https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66233
--- Comment #11 from Matthias Klose doko at gcc dot gnu.org ---
the proposed patch fixes the test case from PR66554 on aarch64-linux-gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65686
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||13962
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66587
Bug ID: 66587
Summary: -no_compact_unwind is dropped for
-nodefaultlibs/-nostdlib
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66588
Bug ID: 66588
Summary: combine should try transforming if_then_else of
zero_extends into zero_extend of if_then_else
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66586
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66253
--- Comment #8 from Michael Matz matz at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: matz
Date: Thu Jun 18 13:31:17 2015
New Revision: 224605
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224605root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/66253
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65686
--- Comment #6 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko dimhen at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
Where does this obfuscated 'return *(e-pu)' come from?
If I remove aggregate then there are no warning.
i.e. this code produce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66586
Bug ID: 66586
Summary: Template backtrace is truncated/absent after 'template
argument deduction/substitution failed:'
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56917
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This also fixed a rejects-valid
int lValue;
int main()
{
switch (lValue)
{
case -(int)((2U (8 * sizeof(int) - 2)) - 1) - 1:;
}
}
g++-4.8 cMinLongValue.ii
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66512
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #2)
In that case I'd like to contribute a documentation patch to make that clear
in the pure/const attribute information, but I need
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66233
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66588
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com ---
BTW: x86_64 is missing any form of zero-extended cmove.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56917
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jun 18 14:47:18 2015
New Revision: 224617
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224617root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-06-18 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65966
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58616
Bug 58616 depends on bug 66001, which changed state.
Bug 66001 Summary: [5/6 regression] ICE when NSDMI in a literal class uses a
destructor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66001
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58616
Bug 58616 depends on bug 65966, which changed state.
Bug 65966 Summary: [5/6 Regression] [C++14] sorry, unimplemented: unexpected
AST of kind try_block when initializing a 2D array
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65966
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66001
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66001
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gmail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66233
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jun 18 14:06:04 2015
New Revision: 224611
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224611root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/66233
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66584
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66587
--- Comment #2 from Pierre Ossman ossman at cendio dot se ---
Note that darwin12.h also exists on trunk that needs to be modified as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66587
--- Comment #1 from Pierre Ossman ossman at cendio dot se ---
Created attachment 35802
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35802action=edit
possible patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66584
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66001
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jun 18 14:55:23 2015
New Revision: 224620
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224620root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/66001
* constexpr.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66001
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jun 18 14:55:45 2015
New Revision: 224621
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224621root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/66001
* constexpr.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66584
Jason McG jmcguiness at liquidcapital dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66565
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66578
--- Comment #4 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Further analysis showed that while the offset of source's temporary descriptor
parm.3 is not as expected:
// allocate(c, source=a(:))
// lb, ub,, offset, data
parm.3 = {1, ub(a)+1,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66233
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jun 18 14:03:50 2015
New Revision: 224609
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224609root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/66233
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66375
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jun 18 14:04:05 2015
New Revision: 224610
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224610root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-06-18 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66584
--- Comment #4 from Jason McG jmcguiness at liquidcapital dot com ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #2)
What would you like us to document exactly? How are we supposed to track
...
Perhaps I was unclear. I am asking that you point
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66584
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
If someone cares so much about the static branch predictor, they would be a
compiler developer. This is the first time I have seen a non-compiler developer
care about documenting
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66583
Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65914
--- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
With the smaller test, at least, this did not reproduce for me with r223868.
Patching up to latest and will try again.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65914
--- Comment #6 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The tree-optimized dump shows:
void foo() ()
{
vector(2) long unsigned int vect_cst_.60;
vector(2) long unsigned int vect_cst_.59;
vector(2) long unsigned int vect_cst_.58;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66585
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61856
Mikhail Maltsev miyuki at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||miyuki at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66578
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org ---
What I currently do not understand is why
allocate(c,source=a(:))
fails and
c = a(:)
works.
And yes, the scalarizer is pretty incomprehensible.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66584
--- Comment #8 from Jason McG jmcguiness at liquidcapital dot com ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
...
compiler developer. This is the first time I have seen a non-compiler
developer care about documenting gcc heuristics. Note
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66061
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65914
--- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Confirmed with r224625, however.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66584
--- Comment #7 from Jason McG jmcguiness at liquidcapital dot com ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
If someone cares so much about the static branch predictor, they would be a
...
I am not a compiler developer and I do care about
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66515
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66590
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Related to bug 20681. Most likely block_may_fallthru is returning true for the
{} block.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66592
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35805
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35805action=edit
Fortran code that exhibits the problem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66592
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This bug appears to be regression and it requires the -O2 and
-ftree-vectorize options.
gfortran -c -O2 -ftree-vectorize z.f
z.f:1:0:
subroutine calsvp(nkr,nkz)
^
internal compiler error:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66593
Bug ID: 66593
Summary: driver-i386.c: -mtune=native unavailable with
non-bootstrapped build of libgccjit with gcc 5
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66593
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #0)
[...]
That said, the above code runs inside the driver, and libgccjit doesn't yet
run that part of the driver, so some extra work will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66595
Bug ID: 66595
Summary: [C++14] ICE in partial specialization template
variables
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66592
Bug ID: 66592
Summary: [Regression] ICE in vect_get_def_for_operand
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66592
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I forgot to mention in comment 1 that the COMMON statement
in the Fortran is also required.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66594
Bug ID: 66594
Summary: jitted code should use -mtune=native
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: jit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66594
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This should be true on all targets which have -mcpu=native (or -march=native).
Note x86 options are not always the same on x86 vs arm vs aarch64 vs ppc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66578
Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
--- Comment #13 from Christophe Lyon clyon at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #12)
However, I am probably missing something since with an updated 4.9-branch
and without this patch, I couldn't make the compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66578
--- Comment #6 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
c= a(:) works because there is no additional array descriptor inbetween.
The (new) allocate gets its own temporary array descriptor for the source=
expression, which in turn has incorrect bounds
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66589
Bug ID: 66589
Summary: AVX instruction set extension is not enabled by
default for bdver2
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66584
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66589
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66590
Bug ID: 66590
Summary: switch statement: incorrect warning reaches end of
non-void function
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66578
--- Comment #8 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org ---
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c b/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c
index fece3ab..0b96de1 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c
@@ -7079,7 +7077,7 @@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66573
Martin Sebor msebor at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66588
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #1)
BTW: x86_64 is missing any form of zero-extended cmove.
... please see [1] how x86_64 implements it (*movsicc_noc_zext).
[1]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66573
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66464
--- Comment #6 from Leo Carreon lcarreon at bigpond dot net.au ---
Has this fix been included in the recent gcc-5.1.1-3 update on Fedora 22?
-libiberty
--with-linker-hash-style=gnu --enable-gnu-indirect-function --disable-multilib
--disable-werror
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20150618 (experimental) (GCC)
Not sure why the new model is not working here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64130
kugan at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kugan at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66591
Bug ID: 66591
Summary: [SH] ICE: in get_reload_reg, at lra-constraints.c:633
with -mlra
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66580
Bug ID: 66580
Summary: max reduction does not auto vectorize
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66571
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jun 18 09:54:17 2015
New Revision: 224599
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224599root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/66571
* pt.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66567
--- Comment #1 from Ilya Enkovich ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ienkovich
Date: Thu Jun 18 10:09:22 2015
New Revision: 224600
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224600root=gccview=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR middle-end/66567
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66510
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66554
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66583
Bug ID: 66583
Summary: incorrect implicitly-defined move constructor for
class with anonymous union and NSDMI
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66568
--- Comment #1 from Ilya Enkovich ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ienkovich
Date: Thu Jun 18 10:14:38 2015
New Revision: 224601
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224601root=gccview=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR middle-end/66568
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66554
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to kugan from comment #6)
-fno-tree-forwprop works.
forwprop propagates:
vect__11.22_96 = (vector(4) float) vect_c.21_94;
vect__13.24_98 = (vector(4) signed int)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66584
Bug ID: 66584
Summary: gcc differs in static, branch-prediction cost from icc
in switch.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66569
--- Comment #1 from Ilya Enkovich ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ienkovich
Date: Thu Jun 18 10:18:48 2015
New Revision: 224602
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224602root=gccview=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/66569
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66585
Bug ID: 66585
Summary: Internal compiler error when initialize field with
lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66554
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Indeed:
./cc1plus -quiet t.ii -O3 -I include
t.ii: In function ‘void fn1()’:
t.ii:3:6: error: invalid types in conversion to integer
void fn1() {
^
vector(4) signed int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66554
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66233
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66233
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||5.2.0, 6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66233
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Ok, I'll look at the 4.9/4.8 fix then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66554
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66581
Bug ID: 66581
Summary: [CHKP] internal compiler error: SSA corruption
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66554
--- Comment #8 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Starting bisect now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66573
--- Comment #1 from Jason McG jmcguiness at liquidcapital dot com ---
Note that clang++ for all tested versions (3.0, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4.1, 3.5, 3.5.1,
3.6 (rc2), 3.7 (experimental)) produce the same assembler output for -O1, -O2
-O3:
foo(bool):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66573
--- Comment #2 from Jason McG jmcguiness at liquidcapital dot com ---
If I try with this code:
#define likely(x) __builtin_expect((x),1)
#define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect((x),0)
extern void bar1();
extern void bar2();
void
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66533
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
ICE started with r208426.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66578
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66510
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jun 18 09:39:13 2015
New Revision: 224598
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224598root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-06-18 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66582
Bug ID: 66582
Summary: -Wstrict-overflow issues invalid warning.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66543
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66533
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66578
--- Comment #3 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Strictly speaking has this not much to do with the renewed allocate(). The
pseudo code shows that with and without the block construct the offset of the
source array's temporary descriptor is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66554
--- Comment #6 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
-fno-tree-forwprop works.
forwprop propagates:
vect__11.22_96 = (vector(4) float) vect_c.21_94;
vect__13.24_98 = (vector(4) signed int) vect__11.22_96;
into:
vect__13.24_98 = (vector(4) signed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66585
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66584
--- Comment #1 from Jason McG jmcguiness at liquidcapital dot com ---
(In reply to Jason McG from comment #0)
I got my static bp summaries wrong, corrected:
void foo(int i) {
switch(i) {
case 1:
bar1(); // gcc: less likely (same as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66233
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
1 - 100 of 101 matches
Mail list logo
