https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86910
--- Comment #3 from Steffen Schuemann ---
Sorry, g++-8 -v:
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++-8
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/8/lto-wrapper
OFFLOAD_TARGET_NAMES=nvptx-none
OFFLOAD_TARGET_DEFAULT=1
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86915
Bug ID: 86915
Summary: Segmentation fault for an array of auto in template
parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68210
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86914
Bug ID: 86914
Summary: gcc 8.1 -O2 generates wrong code with strlen() of
pointers within one-element arrays of structures
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86913
Bug ID: 86913
Summary: Sending a nil message using a method signature
returning a struct corrupts the stack
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86197
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86197
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Aug 10 20:46:04 2018
New Revision: 263479
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263479&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2018-06-19 Segher Boessenkoo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84094
Bug 84094 depends on bug 57160, which changed state.
Bug 57160 Summary: short-circuit IF only with -ffrontend-optimize
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57160
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68210
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Aug 10 20:20:27 2018
New Revision: 263478
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263478&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/68210 adjust operator new and delete for LWG 206
Ensure tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57160
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86197
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Aug 10 20:14:11 2018
New Revision: 263477
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263477&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2018-06-19 Segher Boessenkoo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68210
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Or maybe:
int main ()
{
void *p = operator new (1, std::nothrow);
VERIFY (p != 0);
VERIFY (1 == new_called);
VERIFY (0 == new_handler_called);
VERIFY (!bad_alloc_thrown);
operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68210
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86131
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86771
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
So, what is happening at all? What is different during/after combine, etc.?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86908
--- Comment #5 from Kostya Frumkin ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> (In reply to Kostya Frumkin from comment #3)
> > Hi, for example msvc2013 calls base class's virtual method when msvc2015
> > calls derived class's virtual met
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86684
--- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool ---
So, ignoring all the configury stuff: the problem is that TARGET_VSX does
not imply TARGET_FPRND. It should.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86908
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Kostya Frumkin from comment #3)
> Hi, for example msvc2013 calls base class's virtual method when msvc2015
> calls derived class's virtual method.
It's undefined behaviour. Anything can happen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86684
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|ppc64le-linux-gnu |powerpc*-*-*
Host|x86
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57160
--- Comment #14 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Fri Aug 10 14:08:53 2018
New Revision: 263471
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263471&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-08-10 Janus Weil
PR fortran/57160
* in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85640
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86684
--- Comment #10 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Also happens on native builds:
~/build/tot/gcc/f951 -quiet -Wall -W -O2 bounds_check_19.f90 -mabi=elfv2
-mlittle -mno-fprnd
Error: unrecognizable insn:
(insn 79 78 80 6 (set (reg:DI 175)
(unsp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86684
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86911
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Sounds very probable, this is what I see in GDB:
$ Breakpoint 1, get_visual_column (exploc=..., loc=2147489278,
out=0x7fffca24, first_nws=0x0) at
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc2/gcc/c-family/c-indentation.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86133
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc |powerpcspe-*-*
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86911
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86908
Kostya Frumkin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86912
Bug ID: 86912
Summary: Function pointer imposes an optimization barrier
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86896
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86684
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #7)
> Something wrong with that tarball then, maybe? Please try trunk.
I see it day by day on my periodic tester machine that pulls GCC tip.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86911
Bug ID: 86911
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in gcc/c-family/c-indentation.c:403
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86684
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Something wrong with that tarball then, maybe? Please try trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86728
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86910
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Steffen Schuemann from comment #0)
> std::filesystem::create_directories should create all directories that don't
> exists in the given path. It is not an error if some of the directories
> exi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86910
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86910
Bug ID: 86910
Summary: std::filesystem::create_directories doesn't set error
code or throw while violating postcondition.
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86909
--- Comment #1 from Antony Polukhin ---
Another std::variant related example where GCC fails to eliminate
subexpressions and generates 6 times bigger assembly:
using size_t = unsigned long long;
struct A {} a;
static const size_t variant_npos =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86909
Bug ID: 86909
Summary: Missing common subexpression elimination for types
other than int
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimiza
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86843
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Hmm, many of the checks in algorithms rely on the fact that the iterators are
Debug Mode iterators (e.g. to check that the end iterator is reachable from the
begin one, or that the iterators are not singula
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86904
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to richard.earnshaw from comment #1)
> On 09/08/18 21:08, dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
[...snip...]
> > Maybe:
> > -fdiagnostics-x-coord=bytes : count of bytes
> > -fdiagnostics-x-coord=ch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86908
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This makes the program correct:
strategyPtr = new(&strategy) AStrategy;
static_cast(std::launder(&strategy))->doIt();
strategyPtr->doIt();
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86908
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82418
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82418
--- Comment #8 from Alexander Monakov ---
Author: amonakov
Date: Fri Aug 10 10:13:37 2018
New Revision: 263467
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263467&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386: do not use SImode mul-highpart on 64-bit (PR 82418)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86900
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86908
Bug ID: 86908
Summary: static_cast(&derivedClassO
bject)->virtualMehod() calls base version of
virtualMethod()
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: U
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85559
Bug 85559 depends on bug 83610, which changed state.
Bug 83610 Summary: Come up with __builtin_expect_with_probabilty
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83610
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83610
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
On 09/08/18 21:08, dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86904
>
> Bug ID: 86904
>Summary: Column numbers ignore tab characters
>Product: gcc
>Version: unknown
> Status: UNCONFIRMED
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86904
--- Comment #1 from richard.earnshaw at arm dot com ---
On 09/08/18 21:08, dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86904
>
> Bug ID: 86904
>Summary: Column numbers ignore tab chara
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83610
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri Aug 10 09:43:06 2018
New Revision: 263466
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263466&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Introduce __builtin_expect_with_probability (PR target/83610).
2018-08-10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86900
--- Comment #2 from Jan Kratochvil ---
Created attachment 44523
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44523&action=edit
1.cc.xz
Sorry, the 1.cc file somehow did not get attached.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85799
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85799
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri Aug 10 09:31:51 2018
New Revision: 263465
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263465&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Strip only selected predictors after early tree passes (PR
tree-optimizati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86684
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #5)
> I cannot reproduce this, not on gcc14 either. I notice you use
> ppc64le-linux,
> while the canonical name is powerpc64le-linux; maybe that matters?
No it d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86900
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86905
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
57 matches
Mail list logo