https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97473
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98370
--- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6)
> (In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #4)
> > JFTR, likely all "32-bit targets".
>
> Not x86, that uses int for int32_t.
So on closer inspection,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98370
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
JFTR, likely all "32-bit targets".
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98370
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58243
--- Comment #2 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Confirmed; identical code w./wo. -fno-tree-sra for cris-elf too.
Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99910
--- Comment #5 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
This and several other FAILs have re-appeared on master for cris-elf.
I think my autotester log entry is to the point:
... 2021-06-15-15:17:36 1de31913d20a (f: 88, p: 46598)
*** regress-11 (f: 99, p:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93372
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99363
--- Comment #8 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Shouldn't this be closed as fixed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99910
Bug ID: 99910
Summary: [11 Regression] g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_b.C ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99212
--- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #6)
> Answering my own question:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Types.html
> [...]
Nothing here for a month+. Any chance of this getting progress in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99230
--- Comment #6 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Created attachment 50414 [details]
> gcc11-pr99230.patch
>
> Untested fix.
Tested at r11-7589 for cris-elf, fixes the fail with no regressions.
Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2021-02-23 00:00:00 |2021-3-5
--- Comment #16 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99363
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99352
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99307
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99307
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99301
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99301
Bug ID: 99301
Summary: [11 Regression]: cast conversions in chrono require
uint32_t to be unsigned int
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99212
Bug ID: 99212
Summary: [11 Regression] gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c line
971
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99230
Bug ID: 99230
Summary: [11 Regression] gcc.dg/pr83527.c excess errors:
'-fcompare-debug' failure (length)
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99230
--- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Adding author of the switch rewrite (the trigging commit).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95757
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2015-07-01 00:00:00 |2021-2-23
--- Comment #14 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99212
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-02-23
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99910
--- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
It looks like commit 41019bfae2673a818 / r11-8011 "libstdc++: Clarify
static_assert message" accidentally swept this under the carpet.
If I cut off the last word, " type", i.e. the second changed line
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99910
--- Comment #2 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Appears to be related to (PR 100052 and) PR 12.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100052
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99212
--- Comment #9 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> xfail/pass depending on sizeof (int) might be possible but as said it might
> be that cris doesn't have sizeof (int) == 1
You meant something else here
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99212
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||xfail
--- Comment #12 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99142
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99142
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99142
Bug ID: 99142
Summary: [11 Regression] __builtin_clz match.pd transformation
too greedy
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99082
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66171
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|8.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101980
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101980
--- Comment #8 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Ankur Saini from comment #7)
> Should be fixed after the above commit.
Confirmed (at 43a5d46feabd). Thanks for the prompt fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21132
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101902
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99910
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101853
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-invalid-code |ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101853
Bug ID: 101853
Summary: [12 Regression] g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-5_b.C ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101853
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
This particular ICE/test-failure disappeared (unlikely: was fixed) with a
commit in the series (last known failing as described..first subsequently known
passing) cba64d855df5..ee8f9ff00d79.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94600
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101853
--- Comment #6 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to seurer from comment #5)
> I am still seeing these today with
> g:a40970cf043553f0ca09a3b7be1c5a949623d915, r12-4318
[list elided]
For cris-elf too. For cris-elf, be5bdccd865b (r12-4056)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101853
--- Comment #8 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #6)
> Then no change matching "g++.dg/modules/xtreme-" up to and including
> a29174904bb1 (r12-5240), which is the last run at this writing.
Update:
At
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101853
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103166
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103166
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103166
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103166
--- Comment #9 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Elaboration: there may be (newlib) targets (build/test setups) where the
test-setup can't link and thus erroneously gets a "yes" for these functions.
If that happens for you, look into fixing newlib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102874
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102939
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103226
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103974
--- Comment #2 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Created attachment 52158
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52158=edit
brief gdb inspection session
I had to "rm *ira*.o" and "make all-gcc CXXFLAGS=-g3" and re-start the gdb
session
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103974
--- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Created attachment 52157
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52157=edit
gzipped preprocessed (>1 MB) floating_to_chars.ii
Reproduce using the ungzipped file for example like so:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103974
Bug ID: 103974
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in ira_flattening building
libstdc++ with r12-6415-g01f3e6a40e72
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102024
--- Comment #24 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #23)
> CCing MIPS maintainers on this (and also LoongArch, while there is no ABI
> incompatibility for a new port, it is perhaps something to discuss and
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103974
--- Comment #11 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Yes, thanks for the quick resolution.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104080
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104080
--- Comment #2 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Created attachment 52215
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52215=edit
patch for endian.h issue
This patch is not sufficient: after this, I get:
libtool: compile: /X-obj/./gcc/xgcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104080
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104080
Bug ID: 104080
Summary: [12 Regression] newlib doesn't have endian.h causing
build failure with 2800bc08e4ab r12-6646
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104080
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104080
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-18
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104139
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104033
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104139
Bug ID: 104139
Summary: [12 Regression] g++.dg/abi/no_unique_address2.C at
r12-6028 (a37e8ce3b663)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104139
--- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
BTW, cris-elf structure layout is "default packed"; byte boundaries all over.
(I don't know what pru-elf does.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27576
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105183
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64-linux-gnu,|powerpc64-linux-gnu,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111300
Bug ID: 111300
Summary: [14 Regression] g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_b.C
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110628
--- Comment #9 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #8)
> patch posted
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-August/628231.html
Yay! I stand ready to revert my ugly cover-up.
I'll even give the posted
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111264
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111264
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111264
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> You are mostly correct.
> In C++17, Copy elision is guaranteed to be done here while in earlier
> versions it is not and earlier versions of C++ require a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111264
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111264
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|analyzer|testsuite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111264
--- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
I don't think it's worthwhile to keep this open, as I'm pretty sure I fixed it
for all targets, as the cause wasn't target-related. Otherwise, reopen; if
adding a sarcastic comment, then preferably
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41
--- Comment #6 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Possibly also *gcc-multilib*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111300
--- Comment #5 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> The FAIL should be gone after r14-3812-gb96b554592c5cb
Also: thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111300
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> The FAIL should be gone after r14-3812-gb96b554592c5cb
Confirmed
> but the underlying
> g++ problem is latent.
So, keeping this PR open is TRT?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112320
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112419
Bug ID: 112419
Summary: [14 Regression] gcc.dg/Wnonnull-4.c excess error for
32-bit targets
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112419
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |uecker at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64le |powerpc64le, aarch64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109166
--- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #6)
> The cause I guess, is just a bad fall-through in the arm/sync.md.
Or rather, optabs.cc:expand_atomic_test_and_set, which makes this issue
somewhat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109166
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111523
Bug ID: 111523
Summary: Unexpected performance regression with
-ftrivial-auto-var-init=zero for e.g. systemctl unmask
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109166
--- Comment #9 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #8)
> I'm going to close this as WONTFIX.
I guess I'll have to find another PR to lean on, for fixing the underlying
cause for the nonatomic code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107567
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110628
--- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #5)
> Not seeing any action for this regression for three weeks, for tracking
> purposes I'm considering xfailing this test-case for cris-* after another
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111021
Bug ID: 111021
Summary: [14 Regression] Serial build broken for CRIS, ARM, and
others
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111021
--- Comment #5 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #4)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-August/627435.html
>
> Nope, that just fixes recog.h.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111021
--- Comment #11 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #8)
> I might have misunderstood things of course,
...like still having to include tree.h to get the code_helper class definition.
Doh!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111021
--- Comment #9 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-August/627444.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111021
--- Comment #3 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #2)
> Thanks for reporting, I think the culprit is r14-3093 instead of r14-3092?
Not for this PR!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111021
--- Comment #17 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #12)
> I think a "too broad" dependence isn't bad. The cris specific solution also
> looks manageable, though I wonder what's special about x-protos.h,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111021
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-August/627435.html
Nope, that just fixes recog.h. See the quoted error; it's the patched
*-protos.h.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111021
--- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #6)
> (In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #5)
> [...]
> but the concern is that one day some file just includes tm_p.h but
> not recog.h, the issue will
1 - 100 of 251 matches
Mail list logo
