https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78804
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78804
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew.burgess at embecosm dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78804
--- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo ---
Created attachment 41982
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41982&action=edit
Proposed patch
I'd propose to remove the FLOAT_BIT_ORDER_MISMATCH stuff altogether. It's more
portable to use shif
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78804
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||joseph at codesourcery dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81828
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
>As 48-core ARM chips have just been announced by Qualcomm,
I have been using a 48 core ThunderX which is an ARMv8-a for almost 3 years now
:) So don't bring this up really.
Cilk+ is deprecated as nobody i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78804
--- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo ---
Created attachment 41981
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41981&action=edit
Disassembled DF code of comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78804
--- Comment #6 from Oleg Endo ---
Created attachment 41980
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41980&action=edit
Disassembled SF code of comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78804
--- Comment #5 from Oleg Endo ---
I have checked with the following simplified test code:
#include
int main (void)
{
volatile float testval = 1;
// volatile double testval = 1;
testval = testval + 1;
return ((const uint8_t*)&testval)[
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81828
--- Comment #3 from Eric ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Note Cilk+ have been deprecated:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-7/changes.html
As 48-core ARM chips have just been announced by Qualcomm, now seems like the
wrong time to be d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81828
--- Comment #2 from Eric ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Note Cilk+ have been deprecated:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-7/changes.html
As 48-core ARM chips have just been announced by Qualcomm, now seems like the
wrong time to be d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81830
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81295
--- Comment #11 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Sat Aug 12 00:28:04 2017
New Revision: 251065
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251065&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[RS6000] linux startfile/endfile
These need to match the gnu-user.h defini
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81170
--- Comment #1 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Sat Aug 12 00:28:04 2017
New Revision: 251065
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251065&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[RS6000] linux startfile/endfile
These need to match the gnu-user.h definit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46091
--- Comment #2 from Avi Kivity ---
Another instance:
unsigned long clear(unsigned long x) {
return x & ~ ((unsigned long)1 << 63);
}
This compiles to movabs+andq, while it could compile to a single btr
instruction.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81831
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Hmm, weird:
Wpsabi
C ObjC C++ ObjC++ LTO Var(warn_psabi) Init(1) Warning Undocumented
LangEnabledBy(C ObjC C++ ObjC++,Wabi)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81831
Bug ID: 81831
Summary: -Wno-psabi is not documented
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81824
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80806
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81830
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor ---
This never seems to have worked correctly going as far back as GCC 4.1.0
(r104500) so it's not a regression.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81830
Bug ID: 81830
Summary: missing Wunused-local-typedef on a typedef of an
unnamed enum or struct
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81829
Bug ID: 81829
Summary: [7 Regression] /usr/bin/gcc-{ar,nm,ranlib} segfault
without arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81826
Raul Laasner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78804
--- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #2)
>
> So what I suspect is that something is missing from the rx libgcc
> configuration files (libgcc/config/rx/t-rx and/or libgcc/config/rx/rx-lib.h)
> which means that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81795
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #4)
> Donezo.
Thanks for the quick fix!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81828
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81828
Bug ID: 81828
Summary: Cilkplus performance regression on ARM...
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81795
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81795
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri Aug 11 18:02:18 2017
New Revision: 251056
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251056&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/81795
* c-decl.c (pushtag): Only print inform if t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60355
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Fri Aug 11 17:45:36 2017
New Revision: 251054
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251054&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-08-11 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/60355
* resolve.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81818
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Roberts ---
Looking at --param ggc-min-expand and --param ggc-min-heapsize
For gcc 8.0.0:
on arm with 1Gb RAM:
GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=93 --param ggc-min-heapsize=119808
on aarch64 with 1Gb RAM:
GGC heur
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81827
Bug ID: 81827
Summary: Large compile time with derived-type rrays
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81825
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
BTW, GCC 8 -O2 generates
.file "foo.i"
.text
.p2align 4,,15
.globl func
.type func, @function
func:
.LFB0:
.cfi_startproc
pushq %rbp
.cfi_def_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81825
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81313
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||luto at kernel dot org
--- Comment #7 from H.J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81826
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab ---
Try adding -fpreprocessed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81826
Bug ID: 81826
Summary: Incorrect handling of directives left by preprocessor
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81825
Bug ID: 81825
Summary: x86_64 stack realignment code is suboptimal
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81824
Bug ID: 81824
Summary: Warn for missing attributes with function aliases
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81430
--- Comment #10 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Fri Aug 11 15:37:14 2017
New Revision: 251053
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251053&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR lto/81430] Revert "Add nvptx_override_options_after_change"
Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81732
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81787
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81761
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64le-*-linux,|
|x86_64-*-linux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77732
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2017-08-11 7:51 AM, jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Meanwhile, John, since you seem to have access to an hppa machine, can
> you please test and if it works commit the following?
Will do.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81762
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-*-linux |x86_64-*-*
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81823
Bug ID: 81823
Summary: [RX] Improve support for atomics other than SImode
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81721
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81718
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81821
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo ---
A possible fix:
Index: gcc/config/rx/rx.md
===
--- gcc/config/rx/rx.md (revision 251045)
+++ gcc/config/rx/rx.md (working copy)
@@ -2167,6 +2167,7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81756
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81785
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81821
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[RX] __atomic_test_and_set |[RX] xchg_mem uses
|overwr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81822
Bug ID: 81822
Summary: [RX] Should implement __atomic_compare_exchange
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81133
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka ---
I see. compute_uninlined_call_time uses counts when they are available and
frequencies when they are not. It makes sense that dropping count to 0 will
lead to change of compute_uninlined_call_time. I am bit su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81318
--- Comment #23 from Jan Hubicka ---
determine_unlikely_bbs is intended to propagate known to be cold bbs
(profile_count::zero) rather than guessed_zero so it seems to do the job
correctly here, because we decide to trust the cold attribute (I am
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81821
Bug ID: 81821
Summary: [RX] __atomic_test_and_set overwrites adjacent memory
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81814
--- Comment #5 from d25fe0be@ ---
Oops, sorry, I read the 2nd and the 3rd operand of the conditional operator in
wrong order.
A silly mistake..
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81465
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81814
--- Comment #4 from d25fe0be@ ---
Per n4659 7.8/[conv.integral]:
```
If the destination type is signed, the value is unchanged if it can be
represented in the destination type;
otherwise, the value is implementation-defined.
```
Isn't `(char)xx
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81486
Benjamin Buch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||benni.buch at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81465
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 41978
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41978&action=edit
Tested patch candidate
Adding patch candidate that changes cgraph_node::verify_node that verifies
global.inlined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81465
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 41977
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41977&action=edit
Tested patch candidate
Adding patch candidate that adds:
!opt_for_fn (edge->caller->decl, optimize)) to estimate
.type foo, @function
foo:
.LFB0:
.cfi_startproc
#APP
# 10 "y.c" 1
nop
# 0 "" 2
# 11 "y.c" 1
nop
# 0 "" 2
# 13 "y.c" 1
nop
# 0 "" 2
# 14 "y.c" 1
nop
# 0 "" 2
#N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81318
--- Comment #22 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 41976
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41976&action=edit
Patch candidate
So I believe that problem is hidden in determine_unlikely_bbs where we set
bb->count = profile_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81814
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Ugh, I believe fold_cond_expr_with_comparison does Very Bad stuff: it sees
A == 0 ? A : 0 and thinks that it can be optimized to 0, btu it can't, in this
case we have
(signed char) xxx == 0 ? (unsigned long l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81318
--- Comment #21 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #20)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #19)
> > (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #8)
> > > Reduced Boost testcase:
> > I'm testing patch for t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81801
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Fri, 11 Aug 2017, oss at malat dot biz wrote:
> One could solve it by dividing both pointers by the size before the
> subtraction, but that would make the operation more expensive.
See a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81318
--- Comment #20 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #19)
> (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #8)
> > Reduced Boost testcase:
> I'm testing patch for this PR. Markus what options are needed to spot ICE
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81318
--- Comment #19 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #8)
> Reduced Boost testcase:
>
> struct A;
> struct B {
> typedef A *type;
> };
> struct C {
> B::type operator->();
> };
> struct D {
> struct F {
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77732
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> So hppa uses invisible reference to pass the struct argument.
> Thus I guess we should not run the test-case on hppa target? Martin can you
> please take a look?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81819
Bug ID: 81819
Summary: [7 Regression][RX] internal compiler error: in
rx_is_restricted_memory_address, at config/rx/rx.c:311
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81133
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
I've got it what's responsible. When the edge_badness is called for the first
time, we call compute_uninlined_call_time where:
(gdb) p edge->count.to_gcov_type ()
$25 = 194
Then various clones of the caller
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81818
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Roberts ---
I've added the test results for the arm and aarch64 builds on Raspberry Pi3.
These show compilation time, memory used, and object file size for:
-O0, -Os, -O1, -O2, -O3
using gcc 5.4.0, 6.4.0, 7.2.0, and 8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81318
Michael Ellerman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpe at ellerman dot id.au
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81818
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Roberts ---
Created attachment 41975
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41975&action=edit
Full test results for aarch64 on Raspberry Pi3
Test results for -O0, -Os, -O1, -O2, -O3 for gcc 5.4.0, 6.4.0,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81817
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81816
--- Comment #1 from Alexander Monakov ---
*** Bug 81817 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81818
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Roberts ---
Created attachment 41974
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41974&action=edit
Full test report for Raspberry Pi ARM
Test results for -O0, -Os, -O1, -O2, -O3 for gcc 5.4.0, 6.4.0, 7.2.0, 8.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81818
Bug ID: 81818
Summary: aarch64 uses 2-3x memory and 2x time of arm at -Os,
-O2, -O3 (memory-hog)
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81751
--- Comment #9 from Volker Wehrs ---
Thank you, I guess that change should fix the bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81133
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
So when the edge is insert to the heap we see:
Badness calculation for app_disable/164630 ->
_Z11app_disablev.part.30/166180
size growth 6, time 16.00 unspec 216.00
Wrapper penalty. In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81805
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #41970|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81817
Bug ID: 81817
Summary: ICE in lto1 with -fopenmp offloading and nested
#pragma omp target
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81816
Bug ID: 81816
Summary: ICE in lto1 with -fopenmp offloading and nested
#pragma omp target
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79987
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||5.4.0, 6.3.0, 7.1.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81815
--- Comment #1 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Created attachment 41971
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41971&action=edit
Proposed patch
Here's the patch I'm testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79987
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri Aug 11 10:01:13 2017
New Revision: 251049
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251049&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Do not instrument void variables with MPX (PR tree-opt/79987).
2017-08-11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81805
--- Comment #8 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #7)
> (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #6)
> > Created attachment 41970 [details]
> > tentative patch for test-case from comment 3
>
> Works for test-case from com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81815
Bug ID: 81815
Summary: Invalid conditional reduction
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81814
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Probably started with r125012.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81805
--- Comment #7 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #6)
> Created attachment 41970 [details]
> tentative patch for test-case from comment 3
Works for test-case from comment 2 as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81814
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81805
--- Comment #6 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 41970
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41970&action=edit
tentative patch for test-case from comment 3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81801
--- Comment #3 from Petr Malat ---
After reading the related part of the standard (actually, N1570 draft), I'm not
so sure about this. The semantics section in 6.5.6 says pointers have to be
from the same object and also the result must fit into
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81805
--- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #4)
> (gdb) call debug_generic_expr (cond)
> (signed long) i < 0
And the conversion from unsigned to signed comparison is done here in
c_parser_omp_for_loop:
...
(gdb)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81261
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81805
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #3)
> The comparison should have read '(long long)i < 0', no idea how the cast is
> lost.
It seems to be lost here, in c-omp.c:
...
553/* 2.5.1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81799
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amker at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81213
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81213
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri Aug 11 08:10:42 2017
New Revision: 251047
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251047&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix ifunc and resolver (PR ipa/81213).
2017-08-11 Martin Liska
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81801
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Related to PR 80998.
1 - 100 of 104 matches
Mail list logo
