https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69631
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69647
--- Comment #3 from Pieter Cardoen ---
Created attachment 37571
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37571&action=edit
console printout
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69627
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69652
Bug ID: 69652
Summary: [6 Regression] [ICE] verify_ssa fail w/ -O2
-ffast-math -ftree-vectorize
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69648
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69120
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
Can you add a comment and resolve it?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69628
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69369
--- Comment #4 from Ilya Enkovich ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #2)
> I will take a look. It works in my tree with changes to avoid use of
> IDENTIFIER_TRANSPARENT_ALIAS.
r232560 doesn't seem to fix any known problem in trunk. Can w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69648
--- Comment #2 from Zdenek Sojka ---
If I understand the .reload dump correctly, r87 is not live in insn 289, but it
should be:
...
289: r416:SI=r87:SI+const(unspec[`*.LC9'] 1)
REG_EQUAL `*.LC9'
Creating newreg=417 from oldreg=87,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59627
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 37567
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37567&action=edit
ten
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69241
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Ah, as for whether versioning supports changing return type to void, clearly it
supports it and even fnsplit uses it for the !split_part_return_p.
So perhaps:
--- ipa-split.c.jj1 2016-01-04 14:55:52.00
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59627
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69241
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #17)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16)
> > Created attachment 37565 [details]
> > gcc6-pr69241.patch
> >
> > So, it seems we have at least 3 differ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66330
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69648
--- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka ---
Created attachment 37566
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37566&action=edit
output assembly (intel syntax)
The failing instructions are around line 156:
mov eax, DWORD PTR 60[e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69423
--- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to vehre from comment #4)
> Hi Paul,
>
> I will have a look at it today. May be a fresh pair of eyes can be of help.
>
> - Andre
Thanks. I haven't given it much attention yet. I diverted into recur
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67451
--- Comment #7 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Commited fix; waiting one week for error reports before closing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69423
--- Comment #4 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi Paul,
I will have a look at it today. May be a fresh pair of eyes can be of help.
- Andre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67451
--- Comment #6 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vehre
Date: Wed Feb 3 10:39:09 2016
New Revision: 233101
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233101&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-02-03 Andre Vehreschild
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69418
--- Comment #6 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vehre
Date: Wed Feb 3 10:39:09 2016
New Revision: 233101
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233101&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-02-03 Andre Vehreschild
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69599
--- Comment #6 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #4)
> Looks good but I'm not sure if you should ask for in other partition for
> builtins.
We ask for in_other_partition for parallelized fns (indirectly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69241
--- Comment #18 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Here is Jakub's testcase. It it shorter and nicer than that from comment1.
struct A { virtual void m1 (); };
struct C : A { void m1 () { m1 (); } };
template struct B
{
T *t;
B (T *x) : t (x) { i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69241
--- Comment #17 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16)
> Created attachment 37565 [details]
> gcc6-pr69241.patch
>
> So, it seems we have at least 3 different issues, the attached patch fixes
> two of them, the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69599
--- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 69597 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69597
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69599
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On February 3, 2016 10:01:45 AM GMT+01:00, "vries at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69599
>
>--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
>Created attach
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69120
--- Comment #2 from Kirill Yukhin ---
Looked closely.
The name was chosen intentionally to simplify "sse2_shufpd"
expand. If we want to fix this name - new subst attribute need to be introduced
and
if ()
emit_insn (avx512vl_...
else
emit_in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69241
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 37565
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37565&action=edit
gcc6-pr69241.patch
So, it seems we have at least 3 different issues, the attached patch fixes two
of them, the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69418
--- Comment #5 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vehre
Date: Wed Feb 3 09:44:18 2016
New Revision: 233099
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233099&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-02-03 Andre Vehreschild
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67451
--- Comment #5 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vehre
Date: Wed Feb 3 09:44:18 2016
New Revision: 233099
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233099&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-02-03 Andre Vehreschild
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69613
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69651
--- Comment #1 from Kirill Yukhin ---
File is: libgfortran/io/list_read.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69651
Bug ID: 69651
Summary: Usage of unitialized pointer io/list_read.c
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libfort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69268
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69120
--- Comment #1 from Kirill Yukhin ---
Will fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69118
Kirill Yukhin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69631
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69650
Bug ID: 69650
Summary: [6 Regression] ICE in linemap_line_start, at
libcpp/line-map.c:803
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69599
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 37564
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37564&action=edit
tentative patch
Fixes the two failures, while still passing vect/pr46032.c.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69641
--- Comment #3 from Vladimir Sedach ---
Thanks. Better to use "unsigned int" than options:
0 > (int)((unsigned int)i + 0x0080)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67714
--- Comment #12 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #11)
> Hi Kyrill,
>
> > For this failure (among others) I proposed the series at:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg01713.html
>
> Ah - m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67714
--- Comment #11 from Nick Clifton ---
Hi Kyrill,
> For this failure (among others) I proposed the series at:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg01713.html
Ah - much better! I have approved the parts of your series that I can, In f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69241
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
*** Bug 69649 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69649
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69647
--- Comment #2 from Pieter Cardoen ---
I am using binutils 2.24.
Best regards
Pieter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69649
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Well, comment 9 of 69241 is an exact dup.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69649
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69241
--- Comment #14 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
*** Bug 69649 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69649
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69649
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69649
Bug ID: 69649
Summary: [6 Regression] ICE in assign_temp
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Ass
101 - 151 of 151 matches
Mail list logo
