https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85344
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
More worrying is that this code compiles without error when it should error
out:
void
foo (void)
{
__asm( "%0" :: "J" ((unsigned char) 0x80));
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85344
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
I have a patch, starting testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85344
Thomas Preud'homme changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85344
Bug ID: 85344
Summary: Constant constraint check sign extends unsigned
constant input operands
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85343
Bug ID: 85343
Summary: Overload __throw_ios_failure to allow passing errno
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85323
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If you mean adding if (__builtin_constant_p (__B) && __B == 0) return __A; and
similar to all the various intrinsics, then that is not the right thing to do,
it will make the headers much larger and even the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85281
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85281
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Apr 11 11:37:01 2018
New Revision: 259316
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259316&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/85281
* config/i386/sse.md (iptr): Add V16SFmode
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85323
Julia Koval changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||julia.koval at intel dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84659
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amonakov at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84659
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Monakov ---
Author: amonakov
Date: Wed Apr 11 10:48:42 2018
New Revision: 259314
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259314&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
fix PR 84659 references in ChangeLog files
Modified:
trunk/gcc
/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-ld
--with-as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-259308-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
gcc version 8.0.1 20180411 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85204
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85302
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85302
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Apr 11 10:22:36 2018
New Revision: 259311
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259311&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/85302
* dwarf2out.c (skip_loc_list_entry): Don't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85329
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Matthias can you please point to source files of the project?
And can you please attach full preprocessed source file?
Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85329
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> It's fishy as we have b::b that has create an alias to __ct_base:
>
> #0 symtab_node::create_reference (this= "__ct_comp "/2>, referred_node= "/4>, use_type=IPA_R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85328
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 43907
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43907&action=edit
gcc8-pr85328.patch
Many patterns rely on ix86_hard_regno_mode_ok not allowing < 512-bit vector
modes in xmm16+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85340
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84041
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85261
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
Author: thopre01
Date: Wed Apr 11 10:07:25 2018
New Revision: 259310
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259310&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM] Fix PR85261: ICE with FPSCR setter builtin
Instruction patt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84041
--- Comment #6 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #4)
> A conservative fix is to define the memory_barrier insn as membar.sys.
Filed PR85341 - "[nvptx] Implement atomic load" to fix this more optimally.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85341
Bug ID: 85341
Summary: [nvptx] Implement atomic load
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85203
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
Author: thopre01
Date: Wed Apr 11 09:47:21 2018
New Revision: 259309
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259309&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM] Fix PR85203: cmse_nonsecure_caller returns wrong result
__b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85230
--- Comment #8 from Dmitry Vyukov ---
Depending on how long the proper fix will take. If we are talking about, say, a
week then I will just wait. We have to deal with hundreds of assorted kernel
crashes all over the place anyway.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85339
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85340
Bug ID: 85340
Summary: allocate_deferred_char_scalar_1.f03 dereferences null
pointer
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85337
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85230
--- Comment #7 from chefmax at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dmitry Vyukov from comment #6)
> Right!
>
> Unpoisoning before restoring SP looks like a reasonable and simple solution
> to me. I don't see any potential downsides.
>
> Do you mind
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85338
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238
--- Comment #20 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #18)
> Created attachment 43906 [details]
> Tentative fix v2
Looks good to me, aka OK if it passes whatever testing you think is sufficient.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238
--- Comment #19 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238
>
> --- Comment #17 from Eric Botcazou ---
> > Yes, I said we need that anyway...
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85329
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85339
Bug ID: 85339
Summary: [8 Regression] With early LTO debug the early DWARF
misses line-info
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: lto, wrong
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85338
Bug ID: 85338
Summary: [GCOV] Type conversion leads to incorrect coverage in
printf
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #43893|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238
--- Comment #17 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Yes, I said we need that anyway...
Well, you also said that you were OK for a single kludge in the middle-end,
which seems rather contradictory with having half of it in the back-end.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85326
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #2)
> I think some of the arm tests could well be C tests rather than C++. So
> maybe just renaming the file to *.c will be enough.
>
> For the ones that are truly C++ is t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85331
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238
--- Comment #16 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238
>
> --- Comment #15 from Eric Botcazou ---
> > I think we do need to run dwarf2out_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85326
--- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> gcc.target/arm/pr56184.C
> gcc.target/arm/pr59985.C
> gcc.target/arm/pr67989.C
> gcc.target/arm/pr54300.C
> gcc.target/arm/pr55073.C
> gcc.target/s39
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85337
Bug ID: 85337
Summary: [GCOV] inconsistent coverage in swith-case statement
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238
--- Comment #15 from Eric Botcazou ---
> I think we do need to run dwarf2out_early_finish for the FAT part
> of the object file so please move this to dwarf2out_early_finish,
> like for example with
But then we also need the first kludge in the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85330
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85329
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85317
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85324
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85326
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85331
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 43905
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43905&action=edit
gcc8-pr85331.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85329
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85329
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238
--- Comment #14 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238
>
> --- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou ---
> > Sure, that works for me.
>
> OK, so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85315
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 10 Apr 2018, msebor at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85315
>
> --- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85332
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85333
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85336
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Sure, that works for me.
OK, something like this is apparently sufficient:
===
--- cgraphunit.c(revision 259205)
+++ cgraphunit.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85331
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
101 - 158 of 158 matches
Mail list logo
