https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65269
Bug ID: 65269
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65268
Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65267
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org ---
*** Bug 65268 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63890
--- Comment #15 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Substantially changing code gen 2 days before release with inadequate testing
is slightly dangerous; seem more appropriate for stage 1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63890
--- Comment #16 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
Substantially changing code gen 2 days before release with inadequate testing
is slightly dangerous; seem more appropriate for stage 1.
What release you have in mind?
Honza
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65006
--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
What is status of this bug? I believe it was analyzed and fixed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65263
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65267
Bug ID: 65267
Summary: While compiling gcc/errors.c, invalid link options
passed to Solaris Linker
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61916
--- Comment #7 from Stephen Kitt steve at sk2 dot org ---
Created attachment 34913
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34913action=edit
Pre-processed source reproducing the bug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63731
--- Comment #28 from Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com ---
Currently there is no reasonable way to use the Go DNS resolver when using
gccgo. Any program that uses the net package will call glibc for DNS
resolution, meaning that you are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65249
--- Comment #12 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org ---
It turned out that the patch in c#10 easily produces wrong codes.
Now I'm testing another adhoc fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65233
--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yep, this seems resonable patch to me. It is OK if it passes testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64988
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
And concerning Jakub's question, get_alias_target will ICE when the target does
not exist :).
This is the case in corner situation (call graph construction and function
removal -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65269
--- Comment #1 from GK hgkamath at hotmail dot com ---
/vol/apps/conceptgcc/20150220/bin/g++ -v -save-temps -std=c++1z ~/tmp/a.cc
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/vol/apps/conceptgcc/20150220/bin/gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65130
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64988
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The problem here is that inliner dissolves comdat group it should not.
We inline comdat local function and the fact we can remove it from program does
not mean we can dissolve the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64988
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
And concerning Jakub's question, get_alias_target will ICE when the target does
not exist :) This can be the case during function removal that use
dissolve_comdat_group. But it is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65268
Bug ID: 65268
Summary: While compiling gcc/errors.c, invalid link options
passed to Solaris Linker
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63373
--- Comment #5 from Stephen Kitt steve at sk2 dot org ---
Oops sorry, wrong bug...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63373
Stephen Kitt steve at sk2 dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steve at sk2 dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55295
--- Comment #12 from Manu Evans turkeyman at gmail dot com ---
Hey, I'm still following this with great interest.
Is it possible to make an intrinsic for this instruction so it can be issued at
will?
What I'm still more interested in at this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63890
--- Comment #18 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
I'm happy to defer the question to the person that reviews the patch for the
tree. I'd like a codegen type person that understands the proposed change to
review it. They may feel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65233
--- Comment #8 from Matthias Klose doko at gcc dot gnu.org ---
this is the testcase from ardour3:
$ g++ -c -g -O3 -fPIC track3.ii
track3.ii: In member function 'void F::apply(void (Track::*)(T, void*), T,
void*) [with T = bool]':
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65258
Bug ID: 65258
Summary: Wrong array bounds warning
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65259
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65259
--- Comment #2 from Arnaud Charlet charlet at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: charlet
Date: Sun Mar 1 10:16:20 2015
New Revision: 221087
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221087root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR ada/65259
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65260
Bug ID: 65260
Summary: [SH] Convert add add sub - sub sub sub
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65249
--- Comment #8 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 34910
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34910action=edit
Various R0 pre-alloc splits (2)
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #7)
Created
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65261
Bug ID: 65261
Summary: [5 Regression] bootstrap-ubsan ppc64le:
gcc/libcpp/lex.c:552:30: runtime error: load of
misaligned address 0x01002172dfc6 for type 'const
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65261
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Maybe just adding __attribute__ ((no_sanitize_undefined)) to the function
is the right solution it this case?
for gcc version 5.0.0 20150301 (experimental) (GCC) configured with Ada
compiler enabled
I did not have this problem with
gcc version 5.0.0 20150202 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65233
--- Comment #10 from Matthias Klose doko at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 34909
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34909action=edit
test case for aarch64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65233
Matthias Klose doko at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|arm-linux-gnueabihf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65262
Bug ID: 65262
Summary: Link time optimization breaks use
__attribute__((section(...))) in templates
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65259
Arnaud Charlet charlet at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65067
--- Comment #6 from Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de ---
Ok, I think I understand now, what is wrong.
r216989 did just cause the strict-alignment code path to be executed,
which was not the case before.
Actually the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65249
--- Comment #9 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #8)
Kaz, maybe you have an idea how to quick fix this problem? I'm too obsessed
with the r0-prealloc idea at the moment and can't see
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65249
--- Comment #10 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org ---
On second thought, we could fix this with an adhoc way.
I'm testing the following patch for 4.9.
diff --git a/config/sh/sh.md b/config/sh/sh.md
index d957e55..93fd84e 100644
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65263
Bug ID: 65263
Summary: [5 Regression] ICE (error: unrecognizable insn / in
insn_min_length, at config/rs6000/rs6000.md) on
powerpc64le-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63890
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61916
Stephen Kitt steve at sk2 dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steve at sk2 dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63890
--- Comment #17 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I'm happy to defer the question to the person that reviews the patch for the
tree. I'd like a codegen type person that understands the proposed change to
review it. They may
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65270
Bug ID: 65270
Summary: [5 regression] ICF needs to match TYPE attributes on
memory accesses
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65263
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hmm, this seems interesting. The revision enabled more merging in ICF. The
expansion dies in output MI thunk that is not ICF produced thunk. So only
conclussion I can think of is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65263
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Semantic equality hit:bool VirtualMatriceR::m_fn1(int) const [with R =
int]-virtual bool Cint::m_fn1(int) const
Assembler symbol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65272
--- Comment #1 from James Michael DuPont JamesMikeDuPont at googlemail dot
com ---
output is :
test.go:6:8: error: expected type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65272
Bug ID: 65272
Summary: switch on type of interface failing
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: go
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65272
--- Comment #2 from James Michael DuPont JamesMikeDuPont at googlemail dot
com ---
also on github https://github.com/golang/go/issues/10047
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65273
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65233
Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65233
--- Comment #15 from Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Mon Mar 2 05:22:03 2015
New Revision: 221097
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221097root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/65233
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65233
--- Comment #16 from Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #14)
Presumably this is a case where a block has become unreachable? Or is it a
case where the block previously had multiple preds, then
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65233
Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65233
--- Comment #17 from Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org ---
FWIW, the removal happens by virtue of:
/* The hash table traversals above created the duplicate blocks (and the
statements within the duplicate blocks). This loop creates
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65249
--- Comment #13 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 34915
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34915action=edit
an adhoc patch for 4.9
It pre-allocates R0 for this special case to break long R0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65130
--- Comment #8 from Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Cannot reproduce.
Fixed on mainline by:
commit b9cb01c10d90420929551763dae489c1ef53af93
Author: hubicka hubicka@138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4
Date: Sun Mar 1 01:08:47 2015
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65130
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Aha, almost definitely papering over. I will check tomorrow, thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65263
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
Hi,
the following (untested) patch should prevent redirection to happen.
Index: ipa-icf.c
===
--- ipa-icf.c(revision
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65271
Bug ID: 65271
Summary: Mem-declarator after class-specifier cannot declare
rvalue reference
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65263
--- Comment #4 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com ---
I assume the problem is that thunk can not be generated to non-local symbol.
Yes, that is at the root of this problem. The thunk can't be allowed to jump
to anything outside the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65273
Bug ID: 65273
Summary: Incorrect output in SIMPLE program compiled from high
version gcc with O2
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65130
--- Comment #10 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The bug is:
fn3/5 (fn3) @0x76ae5dc8
Type: function definition analyzed
Visibility: prevailing_def_ironly
previous sharing asm name: 11
References: a/4 (read)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55295
--- Comment #11 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
A note on the side...
As mentioned above, fipr can also be used to do a 3D dot product. However,
GCC's vector extensions do not allow specifying vectors of length 3. To
support that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51244
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65265
Bug ID: 65265
Summary: [SH] Use rotcl to logically and/or comparison results
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65264
Bug ID: 65264
Summary: compare debug failure when using stdin
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65233
Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65259
--- Comment #4 from Andris Pavenis andris.pavenis at iki dot fi ---
Now it is OK. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63731
--- Comment #27 from Tatsushi Inagaki e29253 at jp dot ibm.com ---
(In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #26)
Tatsushi: are you asking about gccgo, or about gc?
I'm asking about gccgo.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65233
Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61142
--- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Sun Mar 1 18:47:38 2015
New Revision: 221089
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221089root=gccview=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/
PR target/61142
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61142
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65144
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65249
--- Comment #11 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Thanks! If this successfully works around the problem, it probably would also
make sense for GCC 5 with a 'if (!sh_lra_p ()) ...'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65245
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sun Mar 1 20:23:21 2015
New Revision: 221090
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221090root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-02-28 Martin Liska mli...@suse.cz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63890
howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||howarth at bromo dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65266
Bug ID: 65266
Summary: [SH] Use rotcl for bit reversals
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
77 matches
Mail list logo
