a string literal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83776 Bug ID: 83776 Summary: missing -Warray-bounds indexing past the end of a string literal Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

Re: [PR/middle-end 81897] make tree-ssa-uninit.c handle longer sequences

On 01/10/2018 10:45 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: >>> @@ -671,11 +668,9 @@ convert_control_dep_chain_into_preds (vec >>> *dep_chains, >>> e = one_cd_chain[j]; >>> guard_bb = e->src; >>> gsi = gsi_last_bb (guard_bb); >>> + /* Ignore empty BBs as they're basically

Re: PR83775

On 01/10/2018 12:21 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > On 01/10/2018 12:01 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: >> Hi, >> The attached patch tries to fix PR83775. >> Validation in progress. >> OK to commit if passes ? > > FWIW, the patch makes sense to me as it simplifies things for > me when debugging using a

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Fix PR83399, ICE During LRA with 2-op rtl pattern for lvx instruction

On 1/10/18 2:38 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > They don't have that name (they don't have any name). > > I often say things like > > (8 unnamed splitters): Likewise. Ok, committed with the following updated ChangeLog which we discussed offline. Thanks! gcc/ PR target/83399

Re: [PATCH PR82096] Fix ICE in int_mode_for_mode, at stor-layout.c:403 with arm-linux-gnueabi

On 01/10/2018 09:25 AM, Sudakshina Das wrote: > Hi Jeff > > On 10/01/18 10:44, Sudakshina Das wrote: >> Hi Jeff >> >> On 09/01/18 23:43, Jeff Law wrote: >>> On 01/05/2018 12:25 PM, Sudakshina Das wrote: Hi Jeff On 05/01/18 18:44, Jeff Law wrote: > On 01/04/2018 08:35 AM,

[Bug rtl-optimization/83575] [8 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed (error: multiple hot/cold transitions found)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83575 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

Re: [PATCH] Add some reproducers for issues found when developing the location-wrappers patch

On 01/09/2018 02:13 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > Whilst developing the location-wrapper patch kit, I accumulated various > source files for which my work-in-progress patched-cc1plus had different > behavior to an unpatched cc1plus: some of these were crashes, others > were erroneous diagnostics. >

Fix buglet in dwarf2out_var_location

Passing a null pointer as argument to formatting functions corresponding to the %s specifier makes the libc choke on old versions of Solaris 10. The attached patchlet fixes a recently added case and thus eliminates: -FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/debug-7.c -gdwarf-2 -O (internal compiler error) -FAIL:

Re: PR82665 - missing value range optimization for memchr

On 01/06/2018 11:58 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: [ Snip ] >> I think with those changes we're probably in good shape. But please >> repost for final approval. > I have the updated the attached version with your suggestions. > Does it look OK ? > Bootstrap+test passes on

[Bug target/83399] Power8 ICE During LRA with 2-op rtl pattern for lvx instruction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83399 --- Comment #13 from Peter Bergner --- Author: bergner Date: Wed Jan 10 20:49:36 2018 New Revision: 256453 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256453=gcc=rev Log: gcc/ PR target/83399 * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (print_operand)

Re: [PATCH] MicroBlaze use default ident output generation

On 01/09/2018 01:26 AM, Nathan Rossi wrote: > On 18 November 2017 at 22:13, Nathan Rossi wrote: >> On 18 November 2017 at 04:25, Jeff Law wrote: >>> On 11/15/2017 11:58 PM, Nathan Rossi wrote: Remove the MicroBlaze specific TARGET_ASM_OUTPUT_IDENT

Re: Fix folding of Inf/NaN comparisons for -ftrapping-math (PR tree-optimization/64811)

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 08:17:08PM +, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: > > > > >+/* x <= +Inf is the same as x == x, i.e. !isnan(x), but this > > > >loses > > > >+ an "invalid" exception. */ > > > >+(if

[Bug ipa/60871] [4.9 Regression] internal compiler error: in possible_polymorphic_call_targets, at ipa-devirt.c:1510

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60871 --- Comment #21 from Neil Kindlon --- Hi, I regret to report that I encountered what appears to be a similar error in gcc version 7.1.0. This is my first bug report here, so please correct me if this information is not helpful or incomplete.

[PATCH] i386: Align stack frame if argument is passed on stack

When a function call is removed, it may become a leaf function. But if argument may be passed on stack, we need to align the stack frame when there is no tail call. Tested on Linux/i686 and Linux/x86-64. OK for trunk? H.J. --- gcc/ PR target/83330 * config/i386/i386.c

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Fix PR83399, ICE During LRA with 2-op rtl pattern for lvx instruction

Hi, On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 01:55:34PM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote: > >> @@ -570,7 +570,7 @@ (define_split > >> ;; The post-reload split requires that we re-permute the source > >> ;; register in case it is still live. > >> (define_split > >> - [(set (match_operand:VSX_D 0 "memory_operand" "")

[Bug target/83761] bfin: ICE: in require, at machmode.h:292

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83761 --- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Could you attached preprocessed source?

RE: [PATCH 5/5][AArch64] fp16fml support

Okay will put on my to-do list for post GCC 8. -Original Message- From: James Greenhalgh [mailto:james.greenha...@arm.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 12:21 PM To: Michael Collison Cc: Richard Sandiford ; GCC Patches

[Bug other/83508] [8 regression][arm] c-c++-common/Wrestrict.c fails since r255836

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83508 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor

[PATCH] suppress -Wstringop-overflow when no-warning is set (PR 83508)

To avoid issuing duplicate warnings for the same function call in the source code the -Wrestrict warning code makes sure the no-warning bit is propagated between trees and GIMPLE and tested before issuing a warning. But the warning also detects some of the same problems as -Wstringop-overflow,

[Bug ipa/60871] [4.9 Regression] internal compiler error: in possible_polymorphic_call_targets, at ipa-devirt.c:1510

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60871 Neil Kindlon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||neil.kindlon at jax dot org --- Comment

  1   2   3   4   >