https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63378
Bug ID: 63378
Summary: decltype and access control issues
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63378
--- Comment #1 from Roger Ferrer Ibanez roger.ferrer at bsc dot es ---
Created attachment 33578
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33578action=edit
Testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63300
Andreas Arnez arnez at linux dot vnet.ibm.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63300
Andreas Arnez arnez at linux dot vnet.ibm.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35545
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Well - ideally you'd want to do some CSE, not only VRP (constant propagation in
this case). So I'd move it even earlier, after pass_lower_vector_ssa? I
can't see what tracing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63376
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63375
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63373
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jsm28 at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60410
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
IMHO -fshort-double should be made a target specific option and generally not
supported.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63325
David Binderman dcb314 at hotmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63379
Bug ID: 63379
Summary: Incorrect vectorization when enabling SSE and O3,
initialises loop with wrong value
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63379
--- Comment #1 from Jason Wyatt jwyatt at feralinteractive dot com ---
Created attachment 33580
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33580action=edit
Test case
Compiling this code and running it gives the following output:
Point
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63380
Bug ID: 63380
Summary: Wrong constant folding
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63381
Bug ID: 63381
Summary: Wrong constant folding
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63247
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63247
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 33581
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33581action=edit
gcc5-pr63247.patch
Untested fix. I believe it is only this particular case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58893
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
--- Comment #5 from Avi Kivity a...@cloudius-systems.com ---
Richard, may I send you the test case privately?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63247
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Schwinge tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Patch works fine in my testing, thanks! Cesar, any further comments, as you
have originally diagnosed this issue?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 26 Sep 2014, a...@cloudius-systems.com wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
--- Comment #5 from Avi Kivity a...@cloudius-systems.com ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61283
--- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Does this still reproduce?
It does on i386-pc-solaris2.11 as of 20140924 (r215597).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50800
Matthias Kretz kretz at kde dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kretz at kde dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50800
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50800
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63382
Bug ID: 63382
Summary: gcc 5 breaks linux early bootup in QEMU
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63382
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59759
--- Comment #6 from Gereon Kremer gereon.kremer at cs dot rwth-aachen.de ---
Any news here?
The problem persists with version g++ (GCC) 4.9.1 20140903 (prerelease).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61848
Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andi-gcc at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59759
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63382
Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63375
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org ---
SRA is indeed quite guilty, the following patch fixes it:
diff --git a/gcc/tree-sra.c b/gcc/tree-sra.c
index 8259dba..fb24114 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-sra.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-sra.c
@@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63253
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35545
--- Comment #14 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com ---
This feels like the kind of situation where I've always wanted a pass to be
able to say something like I've done some set of transformations, schedule
the appropriate cleanup passes to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50021
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63383
Bug ID: 63383
Summary: internal compiler error: in expand_expr_real_1, at
expr.c:9389
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63383
--- Comment #1 from Brandon Rioja brandon at rioja dot us ---
version: gcc (GCC) 4.8.3
system type: cygwin running in windows 7
command line to build:
g++ -ggdb -O0 -std=c++11 BigOEasy.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63383
--- Comment #2 from Brandon Rioja brandon at rioja dot us ---
Created attachment 33583
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33583action=edit
stack dump
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63383
--- Comment #3 from Brandon Rioja brandon at rioja dot us ---
Created attachment 33584
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33584action=edit
preprocessed file (zipped)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44463
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45307
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44463
--- Comment #15 from Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org ---
I don't have any aliasing problems currently, but I haven't tried to take out
the workarounds. But it's ok for me to close.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55992
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
An alias declaration seems necessary to trigger the bug, eg doesn't affect:
templateunsigned P
struct my_array : Apole(P) { };
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59948
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mjambor at suse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47413
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44463
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63384
Bug ID: 63384
Summary: ICE in moveup_expr_chached-sel_bb_head-bb_node with
special options
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46176
Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25957
--- Comment #12 from Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org ---
Problem is still there in
gcc50 (GCC) 4.9.0 20130617 (experimental)
The stack protector edge should be cold and alignment disabled.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60469
Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45475
Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50302
--- Comment #5 from Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org ---
Problem is still there on
gcc version 4.8.3 20140624 (Red Hat 4.8.3-1) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63347
Jonathan Larmour jifl-bugzilla at jifvik dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.8.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63385
Bug ID: 63385
Summary: internal compiler error: in pop_binding, at
cp/name-lookup.c for implicitly captured variable
called closure
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63385
Matthias Kretz kretz at kde dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.9.0, 4.9.1, 4.9.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63282
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 33586
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33586action=edit
gcc5-pr63282.patch
Untested fix. Calling redirect_jump_1/indirect_jump_1 on something
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63282
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 33587
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33587action=edit
gcc5-pr63282-2.patch
Or we can just give up in redirect_jump_1 for asm gotos with 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63385
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com ---
Have you tried with the current 4.9.2 bits? I get the following with a 32bit
host cross to hppa64-unknown-linux-gnu:
depdi 0,52,20,%r26
depdi,z 1,32,4,%r28
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63385
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
This got fixed with r197211. Whether it is safely backportable will leave
to Jason.
Looks safe, testing now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63373
--- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson mikpelinux at gmail dot com ---
Related to PR57180?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63386
Bug ID: 63386
Summary: Release version of CB wont compile Bullet (-o2)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63386
--- Comment #1 from TechoMan root at borealis dot su ---
Using latests MinGW TDM.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63386
--- Comment #2 from TechoMan root at borealis dot su ---
-O2 causes that , -O1 doesnt.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63373
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com ---
I agree with the analysis in bug 28865 that .size should reflect the
presence of the initializer. That bug was marked FIXED, but I'm not clear
if the issue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61397
Maciej W. Rozycki ma...@linux-mips.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49423
--- Comment #32 from gregory.0xf0 at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to cbaylis from comment #31)
I intend to backport to 4.8 and 4.9, once this change has had a week of
testing on trunk.
Hi Charles, just a gentle reminder that you were planning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36757
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63386
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #5 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 26-Sep-14, at 3:46 PM, law at redhat dot com wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63302
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com ---
Have you tried with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35545
--- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sat Sep 27 00:03:23 2014
New Revision: 215651
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215651root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/35545
* passes.def
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35545
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32629
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yep, the problem with dealing arbitrarily long sequences is something we need
to solve. Also memcpy/memset ought to use vector moves by itself in these
cases..
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62121
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sat Sep 27 00:19:06 2014
New Revision: 215655
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215655root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR ipa/62121
* ipa-polymorphic-call.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60665
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60665
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sat Sep 27 00:21:33 2014
New Revision: 215656
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215656root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR ipa/60665
* ipa-devirt.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35545
--- Comment #17 from davidxl xinliangli at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #16)
I have moved tracer before the late cleanups that seems to be rather obbious
thing to do. This lets us to optimize the testcase (with -O2):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62164
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35545
--- Comment #18 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
WE can try some internal benchmarks with this change too.
That would be very welcome. Tracer used to be quite useful pass in old days,
doing 1.6% on -O3+FDO SPECint (for 1.4% code size
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63387
Bug ID: 63387
Summary: Optimize pairs of isnan() calls into a single
isunordered()
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #6 from Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org ---
Seems to be fixed now in
gcc version 5.0.0 20140926 (experimental) (GCC)
The double conversion is only generated for -mtune=amdfam10, but not for
mtune=generic
82 matches
Mail list logo
