https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85804
--- Comment #4 from bin cheng ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #3)
> (In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #2)
> > Patch being discussed here.
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-05/msg01026.html
>
>
> Bin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86519
--- Comment #1 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I cannot repeat this issue on a powerPc machine:
Native configuration is powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu
=== gcc tests ===
Schedule of variations:
unix
Running target unix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78173
Casey Carter changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Casey at Carter dot net
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86259
--- Comment #24 from Martin Sebor ---
The code in example #21 has the same bug:
union U u;
u.s = (struct S){0, 0, 0};
char *bp = u.s.b; // <<< bp points to u.s.b
uintptr_t sp_ip = (uintptr_t)bp - offsetof(struct S,b); //
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86517
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86520
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86520
Bug ID: 86520
Summary: AArch64: Two 8-bit accesses coalesced into a single
16-bit access
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84413
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84413
--- Comment #6 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Jul 13 20:36:01 2018
New Revision: 262650
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262650=gcc=rev
Log:
x86: Tune Skylake, Cannonlake and Icelake as Haswell
r259399, which added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84413
--- Comment #5 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Jul 13 20:25:57 2018
New Revision: 262649
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262649=gcc=rev
Log:
x86: Tune Skylake, Cannonlake and Icelake as Haswell
r259399, which added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86519
Bug ID: 86519
Summary: New test case gcc.dg/strcmpopt_6.c fails with its
introduction in r262636
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86490
--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to zenith432 from comment #12)
> Fair enough, it's a gold bug in the sense that gold's algorithm for
> selecting a prevailing def among multiple defs has an error.
> If an IR symbol has multiple
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86490
--- Comment #12 from zenith432 at users dot sourceforge.net ---
Fair enough, it's a gold bug in the sense that gold's algorithm for selecting a
prevailing def among multiple defs has an error.
If an IR symbol has multiple definitions as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86490
--- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to zenith432 from comment #10)
> Followup on what gold does...
This is a gold bug:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23411
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86455
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
Hmm, even more obvious. We push bx to argp - 24:
...
ORIGINAL:
(insn/f 26 3 27 2 (set (mem:DI (pre_dec:DI (reg/f:DI 7 sp)) [0 S8 A8])
(reg:DI 3 bx)) "clztest.c":12 61 {*pushdi2_rex64}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86516
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80641
--- Comment #11 from Martin Sebor ---
*** Bug 86516 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86490
--- Comment #10 from zenith432 at users dot sourceforge.net ---
Followup on what gold does...
First, it reads the symbol table from the archive (w/o using the plugin) - and
if it doesn't need any of the symbols in an LTO member of the archive -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86374
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86374
--- Comment #3 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Fri Jul 13 16:46:08 2018
New Revision: 262639
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262639=gcc=rev
Log:
[PR c++/86374] Name lookup failure in enclosing template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86518
Bug ID: 86518
Summary: Strengthen bootstrap comparison by not enabling
warnings at stage3
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86514
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|ada |tree-optimization
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809
--- Comment #41 from Qing Zhao ---
> --- Comment #40 from Wilco ---
> See eg. http://www.iso-9899.info/n1570.html section 7.24.4:
>
> "The sign of a nonzero value returned by the comparison functions memcmp,
> strcmp, and strncmp is determined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809
--- Comment #40 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Qing Zhao from comment #39)
> > --- Comment #38 from Wilco ---
> > This uses signed char while the C standard says the comparison is done on
> > unsigned chars.
> >
>
> during my implementation, I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809
--- Comment #39 from Qing Zhao ---
> --- Comment #38 from Wilco ---
> This uses signed char while the C standard says the comparison is done on
> unsigned chars.
>
during my implementation, I did some research on whether I should use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86455
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 44391
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44391=edit
Reproducer patch, splits push
Reproduced without the fkeep-vars-live patch.
Consider this test-case:
...
static
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86374
--- Comment #2 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Fri Jul 13 15:33:27 2018
New Revision: 262637
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262637=gcc=rev
Log:
[PR c++/86374] Name lookup failure in enclosing template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809
--- Comment #38 from Wilco ---
(In reply to qinzhao from comment #37)
> since all the implementation were in trunk.
> can I close this PR now?
Thanks, it generates pretty much what I expected for t1.
However there is an issue:
t1:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809
--- Comment #37 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
since all the implementation were in trunk.
can I close this PR now?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809
--- Comment #36 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
the 3rd part (the last part) of this PR was checked into GCC 9 today as:
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision=262636
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86517
Bug ID: 86517
Summary: relocation R_X86_64_32 against `.rodata.str1.1' can
not be used when making a shared object with LTO
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86202
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|mpolacek at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86202
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri Jul 13 13:36:35 2018
New Revision: 262635
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262635=gcc=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/86202
* gimple-fold.c (size_must_be_zero_p): Check
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85804
--- Comment #3 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #2)
> Patch being discussed here.
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-05/msg01026.html
Bin are you still working on this ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86489
Pat Haugen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86516
Bug ID: 86516
Summary: Spurious warning __builtin_memset at O3 when
protected by a conditional involving empty()
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86216
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
The C FE does
/* Arrange for the SAVE_EXPR on the inside of the
MINUS_EXPR, which allows the -1 to get folded
with the +1 that happens when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86216
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
I can't fully reproduce the obfuscation of the C++ FE (the +-1) but the
following is close but it also works:
typedef int intptr_t;
void foo (intptr_t n, unsigned a)
{
typedef intptr_t ArrTy[(long)a+1];
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69866
--- Comment #16 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
@honza: would you mind backporting to GCC 7? IIRW GCC 6 backport is more
tricky.
Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85974
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jul 13 11:25:38 2018
New Revision: 262632
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262632=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-07-13 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/85974
* match.pd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85974
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||9.0
Summary|[8/9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86514
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86514
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86515
--- Comment #1 from sliser at mail dot ru ---
struct A1
{
static constexpr auto SupportedVersions = {"1.1", "1.2", "1.3", "1.4"}; //
Ok
};
template
struct A2
{
static constexpr auto SupportedVersions = {"1.1", "1.2", "1.3", "1.4"}; //
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86515
Bug ID: 86515
Summary: std::initializer_list constructor is not a constant
expression
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86514
Bug ID: 86514
Summary: GCC/GNAT fails to optimize access to packed array
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86216
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 13 Jul 2018, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86216
>
> --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> I guess lambdas really need to have all the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82617
--- Comment #10 from Ögmundur Petersson ---
Thanks for the fix!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86511
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
This patch fixes inf-compare-[78].c testsuite failures on alphaev68 for me:
--cut here--
diff --git a/gcc/expmed.c b/gcc/expmed.c
index b01e1946898a..f114eb45e01f 100644
--- a/gcc/expmed.c
+++ b/gcc/expmed.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86513
Bug ID: 86513
Summary: ostringstream default constructor missing from
libstdc++
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86511
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> It looks like this goes wrong somewhere in expansion which seems to expand
> this as UNORDERED || GE w/o protecting the GE properly. It looks like we
> do not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86064
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86495
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85842
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tower120 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86507
--- Comment #4 from tower120 ---
> Are you sure about that? You might be able to include the header, but nothing
> else works.
"Everything" that I use, which is:
* std::experimental::filesystem::path (construction, c_str, comparison)
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86202
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86216
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I guess lambdas really need to have all the needed parameters captured, and for
VLAs that likely includes not just the VLAs themselves, but their sizes as
well.
That is something that needs to be done in the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86216
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86216
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86259
--- Comment #23 from Davin McCall ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #22)
> The test cases in this report are variations on this theme. [...]
Ok, except that the one I posted in comment #21 specifically copies the string
into a union
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86512
Bug ID: 86512
Summary: Incorrect sub result for float subnormal inputs in
armv7(with -msoft-float).
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86510
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86471
--- Comment #9 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> This is incorrect for floating point types
Because of negative 0 I assume.
> And it introduces an extra check at runtime if value is not known to compile
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86511
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86492
Umesh Kalappa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||umesh.kalappa0 at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86452
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86452
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jul 13 06:42:31 2018
New Revision: 262624
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262624=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-07-13 Richard Biener
PR debug/86452
* dwarf2out.c
67 matches
Mail list logo
