https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
--- Comment #9 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> I suppose the idea was to make nonzero_bits foolproof. And -1 being
> sign-extended should be fine... unless precision is 0 ;)
>
> So, in nonzero_bits use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81940
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Ok, so we have no early debug but enable late debug. I suppose at some point
we want to have -g vs. -g0 set per function.
Index: gcc/dwarf2out.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
--- Comment #8 from Aldy Hernandez ---
FWIW, the reason a cross x86-64 to ppc64 doesn't exhibit the problem may be
because
wi::shwi (-1, precision) calls sext_hwi() which eventually shifts left by 64
bits:
int shift =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81940
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81932
--- Comment #3 from Paul Smith ---
Created attachment 42030
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42030=edit
tv.py
Test case attached. To run it:
$ gcc -ggdb3 -o tvtest tvtest.cpp
$ gdb tvtest -ex 'br 28' -ex 'source tv.py'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #6)
> The problem here is that get_nonzero_bits() is being called with an SSA
> whose precision is 0 (_Complex float). This is causing this code in
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79890
Andreas Krebbel changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #9 from Andreas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81932
--- Comment #2 from Paul Smith ---
Created attachment 42029
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42029=edit
tvtest.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
--- Comment #6 from Aldy Hernandez ---
The problem here is that get_nonzero_bits() is being called with an SSA whose
precision is 0 (_Complex float). This is causing this code in
get_nonzero_bits():
range_info_def *ri = SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19706
--- Comment #7 from Tamar Christina ---
Author: tnfchris
Date: Wed Aug 23 11:34:59 2017
New Revision: 251304
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251304=gcc=rev
Log:
2017-08-23 Tamar Christina
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19706
--- Comment #6 from Tamar Christina ---
Author: tnfchris
Date: Wed Aug 23 11:32:47 2017
New Revision: 251303
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251303=gcc=rev
Log:
2017-08-23 Tamar Christina
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Confirmed with that testcase, thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81943
Bug ID: 81943
Summary: Wrong ABI in class methods returning structs for the
Windows amd64 target
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
--- Comment #4 from Aldy Hernandez ---
On gcc110.fsffrance.org, I see gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-1.c failing with
an execution error with a simple stage1 compiler. Perhaps this is a different
problem, but it can be distilled to:
int
main
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81936
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 23 Aug 2017, vries at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81936
>
> --- Comment #6 from Tom de Vries ---
> > what failed to properly set its parent?
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81936
--- Comment #6 from Tom de Vries ---
> what failed to properly set its parent?
dwarf2out_early_finish contains:
...
/* Do not generate DWARF assembler now when not producing LTO bytecode. */
if (!flag_generate_lto)
return;
...
and this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81942
Bug ID: 81942
Summary: ICE on empty constexpr constructor with C++14
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81941
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Alternatively:
> gcc-7 -S t.c -m32 -mno-sse
In file included from t.c:1:0:
t.c: In function ‘foo’:
/usr/lib64/gcc/x86_64-suse-linux/7/include/xmmintrin.h:932:1: error: inlining
failed in call to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81940
--- Comment #3 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko ---
r251301 FAIL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81940
--- Comment #2 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko ---
$ cat x.ii
int a, b = a;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81941
Bug ID: 81941
Summary: Rejects intrinsic use
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81940
--- Comment #1 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko ---
$ g++ -fpreprocessed -Werror -Wall -Wextra -flto -O -std=c++98 x.ii -fpic -DPIC
-c -o x.o && g++ -shared x.o -g -flto -o x.so
during IPA pass: inline
/home/dimhen/src/CSPbuild/ipsec/esp/esp_init.cpp:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81940
Bug ID: 81940
Summary: [8 regression] internal compiler error: in
dwarf2out_abstract_function, at dwarf2out.c:21613
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928
--- Comment #4 from Matthieu Brucher ---
I would agree if the debug and optimized versions had the same behavior. They
do not. As such there should be a huge warning about the undefined behavior.
And no, it's not valid code, it's an undefined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81936
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> How do I reproduce, aka configure gcc?
The ICE is actually in the host compiler, but it doesn't seem to reproduce in a
non-offloading setup.
Host compiler:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Matthieu Brucher from comment #2)
> Comparing this to anything from Null to nullptr should be an error, not be
> silently passed.
No, it can't be rejected, because it's valid code. Just like
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81936
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
ICE is due to assert:
...
at gcc/dwarf2out.c:5542
5542 gcc_assert (die->die_tag == DW_TAG_compile_unit
5543 && die->die_id.die_symbol != NULL);
...
The assert triggers because
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928
--- Comment #2 from Matthieu Brucher ---
No, I think the optimization is more than correct.
The warning doesn't warn of the actual problem, if you check against nullptr,
you won't even get a warning.
Comparing this to anything from Null to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81936
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
How do I reproduce, aka configure gcc?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81935
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81933
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81931
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Component|other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81928
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81927
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81932
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81925
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81911
Antony Polukhin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81936
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81939
Bug ID: 81939
Summary: valgrind error message in build_float_string and
heap-buffer-overflow on address sanitized
libgfortran.so
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81938
Bug ID: 81938
Summary: valgrind error message and heap-buffer-overflow on
address sanitized libgfortran.so
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81937
Bug ID: 81937
Summary: stack-buffer-overflow on memcpy in
libgfortran/io/unix.c on character(kind=4)
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81936
Bug ID: 81936
Summary: ICE in dwarf2out_die_ref_for_decl, at dwarf2out.c:5543
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81935
Bug ID: 81935
Summary: [8 Regression] r251260 miscompiles libstdc++ (on
ppc64le)
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81857
--- Comment #2 from Petr Ovtchenkov ---
Related problem: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50119,
commit 1a1dad283 in git's reflection.
101 - 145 of 145 matches
Mail list logo