https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92417
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90280
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93674
bin cheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amker at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93674
--- Comment #12 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Definitely an IVOPTS problem of some kind. It shouldn't be using some_enum
types for the induction variables. It's probably a one-line fix for whomever
knows the code. Bin?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91804
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92906
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93923
--- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
ISTM that if the standard disallows, then we should as well. We could always
raise a DR if we think the standard ought to be updated to be more user
friendly in what it accepts.
I think I ran into maybe a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92342
--- Comment #14 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
That wouldn't be a big surprise Andrew.
My point is I think we could create some match.pd patterns to canonicalize the
form in gimple and it wouldn't matter nearly as much what combine did or didn't
do to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92539
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92342
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note I don't remember where I found this originally. I found this code
somewhere back in May 2012 but I did not record where I found it though; It was
the opposite way around really for Octeon2/3 (MIPS64).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92656
--- Comment #5 from Jim Wilson ---
A rewrite using dataflow would be better of course. I'm just trying to
understand the problem with this testcase better, and maybe find a simple
solution, but I don't think that there is one. The workarounds
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93745
--- Comment #11 from Martin Sebor ---
Regarding the DECL_FIXED_DYNAMIC_TYPE flag: it seems like in C every DECL would
have it set, but in C++ none could (because placement new can change the
dynamic type of decls), and so GCC would not be able
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92656
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
The whole reg_stat thing cannot ever reliably track known bits. We need
some other mechanism to do this, something that *is* reliable, and does
not give different results if you try combinations in a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92342
--- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Gimple can help writing silly expressions like this in a more canonical
form (whatever we decide to use for that) at least, yeah. But you can
not do RTL's job in gimple ;-)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92955
--- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Just to be clear, it's not DOM or threading that introduces any out of bounds
accesses or overflows here.
So the testcase:
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-additional-options "-Wall -Werror" } */
void
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93926
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92656
--- Comment #3 from Jim Wilson ---
Looking at this, I see that the problem occurs in record_value_for_reg where it
does
if (!insn
|| (value && rsp->last_set_table_tick >= label_tick_ebb_start))
rsp->last_set_invalid = 1;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93926
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Some level of permissiveness for built-in functions may be historical,
arising from support for pre-C90 headers without prototypes or with
nonstandard types; that level of permissiveness
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92342
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93962
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
See https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2020-02/msg01014.html also for the
same reasoning but with gdb instead of GCC.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93962
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92955
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93962
Bug ID: 93962
Summary: [10 regression] bootstrap fails with
gcc/value-prof.c:268:28 : error: format '%lld' expects
argument of type 'long long int', but argument 3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93923
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I'm unsure. What the standard allows here might not be very helpful for users.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83118
--- Comment #29 from Damian Rouson ---
Hi Paul,
The test case works with your patch applied. Thanks!
Damian
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90993
--- Comment #3 from Matthias Kretz (Vir) ---
IIUC, AVX512 only allows overriding the rounding-mode from div instructions. So
that wouldn't help.
What standard requires that "integer division is not permitted to raise the
"inexact" exception
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93926
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
I should have said without -Wextra the incompatible return type is silently
accepted. With -Wextra there is a warning:
$ gcc -S -Wall -Wextra -m32 pr93926.c
pr93926.c:1:10: warning: mismatch in return type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93919
Matthias Kretz (Vir) changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #6 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93843
--- Comment #11 from Matthias Kretz (Vir) ---
*** Bug 93919 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93919
Matthias Kretz (Vir) changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93926
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor ---
For reference, the ICE is the result of the fix for PR 93583. It's getting
hard not to fix an ICE without introducing another.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93926
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93932
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Michael Meissner :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:75c299acc47b19fd6c445a6931798325a54e6fb4
commit r10-6908-g75c299acc47b19fd6c445a6931798325a54e6fb4
Author: Michael Meissner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92658
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93007
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93055
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93435
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93961
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Please check that it is really compiled at -O1.
It is: no optimization option beside -O is used.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 93564, which changed state.
Bug 93564 Summary: [10 Regression] 470.lbm regresses by 25% on znver2 with
-Ofast -march=native LTO and PGO since r10-6384-g2a07345c4f8dabc2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93564
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93564
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93582
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93674
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93720
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93731
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93738
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93745
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93871
--- Comment #32 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 05:53:38PM +, thenlich at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93871
>
> --- Comment #31 from Thomas Henlich ---
> I wonder, if some "correct"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93800
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93933
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93933
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9d2d283367a407c1ba9ecdb8590f9295828e25f8
commit r10-6907-g9d2d283367a407c1ba9ecdb8590f9295828e25f8
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93870
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92152
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93961
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92692
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||spop at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #21
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93829
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93877
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93923
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93926
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93871
--- Comment #31 from Thomas Henlich ---
I wonder, if some "correct" rounding could further increase accuracy: We know
the sign and "real" magnitude of the difference deg2rad-π/180 and can round the
result of sin() accordingly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93913
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93913
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Peter Bergner
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:98529e6d7408e896cb74c327ae60b3ccea055d9c
commit r9-8301-g98529e6d7408e896cb74c327ae60b3ccea055d9c
Author: Peter Bergner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93707
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Jambor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cfeef9acd2cec93ed6338cc0d9fad98bdc0f7599
commit r10-6904-gcfeef9acd2cec93ed6338cc0d9fad98bdc0f7599
Author: Martin Jambor
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92152
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9640ff5a88f25fc9bf581136fb25d1c2f756d5d4
commit r10-6903-g9640ff5a88f25fc9bf581136fb25d1c2f756d5d4
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93871
--- Comment #30 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 07:31:43AM +, thenlich at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93871
>
> --- Comment #29 from Thomas Henlich ---
> (In reply to Steve Kargl from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93959
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90467
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93564
--- Comment #3 from Vladimir Makarov ---
I checked the new results
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=288.240.0
It seems the patch solved the problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93870
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Actually perhaps we should create an IMPLICIT_CONV_EXPR for *any*
value-dependent argument.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93870
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Completely untested:
--- a/gcc/cp/pt.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/pt.c
@@ -7082,7 +7082,7 @@ convert_nontype_argument (tree type, tree expr,
tsubst_flags_t complain)
create a TARGET_EXPR, but in a template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93582
--- Comment #34 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 47923
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47923=edit
gcc10-pr93582-wip.patch
WIP patch that fixes the original regression (handling of lookup through masked
loads).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93870
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93961
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93961
Bug ID: 93961
Summary: gnat.dg/lto24.adb FAILs
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93870
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Clearly we're trying to take the address of a TARGET_EXPR:
TARGET_EXPR
That's bad and we've had PRs about this in the past, e.g. Bug 87145. I suspect
the fix might be along the same lines.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93960
Bug ID: 93960
Summary: std::to_address doesn't work with past-the-end Debug
Mode iterators
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93959
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93959
Bug ID: 93959
Summary: g++.dg/analyzer/malloc.C FAILs
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93948
--- Comment #3 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 09:15:53AM +, thenlich at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93948
>
> --- Comment #2 from Thomas Henlich ---
> -fall-intrinsics is a nice
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93870
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92152
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #15)
> The following testcase:
> union U { long long i; long f; };
> struct a {union U u;};
> struct aa {struct a a;};
> struct b {union U u;};
> struct bb {struct b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93946
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 47922
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47922=edit
patch I am testing
This is what I have now. Got to factor out that alias set. In VN consider
passing ao_ref
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92152
--- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka ---
The following testcase:
union U { long long i; long f; };
struct a {union U u;};
struct aa {struct a a;};
struct b {union U u;};
struct bb {struct b b;};
long
foo (struct bb *bv, void *ptr)
{
struct aa *a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93946
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93958
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93958
Bug ID: 93958
Summary: gcc trunk supports -std=c++20 but not -std=gnu++20
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93191
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92645
Bug 92645 depends on bug 93508, which changed state.
Bug 93508 Summary: VN doesn't handle _chk functions or valueize their length
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93508
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93508
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93508
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Guenther :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e431546ff9f1367538ed1307a1c98fa32fec7a8a
commit r10-6891-ge431546ff9f1367538ed1307a1c98fa32fec7a8a
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93953
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Guenther :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e840185b31e40466e1575507200e1600e2343454
commit r10-6890-ge840185b31e40466e1575507200e1600e2343454
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93953
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93957
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93953
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Doh. Testing fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93945
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93954
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93949
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b51057817d9a1aee4f24372f8c97f81f372c0a21
commit r9-8300-gb51057817d9a1aee4f24372f8c97f81f372c0a21
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93945
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a460bf38dc3582ce1f559cc84084ca27e429b34c
commit r9-8299-ga460bf38dc3582ce1f559cc84084ca27e429b34c
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93951
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93953
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93949
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1956773cc655dfcba8d310066d3f6585dd4b8972
commit r10-6886-g1956773cc655dfcba8d310066d3f6585dd4b8972
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
