On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 10:00 PM Michael Collison wrote:
>
> Okay there seems to be consensus on using constant_lower_bound (vf), but
> I don't understand how that is a replacement for "vf.is_constant ()"? In
> one case we are checking if "vf" is a constant, on the other we are
> asking for the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107561
--- Comment #22 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #20)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16)
> > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #15)
> > > where if I understand you correctly, bar () is not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107561
--- Comment #21 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #19)
> And on
> void bar (void);
> struct X {
> X (int);
> int i;
> int j;
> void baz (int);
> };
>
> X::X(int k)
> {
> i = k;
> bar ();
> j = i !=
On Wed, 1 Mar 2023, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/1/23 08:09, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 01:07:02PM +, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> When combining -g1 with -flto we run into the DIE location annotation
> >> machinery for globals calling dwarf2out_late_global_decl but not
>
This came up in a conversation with Jan. (We already have a link a bit
earlier on that page.)
Pushed.
Gerald
---
htdocs/testing/index.html | 6 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/htdocs/testing/index.html b/htdocs/testing/index.html
index bd6219ab..012ac287
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106770
--- Comment #9 from Surya Kumari Jangala ---
RTL after dfinit pass for the vec_sub() and the vec_extract():
(insn 13 12 14 2 (set (reg:V2DI 132 [ vrD.3952 ])
(minus:V2DI (subreg:V2DI (reg:V2DF 117 [ _1 ]) 0)
(subreg:V2DI
On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 7:14 PM Costas Argyris via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> It seems that the win32_spawn function in libiberty/pex-win32.c is leaking
> the cmdline buffer in 2/3 exit scenarios (it is only free'd in 1/3).The
> problem here is that the cleanup code is written 3 times, one
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108984
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106770
--- Comment #8 from Surya Kumari Jangala ---
While the first two xxpermdi's are fine, the 3rd one is a bug. It is incorrect.
Here is the C code inlined into assembly:
_Z4cmp2dd:
.LFB1:
.cfi_startproc
// vector double va =
Thanks all for help.
I tried and validated the way Richard mentioned, it works well as expected.
Meanwhile, I updated the PR as below (I take the in-reply-to option for
send-email but looks failed).
Could you please help to review continuously?
Additionally, I would like to learn if we can land
From: Pan Li
Fix the bug of the rvv bool mode precision with the adjustment.
The bits size of vbool*_t will be adjusted to
[1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64] according to the rvv spec 1.0 isa. The
adjusted mode precison of vbool*_t will help underlying pass to
make
Just forget about this patch, bad idea.
The key_type might have additional data not used for the comparison.
This data would not be preserved if we were inserting the already stored
equivalent key instead of the user provided.
On 22/02/23 07:08, François Dumont wrote:
This one is a
Bernhard Reutner-Fischer writes:
> libgo/runtime/go-setenv.c|6 ++
> libgo/runtime/go-unsetenv.c |3 +--
Files in the libgo directory are mirrored from upstream sources, as
described in libgo/README.gcc. Please don't change them in the gcc
repository. Thanks.
Ian
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108974
Thomas Rodgers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108974
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Rodgers ---
(In reply to Jiang An from comment #3)
> > is_nothrow_invocable_v shall be true.
>
> If implementation divergence is not intendedly permitted, I don't think it
> makes much sense to introduce UB in this
For case like belowi test.c:
1:int foo(char c)
2:{
3: return ((c >= 'A' && c <= 'Z')
4: || (c >= 'a' && c <= 'z')
5: || (c >= '0' && c <='0'));}
the generated line number is incorrect for condition c>='A' of block 2:
Thus correct the condition op0 location.
gcno diff before and
When spliting edge with self loop, the split edge should be placed just next to
the edge_in->src, otherwise it may generate different position latch bbs for
two consecutive self loops. For details, please refer to:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93680#c4
Regression tested pass on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108974
Jiang An changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||de34 at live dot cn
--- Comment #3 from
Hi Haochen,
on 2023/3/1 15:09, HAO CHEN GUI wrote:
> Hi,
> The patch escalates the failure when Hollerith constant to real conversion
> fails in native_interpret_expr. It finally reports an "Unclassifiable
> statement" error.
>
> The patch of pr95450 added a verification for
Committed as obvious. FWIW, I'm on the side that emitting
the warning when the reason is just that it's the default
layout, is bad. A discussion took place years ago when the
warning was added.
-- >8 --
For targets where the byte-wise structure element layout is
the same as for
On 3/1/23 4:07 PM, Steve Kargl via Fortran wrote:
On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 10:28:56PM +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Fortran
wrote:
libgfortran/caf/single.c |6 ++
libgfortran/io/async.c |6 ++
libgfortran/io/format.c |3 +--
Trivia: I copied that ASMNAME construct from the
18-year-minus-a-month old commit of r0-66993-gc5221531453e02,
where it fixed a similar testsuite error. Committed as obvious.
-- >8 --
This fixes:
Running /x/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/dg.exp ...
...
FAIL: gcc.dg/attr-copy-6.c (test for excess
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108865
--- Comment #14 from Andrew Pinski ---
So the problem is host_extra_objs gets included in libbackend.a but since
nothing references it inside the static library, it does not get linked into
the cc1 ...
Looks like other changes are needed to
On Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 01:07:32AM +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 07:39:40 -0800
> Steve Kargl via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> > In fact, Hollerith should be hidden behind a -fallow-hollerith
> > option and added to -std=legacy.
>
> While i'd be all for that, in my mind
> Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2023 01:37:12 +0100
> From: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 00:54:33 +0100
> Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>
> > > Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2023 00:23:36 +0100
> > > From: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> >
> > > On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 17:02:31 +0100
> > > Hans-Peter Nilsson via
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108865
--- Comment #13 from Costas Argyris ---
With the changes in the attached patch, the utf8 object file gets linked into
gcc.exe but not cc1.exe - How can I achieve this?Basically this object file
has to be linked pretty much in every
On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 3:52 PM Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 14:59:44 -0800
> Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 1:31 PM Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Fortran
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > Mere cosmetics.
> > >
> > > - if (foo != NULL)
> > >
On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 00:54:33 +0100
Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2023 00:23:36 +0100
> > From: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
>
> > On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 17:02:31 +0100
> > Hans-Peter Nilsson via Gcc-patches wrote:
> >
> > > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> > > > Date: Wed, 1 Mar
On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 07:39:40 -0800
Steve Kargl via Gcc-patches wrote:
> In fact, Hollerith should be hidden behind a -fallow-hollerith
> option and added to -std=legacy.
While i'd be all for that, in my mind this will block off literally all
consultants and quite some scientists unless we error
On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 10:28:56PM +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Fortran
wrote:
> libgfortran/caf/single.c |6 ++
> libgfortran/io/async.c |6 ++
> libgfortran/io/format.c |3 +--
> libgfortran/io/transfer.c|6 ++
> libgfortran/io/unix.c
On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 10:40:15 +0100
Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please CC fortran@gcc for Fortran patches.
> > --- a/gcc/fortran/target-memory.cc
> > +++ b/gcc/fortran/target-memory.cc
> > @@ -417,10 +417,13 @@ gfc_interpret_float (int kind, unsigned char *buffer,
> > size_t buffer_size,
> >
> Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2023 00:23:36 +0100
> From: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 17:02:31 +0100
> Hans-Peter Nilsson via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> > > Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2023 16:36:46 +0100
> >
> > > ... this is what I intend to commit later
> > >
On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 14:59:44 -0800
Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 1:31 PM Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Fortran
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > Mere cosmetics.
> >
> > - if (foo != NULL)
> > free (foo);
> >
> > With the caveat that coccinelle ruins replacement whitespace or i'm
>
On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 03:25:00PM -0800, Andrew Pinski via Gcc-patches wrote:
> The problem here is after r13-4748-g2a27ae32fabf85, in some
> cases we were calling inform without a corresponding warning.
> This changes the logic such that we only cause that to happen
> if there was a warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107574
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11/12/13 Regression]|[10/11/12 Regression] ICE:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107574
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:de81e06273c613d7e06cbe2c8d9e72826c638056
commit r13-6400-gde81e06273c613d7e06cbe2c8d9e72826c638056
Author: Marek Polacek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108896
--- Comment #6 from Kees Cook ---
I really want to avoid the changes to sizeof() -- this will confuse a lot of
other things. Sizeof is expected to be a constant expression, for example.
I think the attribute is best since it avoids colliding
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108980
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
The problem here is after r13-4748-g2a27ae32fabf85, in some
cases we were calling inform without a corresponding warning.
This changes the logic such that we only cause that to happen
if there was a warning happened before hand.
OK? Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux-gnu with no regressions.
On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 17:02:31 +0100
Hans-Peter Nilsson via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> > Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2023 16:36:46 +0100
>
> > ... this is what I intend to commit later
> > today, just keeping the added comment as brief as
> > reasonable:
>
> Except I see the hook
Hi Berke,
I had the same problem last year. Many IDEs don't really work for
developing gcc. Most here probably use either emacs or vim. If you want
to use an IDE, you might have to do some hacks.
The oldschool indentation style of gcc (mix of tab and spaces) is not
widely supported.
On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 1:31 PM Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Fortran
wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Mere cosmetics.
>
> - if (foo != NULL)
> free (foo);
>
> With the caveat that coccinelle ruins replacement whitespace or i'm
> uneducated enough to be unable to _not_ run the diff through
> sed -e
On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 22:58:59 +0100
Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 22:28:56 +0100
> Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>
> > Remarks:
> > 1) We should do this in if-conversion (?) on our own.
> >I suppose. Independently of -fdelete-null-pointer-checks
>
> and iff we can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108896
--- Comment #5 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> > Iff only (GNU) C would accept the following ...
> >
> > struct foo {
> > ...
> > unsigned
>> Does the eventual value set by ADJUST_BYTESIZE equal the real number of
>> bytes loaded by vlm.v and stored by vstm.v (after the appropriate vsetvl)?
>> Or is the GCC size larger in some cases than the number of bytes
>> loaded and stored?
For VNx1BI,VNx2BI,VNx4BI,VNx8BI, we allocate the larger
On 2/27/23 18:51, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 06:26:04PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
The following patch instead adds a target hook which allows the backend
to temporarily tweak registered types such that emit_support_tinfos
emits whatever is needed.
Why handle these types
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107565
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #6 from David
On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 04:44:12PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/1/23 16:40, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 04:30:16PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > On 3/1/23 15:33, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > > -Wmismatched-tags warns about the (harmless) struct/class mismatch.
> > > >
Previously, if the analyzer saw a call to a non-pure and non-const
built-in function that it didn't have explicit knowledge of the behavior
of, it would fall back to assuming that the builtin could have arbitrary
behavior, similar to a function defined outside of the current TU.
However, this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108988
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:24ebc5404b88b765221b551dc5288f6d64ba3dc7
commit r13-6398-g24ebc5404b88b765221b551dc5288f6d64ba3dc7
Author: David Malcolm
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107565
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:24ebc5404b88b765221b551dc5288f6d64ba3dc7
commit r13-6398-g24ebc5404b88b765221b551dc5288f6d64ba3dc7
Author: David Malcolm
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108988
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||internal-improvement
On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 22:28:56 +0100
Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> Remarks:
> 1) We should do this in if-conversion (?) on our own.
>I suppose. Independently of -fdelete-null-pointer-checks
and iff we can prove that ptr was NULL when passed to free(ptr) then we
can elide the call, of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108988
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Replacement stmt is created here:
(gdb) bt
#0 gimple_set_op (gs=, i=1, op=) at ../../src/gcc/gimple.h:2629
#1 0x01093a6f in gimple_build_call_1 (fn=,
nargs=4) at ../../src/gcc/gimple.cc:234
#2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108988
Bug ID: 108988
Summary: gimple_fold_builtin_fputs doesn't preserve
gimple_builtin_call_types_compatible_p
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
On 2/7/23 11:46, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Sun, Feb 05, 2023 at 05:25:25PM -0800, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 1/24/23 17:49, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 03:19:54PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 1/19/23 21:03, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 01:02:02PM -0500, Jason
On 3/1/23 16:40, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 04:30:16PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 3/1/23 15:33, Marek Polacek wrote:
-Wmismatched-tags warns about the (harmless) struct/class mismatch.
For, e.g.,
template struct A { };
class A a;
it works by adding A to the
On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 04:30:16PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/1/23 15:33, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > -Wmismatched-tags warns about the (harmless) struct/class mismatch.
> > For, e.g.,
> >
> >template struct A { };
> >class A a;
> >
> > it works by adding A to the class2loc hash
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106856
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 54567
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54567=edit
Updated patch
The original patches started to bit-rot, so here is an updated version.
The current
On 2/21/23 19:05, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Sun, 19 Feb 2023, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 2/15/23 12:11, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2023, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 2/15/23 09:21, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Tue, 14 Feb 2023, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 2/13/23 09:23, Patrick Palka wrote:
[N.B.
On 3/1/23 15:33, Marek Polacek wrote:
-Wmismatched-tags warns about the (harmless) struct/class mismatch.
For, e.g.,
template struct A { };
class A a;
it works by adding A to the class2loc hash table while parsing the
class-head and then, while parsing the elaborate type-specifier, we
Hi!
Mere cosmetics.
- if (foo != NULL)
free (foo);
With the caveat that coccinelle ruins replacement whitespace or i'm
uneducated enough to be unable to _not_ run the diff through
sed -e 's/^+\([[:space:]]*\)free(/+\1free (/'
at least. If anybody knows how to improve replacement
Pushed to trunk.
-- >8 --
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* include/bits/cow_string.h: Fix typo in comment.
---
libstdc++-v3/include/bits/cow_string.h | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/cow_string.h
Tested x86_64-linux and powerpc-aix. Pushed to trunk.
-- >8 --
This is consistent with the behaviour of glibc, which assumes UTC when
/etc/localtime and TZ do not identify a valid time zone. The fallback
tzdb used when no valid tzdata exists always contains the UTC zone, so
this change means we
On 2/2/23 19:28, Marek Polacek wrote:
Here we're attempting to evaluate a PTRMEM_CST in a class that hasn't
been completed yet, but that doesn't work:
/* We can't lower this until the class is complete. */
if (!COMPLETE_TYPE_P (DECL_CONTEXT (member)))
return cst;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108973
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Sufficiently narrow |[13 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108973
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic,
|
Okay there seems to be consensus on using constant_lower_bound (vf), but
I don't understand how that is a replacement for "vf.is_constant ()"? In
one case we are checking if "vf" is a constant, on the other we are
asking for the lower bound. For the crash in question
"constant_lower_bound (vf)
Ping.
On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 07:28:25PM -0500, Marek Polacek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Here we're attempting to evaluate a PTRMEM_CST in a class that hasn't
> been completed yet, but that doesn't work:
>
> /* We can't lower this until the class is complete. */
> if
Ping.
On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 11:46:10AM -0500, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 05, 2023 at 05:25:25PM -0800, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > On 1/24/23 17:49, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 03:19:54PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > > On 1/19/23 21:03, Marek Polacek wrote:
> >
-Wmismatched-tags warns about the (harmless) struct/class mismatch.
For, e.g.,
template struct A { };
class A a;
it works by adding A to the class2loc hash table while parsing the
class-head and then, while parsing the elaborate type-specifier, we
add A. At the end of c_parse_file we go
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108980
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
On 3/1/23 08:09, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 01:07:02PM +, Richard Biener wrote:
When combining -g1 with -flto we run into the DIE location annotation
machinery for globals calling dwarf2out_late_global_decl but not
having any early generated DIE for function scope statics.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108987
--- Comment #1 from Vineet Gupta ---
Fix posted here
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-March/613106.html
Essentially:
case PLUS:
if (TARGET_ZBA
&& mode == word_mode
&& GET_CODE (XEXP (x, 0)) == MULT
On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 at 20:53, Vineet Gupta wrote:
>
> This showed up as dynamic icount regression in SPEC 531.deepsjeng with
> upstream
> gcc (vs. gcc 12.2). gcc was resorting to synthetic multiply using shift+add(s)
> even when multiply had clear cost benefit.
>
> |000133b8
This showed up as dynamic icount regression in SPEC 531.deepsjeng with upstream
gcc (vs. gcc 12.2). gcc was resorting to synthetic multiply using shift+add(s)
even when multiply had clear cost benefit.
|000133b8 :
| 133b8: srl a3,a1,s6
| 133bc: and a3,a3,s5
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108987
Bug ID: 108987
Summary: [13 Regression] RISC-V: shiftadd cost model bug
needlessly preferring syth_multiply
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
On Wed, 1 Mar 2023, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/1/23 12:20, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > On Wed, 1 Mar 2023, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >
> > > On 3/1/23 10:32, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 27 Feb 2023, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On 2/22/23 14:45, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > > > > >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108219
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||13.0
Summary|[12/13
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108218
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:096f034a8f5df41f610e62c1592fb90a3f551cd5
commit r13-6395-g096f034a8f5df41f610e62c1592fb90a3f551cd5
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108219
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:096f034a8f5df41f610e62c1592fb90a3f551cd5
commit r13-6395-g096f034a8f5df41f610e62c1592fb90a3f551cd5
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108980
--- Comment #9 from Thiago Macieira ---
Ah, got it. That also explains why I couldn't find anything wrong with my code,
and nothing I did that could likely be it made the warning go away.
Thanks for the quick turnaround.
Hello Kristiyan,
On Wed, Feb 08 2023, Kristiyan Stoimenov via Gcc wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to ask whether I could be part of the upcoming GSoC. I have
> been wanting to contribute to the project for some time now and I think
> that this would be a nice opportunity for that.
>
> I have
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108980
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Thiago Macieira from comment #7)
> The duplicate "note:" disappeared. But now there's no warning at all on the
> same file, with the same options. Was that intended?
Yes that was the intent of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108986
--- Comment #1 from Keith Thompson ---
A similar case. The warning refers to the size in bytes, but unlike
the first case it's not incorrect, though referring to the length
would IMHO be clearer.
Note also that the warning appears twice. It
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108986
Bug ID: 108986
Summary: Incorrect warning for [static] array parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108980
--- Comment #7 from Thiago Macieira ---
The duplicate "note:" disappeared. But now there's no warning at all on the
same file, with the same options. Was that intended?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92639
--- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 05:51:29PM +, cessenat at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92639
>
> --- Comment #2 from Olivier Cessenat ---
> integer(kind=4) valid range is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92639
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
---
On Sat, Jan 21, 2023 at 04:31:52PM +, i.nixman--- via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > Why?
>
> could you explain which of the nine lines are you talking about?
All the uselessly changed ones.
> > As for the rest, it would help if you could list the exact glibc commits
> > which you've ported to
On Wed, 2023-03-01 at 20:59 +0300, Berke Yavas via Gcc wrote:
> One thing I haven't figured out yet, how can I debug C++ frontend(or
> any other language frontend) with CLion. If anybody managed to do
> this (or using another IDE), could you please share your settings
> with me?
Since CLion is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108982
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And please stop reopening this bugzilla bug. There is no bug on the GCC side,
and this should be handled on gcc-help mailing list, not here.
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew Carlotti
> Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 4:58 PM
> To: Andrew MacLeod
> Cc: Tamar Christina ; Richard Biener
> ; Richard Sandiford ;
> Tamar Christina via Gcc-patches ; nd
> ; j...@ventanamicro.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2]middle-end: Fix wrong
Hi Berke,
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to set up my environment for the upcoming google summer of
> code. One thing I haven't figured out yet, how can I debug C++ frontend(or
> any other language frontend) with CLion. If anybody managed to do this(or
> using another IDE), could you please share your
Stack protector needs a guard value on the stack and change the stack
layout. So we need to disable it for those tests, to avoid test failure
with --enable-default-ssp.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.target/aarch64/shrink_wrap_1.c (dg-options): Add
-fno-stack-protector.
Stack protector influence code generation and cause function body checks
fail.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.target/aarch64/pr103147-10.c (dg-options): Add
-fno-stack-protector.
* g++.target/aarch64/pr103147-10.C: Likewise.
---
Hi
It seems that the win32_spawn function in libiberty/pex-win32.c is leaking
the cmdline buffer in 2/3 exit scenarios (it is only free'd in 1/3).The
problem here is that the cleanup code is written 3 times, one at each exit
scenario.
The proposed attached refactoring has the cleanup code
Hi Berke,
Hi,
I am trying to set up my environment for the upcoming google summer of
code. One thing I haven't figured out yet, how can I debug C++ frontend(or
any other language frontend) with CLion. If anybody managed to do this(or
using another IDE), could you please share your settings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108982
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
These tests set large code model with -mcmodel=large or target pragma for
AArch64. But if GCC is configured with --enable-default-pie, it triggers
"sorry: unimplemented: code model large with -fpic". Disable PIE to make
avoid the issue.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR testsuite/70150
1 - 100 of 256 matches
Mail list logo
