https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89464
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89464
--- Comment #2 from Milhouse ---
This is a new build log, with -save-temps added: http://ix.io/1BOD
I've uploaded the PVR HDHomeRun build directory as a tar.gz:
http://milhouse.libreelec.tv/other/pvrhdhomerun.tar.gz
This directory includes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=704
--- Comment #20 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #19)
> (In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #18)
> > Whether this is fixed may be determined by running all of the programs
> > installed in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89464
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89464
Bug ID: 89464
Summary: shared_ptr_base.h: error: '__tag' was not declared in
this scope (gcc-8.3.0 regression?)
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89462
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89446
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Sat Feb 23 03:01:59 2019
New Revision: 269148
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269148=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/89446 fix null pointer dereference in char_traits
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67026
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Sat Feb 23 03:01:59 2019
New Revision: 269148
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269148=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/89446 fix null pointer dereference in char_traits
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81652
Bug 81652 depends on bug 89353, which changed state.
Bug 89353 Summary: Unnecessary ENDBR with -mmanual-endbr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89353
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89353
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89355
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
*** Bug 89353 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77970
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89463
--- Comment #2 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> What is happening is the empty loop is being removed and not replaced with a
> debug statement say i is 6 afterwards. I don't know if this is a good idea
> to put
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89463
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|gcc generates wrong debug |debug information for
ead model: posix
gcc version 9.0.1 20190222 (experimental) [trunk revision 269113] (GCC)
$ cat abc.c
int a;
int main() {
int i;
for (; a < 10; a++)
i = 0;
for (; i < 6; i++)
;
optimize_me_not();
}
$ cat outer.c
optimize_me_not() {}
$ cat cmds
b 8
r
p i
kill
q
$ gcc-tr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89390
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Sat Feb 23 01:19:38 2019
New Revision: 269145
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269145=gcc=rev
Log:
Capture source location of dtors (PR c++/89390)
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84939
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini ---
This also crashes the compiler, in a different way:
void b() {
struct c {
int d struct d e;
};
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89446
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Sat Feb 23 01:02:05 2019
New Revision: 269144
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269144=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/89446 fix null pointer dereference in char_traits
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89446
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Sat Feb 23 01:01:56 2019
New Revision: 269143
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269143=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/89446 fix null pointer dereference in char_traits
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89460
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88074
--- Comment #33 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Feb 23 00:14:52 2019
New Revision: 269139
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269139=gcc=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/88074
* simplify.c (norm2_do_sqrt,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89459
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Please see whether this still applies with GCC mainline (postdating my
2018-11-07 merge of fmaq changes from glibc which brought in at least one
bug fix).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84676
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8/9 Regression] internal |[7 Regression] internal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84676
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Feb 22 23:16:14 2019
New Revision: 269138
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269138=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-02-22 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/84676
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 86448, which changed state.
Bug 86448 Summary: GCC 9 compiler generates slower code for spec 2006 milc on a
power9 using -mcpu=power9 than using -mcpu=power8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86448
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86448
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89411
Jim Wilson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilson at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89456
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
On AVX2 machine:
[hjl@gnu-skx-1 tmp]$ gcc
/export/gnu/import/git/gitlab/x86-gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.target/i386/mv17.C
[hjl@gnu-skx-1 tmp]$ ./a.out
[hjl@gnu-skx-1 tmp]$ gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89461
Bug ID: 89461
Summary: FAIL: experimental/net/timer/waitable/cons.cc
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89460
Bug ID: 89460
Summary: FAIL: experimental/net/headers.cc (test for excess
errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89445
--- Comment #8 from Thiago Macieira ---
Sorry, in editing I ended up removing an important point: GCC 8 also generates
the move *from* OpMask when I put it in the benchmark loop. So that's not a
regression, per se.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52879
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> I think the current implementation has a decent protection against bad seeds,
> so lets close this as fixed.
The least I can say is that I am not convinced about the "decent protection".
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89445
--- Comment #7 from Thiago Macieira ---
Comment on attachment 45800
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45800
gcc9-pr89445.patch
Tested and works on my machine.
The movzbl that GCC 8 generated is also gone, but it inserted
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77691
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89071
--- Comment #22 from Peter Cordes ---
Nice, that's exactly the kind of thing I suggested in bug 80571. If this
covers
* vsqrtss/sd (mem),%merge_into, %xmm
* vpcmpeqd%same,%same, %dest# false dep on KNL / Silvermont
* vcmptrueps
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89450
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89459
Bug ID: 89459
Summary: Incorrect rounding for fma in some cases
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89445
--- Comment #6 from Thiago Macieira ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> vmovupd (%rsi,%rax), %zmm1{%k1}{z}
> addq%rdx, %rax
> vmovupd (%rax), %zmm2{%k1}{z}
> vfmadd132pd %zmm0, %zmm2, %zmm1
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80571
--- Comment #2 from Peter Cordes ---
I think hjl's patch for PR 89071 / PR 87007 fixes (most of?) this, at least for
AVX.
If register pressure is an issue, using a reg holding a arbitrary constant
(instead of xor-zeroed) is a valid option, as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4898
--- Comment #10 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9)
> Why a new warning instead of making -Wterminate handle throw() as well as
> noexcept ?
For consistency with clang? I dunno, I guess putting it under
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=704
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Last reconfirmed|2006-02-02
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82255
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.4 |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71066
--- Comment #16 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Fri Feb 22 21:02:40 2019
New Revision: 269135
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269135=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-02-22 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/71066
Backport from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89458
Bug ID: 89458
Summary: adding aligned attribute to struct causes too much to
be copied
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79251
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P5 |P3
Severity|enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=704
--- Comment #18 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Whether this is fixed may be determined by running all of the programs
installed in $exec_prefix/bin by current mainline with the --help and
--version options (and confirming the GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83057
--- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: anlauf
Date: Fri Feb 22 20:35:38 2019
New Revision: 269134
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269134=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-02-22 Harald Anlauf
PR fortran/83057
* io.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89431
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52879
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89431
--- Comment #9 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Fri Feb 22 20:27:57 2019
New Revision: 269132
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269132=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-02-22 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/89431
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89349
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84387
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle ---
We have confirmed this is addressed in the standard, though, as usual, one has
to read two or three conditions and deduce it.
2018: Section 12.6.4.8.4. I am looking at how to fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89349
--- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou ---
It's a known historical quirk which has been fixed on the mainline:
2018-05-25 Arnaud Charlet
* osint.ads (Unknown_Attributes): No longer pretend this is a constant.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89349
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|raised STORAGE_ERROR : |segfault when building GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89456
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89457
Bug ID: 89457
Summary: -madx doesn't generate ADX instructions
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89420
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri Feb 22 19:24:37 2019
New Revision: 269131
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269131=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/89420 - ICE with CAST_EXPR in explicit-specifier.
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89420
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4898
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Why a new warning instead of making -Wterminate handle throw() as well as
noexcept ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88117
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89402
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Feb 22 19:10:47 2019
New Revision: 269130
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269130=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/89402
* src/c++98/compatibility-ldbl.cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89450
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #0)
> Issues is that:
>
> 14746/* If -fstrict-enums, still constrain TYPE_MIN/MAX_VALUE. */
> 14747if (flag_strict_enums)
> 14748
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89456
Bug ID: 89456
Summary: target attribute doesn't work well with -march=native
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32770
Bug 32770 depends on bug 84509, which changed state.
Bug 84509 Summary: STOP and ERROR STOP statements with -fdefault-integer-8 and
large stop code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84509
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84509
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89450
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
Would it make sense to have an attribute so this can be specified for each
enum, instead of globally?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88853
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89453
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
See e.g. OpenMP 5.0 2.9.1 chapter, or OpenMP 4.5 2.6 chapter.
for (init-expr; test-expr; incr-expr) structured-block
init-expr
One of the following:
var = lb
integer-type var = lb
random-access-iterator-type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89453
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89445
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 45800
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45800=edit
gcc9-pr89445.patch
Full untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85459
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
Given that this is related to r255510, I tried out the proof-of concept patch
from PR 85762 first too and it shrunk text size (compiled with -O3 and Monday
trunk) from 901 to 417. So very likely the same
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89455
Bug ID: 89455
Summary: [9 Regression] FAIL: g++.target/i386/mv16.C on
Westmere
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87008
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #1)
> struct A { double a, b; };
> struct B : A {};
> templatevoid cp(T,T const){a=b;}
> double f(B x){
> B y; cp(y,x);
> B z; cp(z,x);
> return y.a - z.a;
> }
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=704
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #17 from Eric
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4898
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||87403
Summary|adding an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87609
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Feb 22 17:56:59 2019
New Revision: 269127
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269127=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-02-22 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/87609
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81431
--- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3)
> I would prefer to see -Weffc++ deprecated and removed, so tying this valid
> request to -Weffc++ might see it die.
If bug 16166 is fixed, then this request
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85741
Bug 85741 depends on bug 88835, which changed state.
Bug 88835 Summary: overly aggressive -Werror=format-overflow for printf since
r265648
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88835
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88835
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88993
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88835
Bug 88835 depends on bug 88993, which changed state.
Bug 88993 Summary: [9 Regression] GCC 9 -Wformat-overflow=2 should reflect real
libc limits
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88993
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85741
Bug 85741 depends on bug 88993, which changed state.
Bug 88993 Summary: [9 Regression] GCC 9 -Wformat-overflow=2 should reflect real
libc limits
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88993
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88835
--- Comment #15 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Fri Feb 22 17:38:11 2019
New Revision: 269125
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269125=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/88993 - GCC 9 -Wformat-overflow=2 should reflect real libc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88993
--- Comment #14 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Fri Feb 22 17:38:11 2019
New Revision: 269125
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269125=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/88993 - GCC 9 -Wformat-overflow=2 should reflect real libc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88853
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Fri Feb 22 17:38:11 2019
New Revision: 269125
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269125=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/88993 - GCC 9 -Wformat-overflow=2 should reflect real libc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85762
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
The problem is that we now consider MEM_REFs loading a different type
than the one of the underlying DECL as V_C_E and are equally careful
about it.
I this particular case, we have statements like.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89445
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
vmovupd (%rsi,%rax), %zmm1{%k1}{z}
addq%rdx, %rax
vmovupd (%rax), %zmm2{%k1}{z}
vfmadd132pd %zmm0, %zmm2, %zmm1
vmovupd %zmm1, (%rax){%k1}
isn't optimal btw,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89445
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Something like:
--- gcc/simplify-rtx.c.jj 2019-01-10 11:43:14.390377646 +0100
+++ gcc/simplify-rtx.c 2019-02-22 17:54:36.633829649 +0100
@@ -6073,8 +6073,10 @@ simplify_ternary_operation (enum rtx_cod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86259
--- Comment #35 from Bernd Edlinger ---
at least gcc 9 has been fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89446
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Not just
> while (__i < __n && __builtin_constant_p(__a[__i]))
> ?
Yeah that's what I'm testing, not sure where the (i < n && __bcp && i < n)
version came
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89324
Matthew Malcomson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89445
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87761
--- Comment #13 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Fri Feb 22 16:38:43 2019
New Revision: 269123
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269123=gcc=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/87761
* config/mips/mips.md: Add new combiner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89324
--- Comment #5 from Matthew Malcomson ---
Author: matmal01
Date: Fri Feb 22 16:35:22 2019
New Revision: 269122
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269122=gcc=rev
Log:
Handle stack pointer with SUBS/ADDS instructions.
In general the stack
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89229
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #45707|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89425
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89229
--- Comment #23 from H.J. Lu ---
A patch is posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-02/msg01841.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89425
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Fri Feb 22 16:24:36 2019
New Revision: 269121
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269121=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c/89425 - -Wabsolute-value warns in dead subexpressions
gcc/c/ChangeLog:
ix
gcc version 9.0.1 20190222 (experimental) [trunk revision 269113] (GCC)
$ cat abc.c
int a;
int main() {
char l = 0;
if (a)
;
else
l = 10 || 0;
optimize_me_not();
}
$ cat cmds
b 8
r
p l
kill
q
$ cat outer.c
optimize_me_not() {}
$ gcc-trunk -g abc.c outer.c
$ gdb -x cmds -batc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89229
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kretz at kde dot org
--- Comment #22 from
1 - 100 of 329 matches
Mail list logo
