https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67960
Bug ID: 67960
Summary: Prefixing a function with [[deprecated]] produces
multiple warnings
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67959
Bug ID: 67959
Summary: "width of 'code' exceeds its type" error in
ssa-thread-13
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58315
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #36472|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67927
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67925
--- Comment #10 from Arkadiusz Drabczyk ---
Patch sent for review here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg01303.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67931
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66117
--- Comment #5 from Paul Beeler ---
It is from isl master (0.15). This was 5 months ago, and I've been using my
own patch authored by me fine since then. I will continue to use it and not
the recently merged one thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67958
Bug ID: 67958
Summary: The tests changed by r223498 now FAILs on darwin
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59748
Adhemerval Zanella changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||adhemerval.zanella at linaro
dot o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67945
--- Comment #8 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Actually, the problem seems to be that we're oscillating
between forms.
The old fold-const.c folders converted sequences of sqrts
and cbrts into a pow call while tree-ssa-math-opts.c goes
the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67945
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52475
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50360
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67909
--- Comment #6 from Pat Haugen ---
416.gamess now passes on powerpc64 as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54322
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67925
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53542
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52365
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67956
--- Comment #6 from Christos Zoulas ---
great, thank you. since this is tracked already you can close it if you want.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67956
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
There has been some discussion recently of adding -Wformat-pedantic (see
bug 67479), which would seem reasonable to me. A syslog format also seems
reasonable (but we already have bug 15338
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67942
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67956
--- Comment #4 from Christos Zoulas ---
I believe that -pedantic enables other "pedantic" warnings which I don't belive
I want. I can add a specific printf format that does not accept %m, but I would
still need to add a syslog format that does (a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52083
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67920
--- Comment #9 from James Almer ---
(In reply to Yuri Rumyantsev from comment #8)
> Please check that revision 228760 will cure your issue.
Looks like it did. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47805
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67953
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54082
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67912
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67912
--- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Tue Oct 13 16:34:29 2015
New Revision: 228774
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228774&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
support BLKmode inputs for store_bit_field
Revision 228586 changed use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51802
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67956
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
The gnu_printf format attribute is specifically supposed to accept %m; you
can use -pedantic to disallow it. Targets can override what the printf
attribute maps to; see config/i386/msforma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53940
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67945
--- Comment #6 from Pat Haugen ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Was this maybe fixed by
>
> 2015-10-13 Richard Sandiford
>
> * real.h (real_isinteger): Declare.
> * real.c (real_isinteger): New function.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65141
--- Comment #4 from Alexandros Syrakos
---
Dominique, thanks for the quick reply. Your answer is just, but I'm afraid that
due to lack of appropriate skills I can't be much more help than reporting
bugs.
Concerning the present bug, let me add s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67956
--- Comment #2 from Christos Zoulas ---
something is wrong with the bug tracking system, when posting a bug with an
attachment as the first post; this is how the dup got created.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67956
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab ---
*** Bug 67957 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67955
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> The same points-to set results from
>
> int *p = (int *)((char *)&a + 2);
>
> or even
>
> int *p = &a + 1;
>
I see, I didn't realize that. But AFA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67957
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67957
--- Comment #1 from Christos Zoulas ---
Created attachment 36504
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36504&action=edit
patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67957
Bug ID: 67957
Summary: gcc's printf attribute accepts %m as a format
character
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67956
Bug ID: 67956
Summary: gcc's printf attribute accepts %m as a format
character
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67925
--- Comment #8 from Arkadiusz Drabczyk ---
I attach a new patch with an extra whitespace after dot to keep up with an
existing convention.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67925
Arkadiusz Drabczyk changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #36488|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67932
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67930
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Try adding -W -Wall and also -WWrite-string
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67937
--- Comment #4 from Joshua Cranmer ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Most interesting would be a C testcase that produces the CFG with the bogus
> counters ;)
Yeah, I know, but doing the minimization on a 5MLOC program takes tim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67932
--- Comment #9 from R Copley ---
For information, this has already been entered on the mingw-w64 issue tracker
(months ago) (see http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/bugs/459/).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67930
--- Comment #2 from BENAÏSSA ---
Thank you for your reply.
Comments::
I am not convinced by your point of view.
1- the compilation step does not deliver any message.
2- I modify the string by address and this is permitted by C for any e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67954
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67955
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
We use "must point to" nowhere because we don't compute it ;)
The same points-to set results from
int *p = (int *)((char *)&a + 2);
or even
int *p = &a + 1;
so you can't use points-to info that way (to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67915
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67955
Bug ID: 67955
Summary: tree-dse does not use pointer info
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67696
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58315
--- Comment #39 from Christopher Torres ---
(In reply to Alexandre Oliva from comment #36)
> Created attachment 36472 [details]
> backported patch for the 4.9 branch
>
> Chris,
>
> retbnd is of no concern, nothing equivalent existed back then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47469
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51820
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47495
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49590
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48997
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51380
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52265
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67954
Bug ID: 67954
Summary: [5 Regression] internal compiler error: in
patch_jump_insn, at cfgrtl.c:1281
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58002
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67696
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67947
--- Comment #2 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
revision 228760 must fix this bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67744
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #4 from Dominique
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67920
--- Comment #8 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
Please check that revision 228760 will cure your issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67944
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Your expectation is not in line with what the compiler actually promises
you: the only guarantee is that the local register variable will be in
(in your case) ebx _where used in an asm statement_.
Other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67743
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67945
--- Comment #5 from Alexander Fomin ---
Created attachment 36500
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36500&action=edit
Folding regression reproducer
Unfortunately, it does not for x86-64.
Please take a look at the attached repro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67909
--- Comment #5 from Ilya Enkovich ---
Author: ienkovich
Date: Tue Oct 13 13:08:31 2015
New Revision: 228760
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228760&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
2014-10-13 Yuri Rumyantsev
PR tree-optimization/6790
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67936
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67949
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58002
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The test
Module m200c2
Integer,Target :: x = 42
Contains
Function fx()
Integer,Pointer :: fx
fx => x
End Function
End Module
Program q1
Use m200c2
C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60040
--- Comment #9 from Matthijs Kooijman ---
Created attachment 36499
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36499&action=edit
Second testcase, needs -Os to break
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60040
Matthijs Kooijman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matthijs at stdin dot nl
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67915
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Index: gcc/tree-cfgcleanup.c
===
--- gcc/tree-cfgcleanup.c (revision 228753)
+++ gcc/tree-cfgcleanup.c (working copy)
@@ -103,17 +1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67953
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67953
Bug ID: 67953
Summary: [6 Regression] match.pd: X - (X / Y) * Y wrong on
change of sign
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67909
--- Comment #4 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
Created attachment 36498
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36498&action=edit
proposed patch
This patch cures run-time error for 416.gamess.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67909
--- Comment #3 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
Check that guard edge is around the inner loop was missed. After adding it
416.gamess run successfully.
I sent the fix for review.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67950
--- Comment #5 from Hans Streibel ---
Just noticed:
Adding an optimization flag -O1 or -O2 to g++ removes this bug (-O0 does not
help):
[root@dev71 tmp]# /opt/gcc-4.9.3-hans/bin/g++ -o tcpserver.4.9.3++ -O1 -Wall
tcpserver.c
[root@dev71 tmp]# ./
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67950
--- Comment #4 from Hans Streibel ---
Created attachment 36497
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36497&action=edit
g++ preprocessed result
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67950
--- Comment #3 from Hans Streibel ---
Created attachment 36496
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36496&action=edit
gcc preprocessed result
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67950
--- Comment #2 from Hans Streibel ---
Ok, here is the missing Information:
[root@dev71 tmp]# /opt/gcc-4.9.3-hans/bin/gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/opt/gcc-4.9.3-hans/bin/gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/opt/gcc-4.9.3-hans/libexec/gcc/powerpc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62279
--- Comment #5 from Stanislav Angelovic ---
(In reply to Mikhail Maltsev from comment #4)
> (In reply to Stanislav Angelovic from comment #3)
> > GDB 7.7.1 demangler crashes upon this symbol in our binary:
> >
> > _ZSt7forwardIKSaINSt6thread5_Im
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61636
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jens.auer at cgi dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67952
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67952
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67952
Bug ID: 67952
Summary: Compilation error with boost::signals2 and generic
lambda: cannot call member function without object
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67921
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67950
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67949
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67920
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67916
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67951
Bug ID: 67951
Summary: Wshadow for type inferenced (auto) lambda parameters
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67947
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67950
Bug ID: 67950
Summary: AIX: Illegal instruction in accept()
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67476
--- Comment #11 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Oct 13 10:08:40 2015
New Revision: 228754
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228754&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Handle original loop tree in expand_omp_for_generic
2015-10-13
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67476
--- Comment #12 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Oct 13 10:08:59 2015
New Revision: 228756
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228756&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add param parloops-schedule
2015-10-13 Tom de Vries
1 - 100 of 125 matches
Mail list logo