https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113030
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
So the problem here is the 2 functions check_cpu and check_arch use
the wrong variable to check if an alias is valid for that cpu/arch.
check_cpu uses cpu_optaliases instead of cpu_opt_alias. cpu_optaliases
is an array of index'ed by the cpuname that contains all of the valid aliases
for that cpu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109708
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109708
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:29f931e39f2be86b454a8264b1cd42e4ca3cdcd7
commit r14-8314-g29f931e39f2be86b454a8264b1cd42e4ca3cdcd7
Author: Sandra Loosemore
gcc/ChangeLog
PR c/109708
* doc/invoke.texi (Warning Options): Fix broken example and
clean up/reorganize the others. Also describe what the short-form
options mean.
---
gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 56 +++--
1 file changed, 34
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109112
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eric-bugs at omnifarious dot
org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113527
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113527
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113527
Bug ID: 113527
Summary: Missed optimization [[assume]] attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110935
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-01-21
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113239
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Why the warning only happens with the 2 elements in frame_t, I have no idea
really since there seems not to be any changes in the final IR (except for an
extra load/store for those 2 elements).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113239
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note the missed optimization was there in GCC 12, just the diagnostic was not.
We have:
```
_4 = MEM[(const unsigned char * const &)current_frame__2(D) + 24];
_7 = MEM[(const unsigned char * const
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113526
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||inline-asm, ra,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113526
Bug ID: 113526
Summary: [14 Regression ARM] gcc.target/arm/asm-flag-1.c fails
since gcc-14-7248-g76bc70387d9
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024, Martin Uecker wrote:
> C23: Fix ICE for composite type for structs with unsigned bitfields [PR113492]
>
> This patch fixes a bug when forming a composite type from structs that
> contain an unsigned bitfield declared with int while using
> -funsigned-bitfields.
> In
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, OK for trunk?
-- >8 --
Currently, importing a namespace declarations marks it as imported, and
so marks it as originating from the module that it was imported from.
This is usually harmless, but causes problems with nested namespaces.
In the
Based on what I am reading here, I can either do the DCO path or the copy
right form path? Or is it both, where I send in the copy right forms and
then on every commit I put the DCO?
On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 3:40 PM Harald Anlauf wrote:
> Am 20.01.24 um 21:37 schrieb Jerry D:
> > On 1/20/24
Snapshot gcc-13-20240120 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13-20240120/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 13 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109708
--- Comment #2 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I was wondering if some subsequent patch might have caused the first example to
regress rather than this being a documentation bug, but it did not give a
diagnostic at the time the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82943
--- Comment #17 from Steve Kargl ---
On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 09:37:17PM +, jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82943
>
> --- Comment #16 from Jerry DeLisle ---
> (In reply to Alexander
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113525
Mikołaj Piróg changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |web
--- Comment #3 from Mikołaj Piróg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113525
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.8.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113525
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57360
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Tested on hppa-unknown-linux-gnu. Committed to trunk.
Dave
---
Remove several xfails for 32-bit hppa*-*-*
These arise because 32-bit ELF targets were changed from
callee copies to caller copies.
2024-01-20 John David Anglin
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.dg/ipa/iinline-4.c:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113525
Bug ID: 113525
Summary: GCC does not recognize "-fdump-rtl-sibling" command
line option
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Dear all,
here's the first part of an attempt to fix issues with optional
dummy arguments as actual arguments to optional dummies. This patch
rectifies the case of scalar dummies with the VALUE attribute,
which in gfortran's argument passing convention are passed on the
stack when they are of
Tested on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11. Committed to trunk.
Dave
---
Increase timeout by 2 in libgomp.fortran/alloc-comp-3.f90 on hppa*-*-*
2024-01-20 John David Anglin
libgomp/ChangeLog:
* testsuite/libgomp.fortran/alloc-comp-3.f90: Increase
timeout by 2 on hppa*-*-*.
diff --git
Am 20.01.24 um 21:37 schrieb Jerry D:
On 1/20/24 12:08 PM, Harald Anlauf wrote:
Am 20.01.24 um 20:08 schrieb Jerry D:
On 1/20/24 10:46 AM, Alexander Westbrooks wrote:
Hello and Happy New Year!
I wanted to follow up on this patch I made to address PR82943 for
GFortran. Has anyone had a chance
Tested on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11. Committed to trunk.
Dave
---
Don't run libgomp.c/simd-math-1.c on hppa*-*-hpux*
hppa*-*-hpux* lacks necessary math functions.
2024-01-20 John David Anglin
libgomp/ChangeLog:
* testsuite/libgomp.c/simd-math-1.c: Don't run on
hppa*-*-hpux*.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82943
--- Comment #16 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Alexander Westbrooks from comment #15)
> Created attachment 57176 [details]
> Proposed Patch to fix PR82943, PR86148, PR86268
I am attempting to roll with this. Steve, do you know where the
Tested on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11. Committed to trunk.
Dave
---
xfail scan-tree-dump-times checks on hppa*64*-*-* in gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-13.c
2024-01-20 John David Anglin
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-13.c: xfail scan-tree-dump-times
checks on hppa*64*-*-*.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86656
Bug 86656 depends on bug 111291, which changed state.
Bug 111291 Summary: ASAN error: heap-use-after-free gcc/fortran/parse.cc:359 in
decode_statement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111291
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111291
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
Tested on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11. Committed to trunk.
Dave
---
Require target lra in gcc.dg/torture/pr110422.c
LRA is required for asm goto.
2024-01-20 John David Anglin
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.dg/torture/pr110422.c: Require target lra.
diff --git
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113490
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed a fix on the mailing list:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6cytv3eyy.fsf@/T/#u
Hi,
When the check for exceeding param_ipa_cp_value_list_size limit was
modified to be ignored for generating values from self-recursive
calls, it should have been changed from equal to, to equals toor is
greater than. This omission manifests itself as PR 113490.
When I examined the condition I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94629
--- Comment #28 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #27)
> The original article checked gcc-10.
> gcc-13 is checked in the following article:
>
> https://pvs-studio.com/en/blog/posts/cpp/1067/
>
> I suspect it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111410
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111410
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7db802d972e622242d015ecd5a8cecf63e69a45a
commit r14-8307-g7db802d972e622242d015ecd5a8cecf63e69a45a
Author: Marek Polacek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104094
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yeah, maybe this is just a dup of my older bug report. It's been frustrating me
for years.
And obviously I meant "hash collision" above not "has collision" :-)
On 1/20/24 12:08 PM, Harald Anlauf wrote:
Am 20.01.24 um 20:08 schrieb Jerry D:
On 1/20/24 10:46 AM, Alexander Westbrooks wrote:
Hello and Happy New Year!
I wanted to follow up on this patch I made to address PR82943 for
GFortran. Has anyone had a chance to review it?
Thanks,
Alexander
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94629
--- Comment #27 from David Binderman ---
The original article checked gcc-10.
gcc-13 is checked in the following article:
https://pvs-studio.com/en/blog/posts/cpp/1067/
I suspect it would be most unwise if any release of gcc after 13
All,
I have attached a new patch to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
which addresses the following issues.
PR113152 -- implement half-cycle trigonometric functions
PR113412 -- better error message for atan(y,x)
PR113413 -- implement atand(y,x)
The patch clocks in at 3488
Am 20.01.24 um 20:08 schrieb Jerry D:
On 1/20/24 10:46 AM, Alexander Westbrooks wrote:
Hello and Happy New Year!
I wanted to follow up on this patch I made to address PR82943 for
GFortran. Has anyone had a chance to review it?
Thanks,
Alexander Westbrooks
Inserting myself in here just a
On 1/20/24 11:08 AM, Jerry D wrote:
On 1/20/24 10:46 AM, Alexander Westbrooks wrote:
Hello and Happy New Year!
I wanted to follow up on this patch I made to address PR82943 for
GFortran. Has anyone had a chance to review it?
Thanks,
Alexander Westbrooks
Inserting myself in here just a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 109744, which changed state.
Bug 109744 Summary: mesa/panvk: bogus Warray-bounds on gcc 12.2, fixed in 13
branch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109744
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109744
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110705
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:17473a93cff5340acfc293299a2f9a5857a50909
commit r14-8306-g17473a93cff5340acfc293299a2f9a5857a50909
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date:
This testcase was fixed with r13-1695-gb0f02eeb906b63 which
added an Ada testcase for the issue but adding a C testcase
is a good idea and that is what this does.
Committed after making sure it passes on x86_64-linux-gnu.
PR ipa/110705
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113306
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113448
--- Comment #2 from John David Anglin ---
The tests fail on hppa-unknown-linux-gnu:
FAIL: libgomp.c/alloc-pinned-1.c execution test
FAIL: libgomp.c/alloc-pinned-2.c execution test
FAIL: libgomp.c/alloc-pinned-3.c execution test
FAIL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #56949|0 |1
is obsolete|
On 1/20/24 10:46 AM, Alexander Westbrooks wrote:
Hello and Happy New Year!
I wanted to follow up on this patch I made to address PR82943 for
GFortran. Has anyone had a chance to review it?
Thanks,
Alexander Westbrooks
Inserting myself in here just a little bit. I will apply and test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86268
Alexander Westbrooks changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ctechnodev at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86148
Alexander Westbrooks changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ctechnodev at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57360
--- Comment #5 from Walter Spector ---
IMHO this should be a "surprising" warning when -Wsurprising is specified.
The message should suggest adding an explicit SAVE attribute to make the code
clear.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82943
--- Comment #15 from Alexander Westbrooks ---
Created attachment 57176
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57176=edit
Proposed Patch to fix PR82943, PR86148, PR86268
Hello and Happy New Year!
I wanted to follow up on this patch I made to address PR82943 for GFortran.
Has anyone had a chance to review it?
Thanks,
Alexander Westbrooks
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 10:38 PM Alexander Westbrooks
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have finished my testing, and updated my patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104094
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> _Pattern is used in lazy_split_view, split_view and join_view, none of which
> are used at all by `ranges::to`. Is there some has collision going on here
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113026
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
C23: Fix ICE for composite type for structs with unsigned bitfields [PR113492]
This patch fixes a bug when forming a composite type from structs that
contain an unsigned bitfield declared with int while using -funsigned-bitfields.
In such structs the unsigned integer type was not compatible
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113524
Bug ID: 113524
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr113026-1.c -O3
-fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops
-ftracer -finline-functions (test for bogus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111693
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112804
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112734
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110265
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110205
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109811
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110029
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109615
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109253
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108640
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108521
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108470
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107839
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106682
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106516
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106229
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106147
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105525
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104401
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102998
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104355
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99888
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99701
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96388
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96176
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95424
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94629
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94253
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86724
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84645
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87699
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113463
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113102
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30271
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112941
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113491
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
1 - 100 of 171 matches
Mail list logo
