https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91127
Bug ID: 91127
Summary: Incorrect checking of nonnull attribute with argument
to a constructor of class with a virtual base
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.0
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58638
--- Comment #12 from Daniel Richard G. ---
This issue appears to persist in 9.1.0, where it prevents bootstrap from
completing:
[...]
libtool: link: /tmp/gcc-9.1.0.build/./gcc/xg++ -B/tmp/gcc-9.1.0.build/./gcc/
-nostdinc++ -nostdinc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55930
Daniel Richard G. changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||skunk at iskunk dot org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90989
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10 Regression] |[9 Regression] incorrrect
提供各种发票幵:1 3 6;922 275 95张【 有 】↓【3%-13%】【 増 】各【 发 】 【 稙 】种【 票 】【 税 】真【 幵 】
如果你不想 再收到该产品的推荐邮件, 请点击这里退订
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87256
--- Comment #9 from John David Anglin ---
Also appears to occur building glusterfs.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67678
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91126
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Oh, and I think it's a pity we're trying to stay away from optimizing the
bitfield cases. I suppose we could also use encode_tree_to_bitpos from
the store-merging pass for this purpose, but while operating
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91126
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 46581
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46581=edit
patch
Untested patch that fixes the issue.
Value numbering stmt = _1 = BIT_FIELD_REF ;
Successfully combined 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91126
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
So the issue is the usual GET_MODE_SIZE != ref->size. native_encode_int
encodes two 32bit numbers (but only 3 bytes from them, in big-endian) while VN
expects it to encode a 3-byte 24bit number. There's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91126
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61339
--- Comment #13 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Tue Jul 9 18:32:49 2019
New Revision: 273311
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273311=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/61339 - add mismatch between struct and class [-Wmismatched-tags] to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91126
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91126
Bug ID: 91126
Summary: [10 regression] Incorrect constant propagation of
BIT_FIELD_REF
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91124
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Likely r273194.
Confirmed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91115
--- Comment #3 from Fred Hsueh ---
The actual SP and shadow byte location varies a bit between each run. Other
than that, the signature looks very similar. Another thing to note is that the
program has a high thread count, perhaps ~140.
Any
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61339
--- Comment #12 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Tue Jul 9 16:36:00 2019
New Revision: 273308
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273308=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/61339 - add mismatch between struct and class [-Wmismatched-tags] to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42575
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #19 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91049
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|wrong location in |wrong location in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91124
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91117
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Wolf . from comment #2)
> Is there any way to still access MMX instructions/registers with intrinsics
> in gcc-10 at all or is this bug "fixable but that code generation option
> will go away
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42575
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91117
--- Comment #2 from Wolf . ---
Is there any way to still access MMX instructions/registers with intrinsics in
gcc-10 at all or is this bug "fixable but that code generation option will go
away entirely with gcc-10 so it wouldn't matter" then?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83518
--- Comment #15 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #14)
> Yeah. It is
>
>[local count: 178992762]:
> arr = *.LC0;
> arr[0] = 5;
> vect__56.15_75 = MEM [(int *)];
>
> I'll fix that (well, I'll try).
Right, it's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91049
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83518
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
Yeah. It is
[local count: 178992762]:
arr = *.LC0;
arr[0] = 5;
vect__56.15_75 = MEM [(int *)];
I'll fix that (well, I'll try).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83518
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 9 Jul 2019, wilco at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83518
>
> Wilco changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83518
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #12 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91114
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91114
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jul 9 13:26:43 2019
New Revision: 273306
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273306=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-07-09 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/91114
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91124
--- Comment #3 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #2)
> Not exactly reduced!-(
273184 (OK) - 273243 (FAIL) is my smallest interval.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91124
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Not exactly reduced!-(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91124
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91125
Bug ID: 91125
Summary: -frepo can't build tramp3d
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91124
Bug ID: 91124
Summary: [10 regression] gcc.target/i386/avx512vl-vpshldvd-2.c
etc. FAIL
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91123
Bug ID: 91123
Summary: [10 Regression] no longer removes redundant store
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91123
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91124
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91122
Bug ID: 91122
Summary: alignas gives up evaluating a constant expression in
template context
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91109
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 8 Jul 2019, clyon at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91109
>
> --- Comment #2 from Christophe Lyon ---
> Removing the test*() calls from the end,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91114
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Index: gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c
===
--- gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c (revision 273294)
+++ gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c (working copy)
@@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91114
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91121
--- Comment #1 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Oh it might be the same one as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90764
lt-pie
--enable-default-ssp --enable-cet=auto
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 10.0.0 20190709 (experimental) (GCC)
```
Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91120
Bug ID: 91120
Summary: broken template instantiation for std::string_view
values
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 91071, which changed state.
Bug 91071 Summary: [10 Regression] Miscompare of 410.bwaves since r272644
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91071
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91071
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91119
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91114
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> Started with r272711.
This revision just exposes a generic issue in tree vectorizer.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91117
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ---
The generated code is created the way it is partially by design, and partially
by missing (!y,*x) alternative in *vec_extractv2di_0_sse. GCC lowers intrinsics
to generic operations, and this has its pluses
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91083
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91114
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91112
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91114
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91103
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91115
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91119
--- Comment #2 from Adhokshaj Mishra ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> No GCC is correct. There is another section which you missed made this code
> invalid but no diagnostic is required.
Can you please point to the section
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91119
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
No GCC is correct. There is another section which you missed made this code
invalid but no diagnostic is required.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91119
Bug ID: 91119
Summary: Bogus type re-difinition error
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
59 matches
Mail list logo
