https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84101
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
lower-subreg.c doesn't consider this for multiple reasons: 1) it doesn't have
VEC_CONCAT handling, but that could be easily added 2) V2DImode isn't
considered, because its move cost is the same as scalar mov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88494
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88494
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88494
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89134
Jiangning Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79966
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|7.5 |9.0
Summary|[7 Regression] run
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45358
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89136
--- Comment #6 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> Shouldn't we have a warning for this =+ vs. += case (of course, =- is fine)?
I found PR45358 - "Diagnostic could be issued for old C style a =+ b and
similar case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89138
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89136
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89136
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89136
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Thu Jan 31 12:17:32 2019
New Revision: 268419
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268419&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[libbacktrace] Fix .gnu_debugaltlink build-id check
The 'debugaltlink_name
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89115
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89115
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 31 12:05:19 2019
New Revision: 268418
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268418&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-01-31 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81651
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #2)
> What is a "fully qualified module name"?
Error: Module file /full/path/to/module/mymodule.mod is bletchful.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89135
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||9.0
Summary|[7/8/9 Regressio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89135
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 31 11:51:59 2019
New Revision: 268417
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268417&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-01-31 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/89135
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89137
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openmp
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89138
Bug ID: 89138
Summary: ICE on valid C++11 code: in expand_expr_real_1, at
expr.c:9993
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89136
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88678
--- Comment #23 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #22)
> (In reply to nsz from comment #21)
> > this fix undid the change for bug 78314
> > do you plan to backport it to gcc 7,8 branches ?
Yes, I'd like to backport the f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88678
--- Comment #22 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to nsz from comment #21)
> this fix undid the change for bug 78314
> do you plan to backport it to gcc 7,8 branches ?
>
> note that in principle on targets where trapping is not supported
> the "imm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89137
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
As this is all in
if (code == OMP_FOR || code == OMP_SECTIONS)
guarded block, that warning is obviously a false positive.
I guess I can just drop the " if (code == OMP_SECTIONS)" to make it happy.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88678
--- Comment #21 from nsz at gcc dot gnu.org ---
this fix undid the change for bug 78314
do you plan to backport it to gcc 7,8 branches ?
note that in principle on targets where trapping is not supported
the "immediate alternate exception handling
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89137
Bug ID: 89137
Summary: gcc/omp-low.c:7135: possible read of uninit memory ?
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88678
--- Comment #20 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to nsz from comment #19)
> that code was there for a reason.. now aarch64 fails because it cannot
> detect if the flags are supported or not.
>
> so if detection is turned off then on aarch64 "suppo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89123
rdapp at linux dot ibm.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rdapp at linux dot ibm.com
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84974
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9 Regression] ICE: |[8 Regression] ICE:
|S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88678
nsz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nsz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89136
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89136
Bug ID: 89136
Summary: libbacktrace/elf.c:2941: suspicious assignment
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89115
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 31 10:00:26 2019
New Revision: 268416
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268416&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-01-31 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81651
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #2 from Domin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84733
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P4 |P3
Severity|minor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87199
--- Comment #4 from Ev Drikos ---
Created attachment 45574
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45574&action=edit
program output & gcc configuration in Sierra
Hello,
Having run this small test in older systems also, Yosemite (10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87199
--- Comment #3 from Ev Drikos ---
Created attachment 45573
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45573&action=edit
program output & gcc configuration in Yosemite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89115
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||9.0
Known to fail|9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89134
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89135
--- Comment #3 from Shubham Narlawar ---
I could reproduce the ICE on gcc-8.2 but not on trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89135
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88170
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89124
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89130
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89124
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 31 08:20:45 2019
New Revision: 268415
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268415&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/89124
* ipa-inline.c (sanitize_attrs_match_fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89125
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89119
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89115
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 31 08:09:59 2019
New Revision: 268414
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268414&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-01-31 Richard Biener
PR rtl-optimization/89115
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89135
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
101 - 148 of 148 matches
Mail list logo
