https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91909
--- Comment #5 from Christophe Lyon ---
I confirm that the proposed patch fixed the problem for me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91924
Bug ID: 91924
Summary: tgammal(- odd.5 ) has wrong sign
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libquadmath
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91923
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
This patch implements that suggestion:
diff --git a/gcc/cp/pt.c b/gcc/cp/pt.c
index e5d64989b32..bd8b2400b86 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/pt.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/pt.c
@@ -25233,7 +25233,7 @@ invalid_nontype_parm_type_p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91923
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91923
Bug ID: 91923
Summary: [9/10 Regression] Failure-to-SFINAE with class type
NTTP in C++17
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89924
--- Comment #6 from Kamlesh Kumar ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-09/msg01527.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91908
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2019-09-26 6:26 p.m., ian at airs dot com wrote:
> Should be fixed on trunk.
Thanks Ian.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91871
--- Comment #7 from Brooks Moses ---
Thanks, Jonathan! I've confirmed that this does indeed fix the warning with
Clang trunk, and the test passes again.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91908
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91860
--- Comment #5 from Jim Wilson ---
The new testcase is essentially the same problem, but it is i1src this time not
i2src, so just copying i2src earlier doesn't solve the problem, we also need a
fix for i1src, or a fix elsewhere.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91908
--- Comment #1 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Thu Sep 26 22:19:47 2019
New Revision: 276168
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276168=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libbacktrace/91908
* pecoff.c (backtrace_initialize):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91885
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91885
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91880
jcmvbkbc at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91922
Bug ID: 91922
Summary: #pragma pack(push,4) does not align element on 32 bit
boundary properly
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91880
--- Comment #4 from jcmvbkbc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jcmvbkbc
Date: Thu Sep 26 20:51:27 2019
New Revision: 276166
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276166=gcc=rev
Log:
xtensa: fix PR target/91880
Xtensa hwloop_optimize segfaults when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49973
--- Comment #18 from Lewis Hyatt ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #17)
> On Tue, 17 Sep 2019, lhyatt at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> > In any case, the underlying source of wcwidth() could easily be changed as a
> > drop-in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91903
--- Comment #2 from Paul E. Murphy ---
I tried this out on IBM's new AT13 compiler (GCC 9.2.1):
/opt/at13.0/bin/powerpc64le-linux-gnu-gcc -c test.c
during RTL pass: expand
test.c: In function ‘test’:
test.c:5:5: internal compiler error: in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91919
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91919
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91829
--- Comment #2 from Jon Daniel ---
Enabling only the COLDFIRE section in load_got seems to fix the compilation
problem even without a coldfire cpu target.
I'll try to figure out which lea move.l combo to use for a specific motorola
target cpu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91369
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #46946|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91829
Jon Daniel changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://cygwin.com/ml/cross
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91921
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91921
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91921
Bug ID: 91921
Summary: Incomplete -Woverloaded-virtual warning when base
class is in system header
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87243
Ken Cunningham changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ken.cunningham.webuse@gmail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91897
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91896
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Sep 26 16:54:51 2019
New Revision: 276158
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276158=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-09-25 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/91896
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91920
Daniel Kolesa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc at octaforge dot org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91920
--- Comment #1 from robert at robbieab dot com ---
Created attachment 46955
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46955=edit
Preprocessed copy of test-openmp.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91920
Bug ID: 91920
Summary: ggc 9.2.0 failing openmp compile on ppc64le
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91917
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91914
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Thu Sep 26 16:17:22 2019
New Revision: 276156
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276156=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/91914 - Invalid strlen folding for offset into struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91918
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
In general this sort of thing is undefined behavior under 7.1.4. It's
valid to give an error in this case (as the types are wrong), but it's
liable to be hard to do so in all cases for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91915
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91914
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91919
Bug ID: 91919
Summary: [10 Regression] arm-linux-eabi ICE with building
kernel
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91889
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91889
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |NEW
--- Comment #11 from Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91369
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> So, is the [class.dtor]/9 note just incorrect and should be removed, or
> clarified somehow? I believe it shouldn't affect what actually is a literal
> type or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91889
--- Comment #10 from Steve Ellcey ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #9)
> I'll raise it with CWG; suspending until then.
Not sure if it matters but there seem to be 8 instances of this problem in
Boost (get_color, get_left, get_next,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91918
--- Comment #4 from Maria Matejka ---
This bug applies also on v9.2.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91918
--- Comment #3 from Maria Matejka ---
Created attachment 46953
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46953=edit
Compiler output on gcc -v -save-temps
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91918
--- Comment #2 from Maria Matejka ---
Created attachment 46952
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46952=edit
generated assembler code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91918
--- Comment #1 from Maria Matejka ---
Created attachment 46951
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46951=edit
preprocessed source file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91918
Bug ID: 91918
Summary: Const pointer argument to atomic_compare_exchange
doesn't cause an error.
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91917
Bug ID: 91917
Summary: OpenACC 'acc_set_cuda_stream' return type
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openacc
Severity: normal
Priority:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91889
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |SUSPENDED
--- Comment #9 from Marek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91915
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87858
--- Comment #2 from Matthew Krupcale ---
I can confirm that I'm still observing this when building multilib bootstrap
GCC 4.8.3 using GCC 9.2.1 on Fedora 30[1,2]. I tried to verify this issue when
building GCC 6.4.1 (GLIBCXX_3.4.22,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18374
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91913
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91912
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91909
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91909
>
> --- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
> ---
> Created attachment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69471
--- Comment #13 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Thu Sep 26 10:52:42 2019
New Revision: 276148
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276148=gcc=rev
Log:
driver: Also prune joined switches with negation
When
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70862
Jeff Chapman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jeff.chapman.bugs at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69718
Jeff Chapman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jeff.chapman.bugs at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91909
--- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Created attachment 46948
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46948=edit
Candidate patch
The attached patch seems to fix it. Will give it a bit more testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91901
--- Comment #2 from Trass3r ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> The compiler doesn't know that printf doesn't modify the data you pass it to
> so it cannot elide the automatic variable.
Does it matter in this case? The data comes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91860
--- Comment #4 from Zdenek Sojka ---
Created attachment 46947
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46947=edit
different testcase
$ riscv64-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc -Og -fexpensive-optimizations -fno-tree-fre -g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91916
Bug ID: 91916
Summary: Maybe a dead code in socket.d
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91915
Bug ID: 91915
Summary: New warning for duplicate if condition in
if-elseif-elseif chain
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91915
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71102
Stephan Bergmann changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sbergman at redhat dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 91836, which changed state.
Bug 91836 Summary: [10 Regression] Speed regression of 525.x264_r with -Ofast
-march=native since r275982
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91836
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91836
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91910
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Leon suggested using the _M_sequence pointer to access the mutex pool directly,
instead of calling _M_sequence->_M_get_mutex() (which is undefined if
_M_sequence is being destroyed).
Combining that with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91913
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91912
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91909
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91914
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91369
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Still need to add further testcase coverage and finish cookie support, but I
ran into something that looks like a bug in the C++ standard.
[dcl.constexpr]/3 says:
if the function is a constructor or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91909
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91369
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 46946
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46946=edit
gcc10-pr91369.patch
Current WIP patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91914
Bug ID: 91914
Summary: Invalid strlen optimization
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91885
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
Summary|[9/10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91910
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Specifically, [res.on.data.races] p7 in the standard says we need to protect
the container's internal state from data races.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91885
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Thu Sep 26 07:40:09 2019
New Revision: 276141
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276141=gcc=rev
Log:
Add TODO_update_ssa for SLP BB vectorization (PR tree-optimization/91885).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91910
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91913
Bug ID: 91913
Summary: ICE in extract_constrain_insn, at recog.c:2211
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91912
Bug ID: 91912
Summary: ICE in lra_set_insn_recog_data, at lra.c:1004
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91901
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91889
--- Comment #8 from Marc Glisse ---
int i;
void f(int* const&) { }
void f(const int* const &) { }
void g(int* p) { f(p); }
void h() { f(); }
I find it painful that g is ambiguous, and confusing that h remains ok. It
needs confirmation that CWG
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91903
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc
--- Comment #1 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91909
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||armeb
CC|
86 matches
Mail list logo
