https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71792
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d82823454355f9d24dba51316145f84ae8d34ff7
commit r12-5765-gd82823454355f9d24dba51316145f84ae8d34ff7
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88471
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-03
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84516
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
There is most likely a missing call to unlowered_expr_type somewhere, most
likely in finish_unary_op_expr.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95009
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102735
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Thomas Schwinge :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:31c200c6e110ced8732332376e69c0958985b926
commit r12-5766-g31c200c6e110ced8732332376e69c0958985b926
Author: Thomas Schwinge
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95009
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||84516, 70733
--- Comment #4 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103523
Joel Hutton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from Joel Hutton
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70733
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2016-06-16 00:00:00 |2021-12-2
--- Comment #6 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89880
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
ICC accepts the code too
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103523
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12 Regression] SVE |[11/12 Regression] SVE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103537
Bug ID: 103537
Summary: Using -fstack-protector-strong "without" optimization
cause segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103450
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71934
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fe7c3ecff1f9c0520090a77fa824d8c5d9dbec12
commit r12-5768-gfe7c3ecff1f9c0520090a77fa824d8c5d9dbec12
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103409
--- Comment #14 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to hubicka from comment #13)
> > I've fixed the threading slowdown. Can someone verify and close this PR if
> > all
> > the slowdown has been accounted for? If not, then someone needs to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 103409, which changed state.
Bug 103409 Summary: [12 Regression] 18% SPEC2017 WRF compile-time regression
with -O2 -flto since r12-5228-gb7a23949b0dcc4205fcc2be6b84b91441faa384d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103409
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103537
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you try add -fsanitize=undefined and seeing if there is any undefined
behavior there? What about -fsanitize=address?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103450
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98782
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 96825, which changed state.
Bug 96825 Summary: [11/12 Regression] Commit r11-2645 degrades CPU2017
548.exchange2_r by 35%
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96825
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96095
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79620
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||barry.revzin at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103450
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103463
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 103450 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103456
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:97ffef3553267f52ca83dbebdcc8b5e3739febee
commit r12-5770-g97ffef3553267f52ca83dbebdcc8b5e3739febee
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98782
--- Comment #10 from Jan Hubicka ---
Thanks for looking into this. I was planning to try to contact Vladimir about
the IRA behaviour here, but there was always something else to work with higher
priority. I wonder if you could possibly attach
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90347
--- Comment #7 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko ---
r12-5761 PASS for me
r12-5648 FAIL
r12-5761 PASS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103302
--- Comment #9 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Thanks, this alternate testcase confirms my suspicion that the original issue
was only going latent. It's clearly a preexisting register allocation issue on
riscv, that was latent and that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90347
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Dmitry G. Dyachenko from comment #7)
> r12-5761 PASS for me
>
> r12-5648 FAIL
> r12-5761 PASS
Most likely r12-5696-g53caa4723d8de .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103024
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aoliva at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103530
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aoliva at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96825
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103538
Bug ID: 103538
Summary: [12 Regression] trunk 20211203 fails to build gnat on
x86_64-linux-gnux32
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #21 from Richard Earnshaw ---
The newlib change that caused this has now been reverted:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/newlib/2021/018747.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83782
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
Summary|[9/10/11/12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103539
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||98940
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103539
Bug ID: 103539
Summary: [C++23] P2324 - Labels at the end of compound
statements
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103383
--- Comment #8 from Rich ---
(In reply to Michael Eager from comment #7)
> Do you have a test case which shows the problem?
It's not difficult to get it to show up if you're using the builtin swap16 and
conditionals. Here's a simple one (the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61457
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
In C++17 the static member is implicitly inline, so GCC no longer expects it to
have a separate definition.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83782
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f7854b908977adce4ff669c4e0332ef868568b7c
commit r12-5771-gf7854b908977adce4ff669c4e0332ef868568b7c
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Sat Jun 19
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71934
--- Comment #13 from Iain Sandoe ---
Have two patches that implement "--enable-pie-tools" to do this
as noted they need some polish and I suspect that we need a "PIEflag.m4"
modelled in the same way as PICflag.m4 (which covers both enable and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103540
Bug ID: 103540
Summary: diagnosting concept depends on itself
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71934
--- Comment #15 from Iain Sandoe ---
if it were only the main exe, I think we'd be OK on m32 Darwin too - but after
10.7 everything gets ASLRd (kernel, DSOs, dynamic linker and exe) so even
though each one is in a smallish range, the combined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71934
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And if doing it at restore time would be too hard, there is always an option to
precompute a "relocation" table during PCH saving and store it at the very end
of the PCH file, so that normally when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51469
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f7854b908977adce4ff669c4e0332ef868568b7c
commit r12-5771-gf7854b908977adce4ff669c4e0332ef868568b7c
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Sat Jun 19
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71934
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu ---
Can we enable PIE on gcc now?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71934
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
For start we could revert the patch that prevents it, I think that was
r6-4396-g5148d2e38fa5ff6 + perhaps some follow-ups.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71934
--- Comment #11 from Iain Sandoe ---
I think this needs to be done selectively (I posted some patches which probably
need some polish).
We have to remember that (much thought I really appreciates Jakub's work on
this) this only solves part of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71934
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71934
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Making PCH relocatable (as last resort) is doable too, after all, we already
relocate it once during PCH storing, all the info is there.
We even don't need something like the saving_htab for it, all we need
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103541
Bug ID: 103541
Summary: unnecessary spills around const functions calls
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103364
--- Comment #17 from Andreas Krebbel ---
(In reply to Sarah Julia Kriesch from comment #12)
> that is happening during the build process in OBS with a really minimal
> openSUSE Tumbleweed. We are using VMs using QEMU and with 4GB of memory.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103383
--- Comment #9 from Rich ---
of course, that should be -mxl-barrel-shift...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103542
Bug ID: 103542
Summary: bogus -Warray-bounds while index is limited by
switch/case
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
101 - 154 of 154 matches
Mail list logo