https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95053
--- Comment #11 from Bill Seurer ---
/home/seurer/gcc/git/install/gcc-test/bin/gfortran -c -o
module_ra_cam.fppized.o -I. -I./netcdf/include -I./inc -m64 -O0 -g3
-mcpu=power8 -Wno-deprecated-declarations -fconvert=big-endian -std=legacy
module_ra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95046
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8a6790fb4e5090624fbd71e2b895e6bdd5319fd7
commit r11-332-g8a6790fb4e5090624fbd71e2b895e6bdd5319fd7
Author: Uros Bizjak
Date: Tue May
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95053
--- Comment #12 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Bill Seurer from comment #11)
> /home/seurer/gcc/git/install/gcc-test/bin/gfortran -c -o
> module_ra_cam.fppized.o -I. -I./netcdf/include -I./inc -m64 -O0 -g3
> -mcpu=power8 -Wno-depr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79706
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94998
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d17cdc17c90ce77cb90c569322c1f241d3530cec
commit r11-333-gd17cdc17c90ce77cb90c569322c1f241d3530cec
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Tue May 12 10:3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94998
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
Fixed on master branch so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79706
--- Comment #4 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> Probably the same issue:
>
> struct A {
> void operator delete(void*) = delete;
> void operator delete[](void*) = delete;
> };
>
> using type1 = decltype(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79706
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Ah good point.
struct A {
void operator delete(void*) = delete;
void operator delete[](void*) = delete;
};
A* f();
A* f2();
using type1 = decltype(delete f());
using type2 = decltype(delete[] f2());
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95053
--- Comment #13 from Bill Seurer ---
I don't know fortran and this appears to be part of a multi-thousand line
extremely complex function.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95053
--- Comment #14 from Steve Kargl ---
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 06:43:54PM +, seurer at linux dot vnet.ibm.com
wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95053
>
> --- Comment #13 from Bill Seurer ---
> I don't know fortran and this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95080
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-05-12
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95051
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ac627eb4162d31aa4d009c3c9a8da7dfd6cc34e0
commit r11-335-gac627eb4162d31aa4d009c3c9a8da7dfd6cc34e0
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95093
Bug ID: 95093
Summary: Implement DR 1966, Colon following enumeration
elaborated-type-specifier
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95092
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-05-12
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94906
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:45a6686e76bfcd48f7c72a23d0e15186f76b4bfc
commit r9-8588-g45a6686e76bfcd48f7c72a23d0e15186f76b4bfc
Author: Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94906
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68033
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82283
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95087
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.1.0
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68033
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95021
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ubizjak at gmail dot com
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95053
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95036
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95074
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:90b160f8ec515f54ddc36519a6aaa60abdabdec1
commit r11-336-g90b160f8ec515f54ddc36519a6aaa60abdabdec1
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95074
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95013
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2a0225e47868fbfceaecaa5e2de96c1c5a2251ea
commit r11-338-g2a0225e47868fbfceaecaa5e2de96c1c5a2251ea
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95013
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95094
Bug ID: 95094
Summary: alignof(reference_to_type) doesn't return
alignof(referenced_type) as it ought to, by the
standard
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93983
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95095
Bug ID: 95095
Summary: Feature request: support -fno-unique-section-names
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12411
Rafael Avila de Espindola changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rafael at espindo dot la
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95094
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95094
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
But this doesn't seem like a very useful behaviour for the extension.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93983
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95096
Bug ID: 95096
Summary: Feature request: add -fsplit-dwarf
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95096
--- Comment #1 from Fangrui Song ---
Created https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-May/545638.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95093
ensadc at mailnesia dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ensadc at mailnesia dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95094
--- Comment #3 from Inbal Levi ---
Actually, you are right,
I'm currently working on a paper to change it, should have waited for
afterward.
The reason to change it is to align (...) with C behavior.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95023
--- Comment #2 from Ye Luo ---
I got the following error when building the new lib. Tried gcc 8 and 10 with
master and newlib-3.3.0. No difference
/home/yeluo/opt/build-amdgcn-gcc/./gcc/xgcc
-B/home/yeluo/opt/build-amdgcn-gcc/./gcc/ -nostdinc
-B
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95078
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> TER should go away, not be extended. So you are suggesting that we replace
>
> leaq44(%rdi,%rdx,4), %rdx --- redundant could be fwprop
> mov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94118
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0fec3f62b9bfc03e5088a09036791c2ac84fe0c8
commit r11-344-g0fec3f62b9bfc03e5088a09036791c2ac84fe0c8
Author: liuhongt
Date: Fri May 8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94118
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #25 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #23)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #20)
> > (In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #18)
> > > Currently, I'm thinking to enhance GCC 'cunroll' as:
> > > if th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #26 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #20)
> (In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #18)
> > Currently, I'm thinking to enhance GCC 'cunroll' as:
> > if the loop has multi-exits or upbound is not a fixed numbe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95097
Bug ID: 95097
Summary: Missed optimization with bitfield value ranges
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #27 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
(In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #26)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #20)
> > (In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #18)
> > > Currently, I'm thinking to enhance GCC 'cunroll' as:
> > > if the lo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94969
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Bin Cheng :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f6e1a4cd83190746b6544917f7526fa480ca5f18
commit r11-345-gf6e1a4cd83190746b6544917f7526fa480ca5f18
Author: Bin Cheng
Date: Wed May 13
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95097
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-05-13
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95019
--- Comment #1 from bin cheng ---
Please provide the exact configuration/compilation command lines in bug report
next time, which could save others' time to reproduce. Considering I didn't
touch mips for years.
As for this specific issue, note
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95053
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|WAITING
--- Comment #16 from Thomas Koen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95052
--- Comment #7 from Krzysztof Nowicki ---
Thanks for the very quick response. I've applied the patch on top of GCC 9.1
and it indeed fixes the problem we've seen on MIPS64.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #28 from Richard Biener ---
> It the growth limit seems could be refined. The ^ is an exponent operation,
> right?
Yes. The idea is to limit growth more when there is no benefit of unrolling
detected by the cost model (which current
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95097
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|85316 |
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95098
Bug ID: 95098
Summary: Out of scope variable visible during debugging at Og
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95019
--- Comment #2 from zhongyunde at tom dot com ---
It is a generic issue for all targets, such as x86, it also don't enpand IVOPTs
as index is not used for DEST and Src directly. we may need expand IVOPTs, then
different targets can select differe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95097
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Just to quote EVRP sees
:
_1 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR(f);
_2 = _1 & 1048575;
if (_2 != 0)
goto ; [INV]
else
goto ; [INV]
:
_3 = f.x;
_4 = (unsigned int) _3;
y_8 = _4 * 4096;
if (y_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95098
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95013
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Christophe Lyon :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a7b7818f3dbd14cc7577d25dcebaded07395c476
commit r11-346-ga7b7818f3dbd14cc7577d25dcebaded07395c476
Author: Christophe Lyon
Date:
101 - 158 of 158 matches
Mail list logo
