https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89354
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8/9 Regression] Combine |[7 Regression] Combine pass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88920
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89278
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89340
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8/9 Regression] ICE in |[7/8 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88920
--- Comment #27 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Feb 15 07:52:50 2019
New Revision: 268930
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268930=gcc=rev
Log:
PR other/69006
PR testsuite/88920
* lib/gcc-dg.exp: If
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69006
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Feb 15 07:52:50 2019
New Revision: 268930
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268930=gcc=rev
Log:
PR other/69006
PR testsuite/88920
* lib/gcc-dg.exp: If
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89342
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89278
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Feb 15 07:50:26 2019
New Revision: 268928
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268928=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/89278
* tree-loop-distribution.c: Include
; .p2align 4,,10
> .p2align 3
> .L3:
> .L2:
> endbr64 <<< Why is ENDBR here? There is no indirect branch.
> movl$22, %eax
> ret
> .cfi_endproc
> .LFE0:
> .size test, .-test
> .ident "GCC: (GNU) 9.0.
; .p2align 4,,10
> .p2align 3
> .L3:
> .L2:
> endbr64 <<< Why is ENDBR here? There is no indirect branch.
> movl$22, %eax
> ret
> .cfi_endproc
> .LFE0:
> .size test, .-test
> .ident "GCC: (GNU) 9.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89278
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Feb 15 07:39:45 2019
New Revision: 268927
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268927=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/89278
* tree-loop-distribution.c: Include
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89340
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Feb 15 07:38:09 2019
New Revision: 268926
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268926=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c/89340
* c-decl.c (start_function): Clear TREE_PUBLIC on nested
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89342
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Feb 15 07:36:23 2019
New Revision: 268925
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268925=gcc=rev
Log:
PR other/89342
* optc-save-gen.awk: Handle optimize_fast like
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89342
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Feb 15 07:17:24 2019
New Revision: 268924
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268924=gcc=rev
Log:
PR other/89342
* optc-save-gen.awk: Handle optimize_fast like
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88835
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89350
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #1)
>
> The test case makes the tacit assumption that argc is necessarily
> non-negative. That makes sense for the argc argument to main but not in
> other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85316
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager ---
There's probably a lot more bugs that should fall under this meta-bug than
currently do; I'll leave finding them all for another day though (or for
someone else to do)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89356
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
reshape_init turns {NON_LVALUE_EXPR <2>} into NON_LVALUE_EXPR <2> and then the
mangled name misses "tlE".
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89356
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
That revision also changes mangling of fn from
decltype (unsigned short{2u}+((int)(3))) fn()
to
decltype ((2u)+((int)(3))) fn()
template
auto fn () -> decltype(unsigned{2u} + (T)3) { return 42; }
template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70149
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #13 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89168
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88835
--- Comment #12 from Mark Wielaard ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #11)
> Ah, but you mentioned elfutilts, not binutils. I've now downloaded and
> built elfutils-0.175. It took a bit more effort because --disable-werror
> doesn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89168
--- Comment #1 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Fri Feb 15 00:36:50 2019
New Revision: 268922
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268922=gcc=rev
Log:
PR go/89168
libgo: change gotest to run examples with output
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88835
--- Comment #11 from Martin Sebor ---
Ah, but you mentioned elfutilts, not binutils. I've now downloaded and built
elfutils-0.175. It took a bit more effort because --disable-werror doesn't
work there but once I got past that I just got the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88835
--- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor ---
I've built the top of binutils-gdb with the patch referenced in comment #8
applied and with -Wformat-overflow=2 and -Wformat-truncation=2 and got the
following breakdown:
Diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89356
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
A similar testcase
template auto fn () -> decltype(unsigned{0} + T(1));
auto e = fn();
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89350
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor ---
The -Wstringop-overflow warning is a consequence of pointer offsets being
treated as unsigned integers, argc being signed, and the object size
computation returning scalars rather than ranges. In the first
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70090
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Micay ---
This has now been implemented in Clang as __builtin_dynamic_object_size.
There's a thread on the GCC mailing list about it at
https://www.mail-archive.com/gcc@gcc.gnu.org/msg87230.html.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491
Bug 67491 depends on bug 89036, which changed state.
Bug 89036 Summary: [8 Regression] ICE if destructor has a requires
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89036
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89036
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89036
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Thu Feb 14 23:17:51 2019
New Revision: 268916
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268916=gcc=rev
Log:
C++ concepts: fix ICE with requires on dtors (PR c++/89036)
PR c++/89036
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88795
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Thu Feb 14 23:14:56 2019
New Revision: 268915
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268915=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix ICE on class-template argument deduction (PR c++/88795)
PR c++/88795
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89354
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 14 23:12:26 2019
New Revision: 268914
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268914=gcc=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/89354
* combine.c (make_extraction): Punt if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89354
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Feb 14 23:10:47 2019
New Revision: 268913
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268913=gcc=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/89354
* combine.c (make_extraction): Punt if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86329
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Thu Feb 14 23:02:45 2019
New Revision: 268909
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268909=gcc=rev
Log:
C++: don't offer bogus "._0" suggestions (PR c++/86329)
PR c++/86329 reports
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89337
--- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor ---
The warning is very simple: it just looks for excessive sizes in calls emitted
in the optimized IL. When the call is there (either because it's in the source
code as is or because it's been synthesized by
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85515
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Thu Feb 14 22:57:34 2019
New Revision: 268908
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268908=gcc=rev
Log:
Don't offer suggestions for compiler-generated variables (PR c++/85515)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88835
--- Comment #9 from Mark Wielaard ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #8)
> The patch I posted for the related pr88993 also relaxes this warning for
> printf and fprintf: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-02/msg00224.html
>
> Like
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89077
--- Comment #16 from Harald Anlauf ---
Regarding the unwanted padding with \0, the following patch seems to
solve the issue with transfer.
Index: decl.c
===
--- decl.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88248
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81552
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81552
--- Comment #5 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Thu Feb 14 21:33:29 2019
New Revision: 268906
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268906=gcc=rev
Log:
PR 81552 Improve and document -flag-init-integer
Make the option handling code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89321
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89321
--- Comment #7 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Thu Feb 14 21:07:13 2019
New Revision: 268904
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268904=gcc=rev
Log:
PR go/89321
compiler: copy has_padding field from converted
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89358
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89358
Bug ID: 89358
Summary: Combining -std=c++14 and -std=c++17 objects gives ODR
warnings
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88248
--- Comment #9 from Harald Anlauf ---
Fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88248
--- Comment #8 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: anlauf
Date: Thu Feb 14 20:24:54 2019
New Revision: 268895
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268895=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-02-14 Harald Anlauf
PR fortran/88248
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85805
--- Comment #14 from Segher Boessenkool ---
I backported it anyway.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71880
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clange001 at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68241
Bug 68241 depends on bug 89352, which changed state.
Bug 89352 Summary: Deferred length character array pointer error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89352
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89352
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89349
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ---
> My reproducer described in the first comment was:
> 1) build gcc trunk w/o bootstrap and install it
> 2) use the compiler and build gcc-8 branch w/o bootstrap
> 3) Ada FE is successfully built, but Ada
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87149
--- Comment #13 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Thu Feb 14 19:03:54 2019
New Revision: 268890
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268890=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport from trunk
2018-08-31 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86684
--- Comment #15 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Thu Feb 14 19:03:54 2019
New Revision: 268890
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268890=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport from trunk
2018-08-31 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
--- Comment #16 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Thu Feb 14 18:57:54 2019
New Revision: 268889
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268889=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport from trunk
2019-01-18 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88145
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85805
--- Comment #13 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Thu Feb 14 18:46:18 2019
New Revision: 26
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=26=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport from trunk
2018-07-26 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89313
--- Comment #5 from Peter Bergner ---
I'm testing a patch that gives a better error message and eliminates the ICE:
[bergner@dagger1 PR89313]$ cat pr89313.i
long f;
long g (void)
{
register long z asm ("rax");
asm ("foo %0, %1, %2" : "="
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89349
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #2)
> What happens without --disable-bootstrap?
My reproducer described in the first comment was:
1) build gcc trunk w/o bootstrap and install it
2) use the compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89349
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> I thought that typically you can't build older gcc with newer gcc when using
> ada, at least I remember seeing issues with gcc 7 built with gcc 8 too when
> ada
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89352
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87864
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78147
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87864
--- Comment #10 from Rainer Orth ---
Author: ro
Date: Thu Feb 14 17:47:49 2019
New Revision: 268886
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268886=gcc=rev
Log:
Provide __start_minfo/__stop_minfo for linkers that don't (PR d/87864)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89337
Rafael Avila de Espindola changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443
Bug 88443 depends on bug 89337, which changed state.
Bug 89337 Summary: Bogus "exceeds maximum object size" on unreachable code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89337
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89308
--- Comment #8 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This is the way it came from upstream (llvm) and the solution for powerpc64 was
copied from what aarch64 did before.
What is really needed is a workable solution from whoever does sanitizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89337
Rafael Avila de Espindola changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #45710|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89330
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
> Let me see if I can add the respective usefulness test to the code
> deciding to speculate.
I see, it is mine, sorry for blaming you :)
One alternative would be also to put the indirect part of pseculative
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89308
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Still, a reexec is costly and might break some programs. If the ASLR makes
problems only sometimes, it might be better to try to map stuff it wants and if
that fails, before reporting failure try this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88850
--- Comment #11 from Tamar Christina ---
Author: tnfchris
Date: Thu Feb 14 17:17:20 2019
New Revision: 268884
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268884=gcc=rev
Log:
Arm: Add HF modes to ANY iterators
The iterator ANY64 are used in various
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89308
--- Comment #6 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I think it only comes out if you specify the verbose sanitizer option on the
compilation. If I can remember how to specify that I will try it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89349
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89330
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89308
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Ugh, does this mean if ASLR is enabled you get
"WARNING: Program is being run with address space layout "
"randomization (ASLR) enabled which prevents the thread and "
"memory sanitizers from working on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89308
--- Comment #4 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The above patch pulls in just enough of the changes from trunk to disable ASLR
for powerpc64 while leaving things alone for everyone else.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89308
--- Comment #3 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 45725
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45725=edit
Patch to disable ALSR for asan/tsan on powerpc64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89354
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 45724
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45724=edit
gcc9-pr89354.patch
Untested fix. I think the bug is in make_extraction, which for VOIDmode,
(mem:DI ...), 0,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89349
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89357
Bug ID: 89357
Summary: alignas for automatic variables with alignment greater
than 16 fails
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89335
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||87089
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89341
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Both decls of "foo" are using the same FUNCTION_DECL.
node->alias is set in varasm.c: assemble_alias here:
5991cgraph_node::get_create (decl)->alias = true;
when processing the second decl of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89354
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89356
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89356
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89341
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
The -Wattributes warning would be emitted here in cgraphunit.c:
process_function_and_variable_attributes:
777 if (lookup_attribute ("weakref", DECL_ATTRIBUTES (decl))
778 &&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89356
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89356
Bug ID: 89356
Summary: [9 Regression] sorry, unimplemented: mangling
implicit_conv_expr in nodejs8 package since r268321
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89354
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
-mno-stv also cures it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89354
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88677
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88677
--- Comment #16 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Feb 14 14:49:03 2019
New Revision: 268880
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268880=gcc=rev
Log:
PR lto/88677
Fix PR number.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
; Why is ENDBR here? There is no indirect branch.
movl$22, %eax
ret
.cfi_endproc
.LFE0:
.size test, .-test
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 9.0.1 20190214 (experimental)"
.section.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
.section
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89307
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
> Ah now, it's really doing sampling. I guess it can lead to quite some profile
> inconsistencies..
Yep, it is not coolest solution. I would not worry too much about
precision loss unless you get some weird
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72715
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-invalid-code, openmp |openacc
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89354
Bug ID: 89354
Summary: Combine pass yields wrong code with -O2 and -msse2 for
32bit target
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89242
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Thu Feb 14 13:57:52 2019
New Revision: 268876
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268876=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport r268873
2019-02-14 Martin Liska
Backport from mainline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89351
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
1 - 100 of 155 matches
Mail list logo
