https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72853
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
I believe this is a duplicate of PR 72802 that Alan fixed on August 8th for
trunk (subversion id 239233), and backported to the gcc-6-branch (subversion id
239269)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72853
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 39090
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39090=edit
Proposed patch to fix the problem
Alan mixed up the stxsspx and stxssp alternatives. I haven't yet done the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72746
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71724
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||helloqirun at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72741
--- Comment #4 from cesar at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I could be mistaken, but I don't think there's anything we can do about that
test case because fortran doesn't have file scope. Specifically, in your
example,
SUBROUTINE r_w
IMPLICIT NONE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64971
--- Comment #17 from Renlin Li ---
Author: renlin
Date: Tue Aug 9 17:20:14 2016
New Revision: 239300
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239300=gcc=rev
Log:
[PATCH][PR64971]Convert function pointer to Pmode when emit call.
gcc/
2016-08-04
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52116
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71009
--- Comment #7 from Eric Gallager ---
Created attachment 39089
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39089=edit
some compressed compiler output
Still happens with trunk from the end of July. I tried playing around with some
of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71712
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Aug 9 16:55:08 2016
New Revision: 239299
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239299=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/71712 - ABI tags on conversion ops.
* class.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71691
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Based on c#6 I started thinking about how to make tree-ssa-loop-unswitch.c
appropriately conservative when a condition references a maybe-undefined
SSA_NAME.
To recap, tree_may_unswitch_on has this test:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72833
--- Comment #14 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Author: edlinger
Date: Tue Aug 9 17:58:00 2016
New Revision: 239301
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239301=gcc=rev
Log:
2016-08-09 Bernd Edlinger
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72856
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72853
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72076
Thorsten Hirsch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71680
--- Comment #16 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Wed Aug 10 05:43:36 2016
New Revision: 239317
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239317=gcc=rev
Log:
[RS6000] e500 part of pr71680
The fallback part of HARD_REGNO_CALLER_SAVE_MODE,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72858
Bug ID: 72858
Summary: incorrect fixit hints in -Wformat diagnostics
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72856
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68477
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72857
Bug ID: 72857
Summary: incorrect caret location in -Wformat for width and
precision given by asterisk
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68500
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
What happened to this set of patches? it is stage 1 now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72850
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|arm-none-eabi |
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72835
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.1.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66415
--- Comment #11 from Andreas Schwab ---
FAIL: gcc.dg/cpp/pr66415-1.c expected multiline pattern lines 11-12 not found:
"\s*__builtin_printf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71881
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Aug 9 10:49:36 2016
New Revision: 239277
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239277=gcc=rev
Log:
2016-08-09 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68273
--- Comment #39 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Aug 9 10:49:36 2016
New Revision: 239277
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239277=gcc=rev
Log:
2016-08-09 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68273
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.2.0, 7.0
Summary|[5/6/7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71881
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72765
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72831
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72848
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
I wonder whether HWI is 32bits in your case. You'll hit the assert when a
counter overflow occurs.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44779
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72811
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72835
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72849
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72850
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72834
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72823
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72813
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72850
Bug ID: 72850
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr69270-3.c scan-tree-dump-times
uncprop1 ", 1" 4
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72830
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
GCC 4.6 is no longer maintained, please try GCC 5 or newer.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72828
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|5.5 |---
Summary|[5/6/7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72829
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72845
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67815
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71802
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Aug 9 07:40:50 2016
New Revision: 239274
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239274=gcc=rev
Log:
2016-08-09 Richard Biener
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58306
--- Comment #26 from Artem S. Tashkinov ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #24)
> > Wonderful! What are the chances of this patch being merged with GCC 4.9.x?
>
> Any, because 4.9 was closed last week and there's not going to be any
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71902
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6 Regression] Unneeded |[5/6/7 Regression] Unneeded
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71680
--- Comment #15 from Arseny Solokha ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #14)
> Arseny, you might like to try this. I don't have the means at the moment to
> properly test e500 support (ie. run the gcc testsuite) without building a
> whole
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72833
--- Comment #13 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #11 from Bernd Edlinger ---
> Created attachment 39082
> --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39082=edit
> updated patch
>
> patch both variants of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72829
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also|https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72849
Bug ID: 72849
Summary: [7 Regression] r239267 causes Firefox build failure
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72824
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.0
Summary|[5/6/7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72824
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Aug 9 07:49:14 2016
New Revision: 239275
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239275=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/72824
* tree-loop-distribution.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71078
--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 9 Aug 2016, thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71078
>
> Thomas Preud'homme changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71078
Thomas Preud'homme changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68273
--- Comment #38 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Aug 9 07:38:13 2016
New Revision: 239273
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239273=gcc=rev
Log:
2016-08-09 Richard Biener
PR ipa/68273
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72809
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72716
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.5
Summary|[5/6/7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72809
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Aug 9 07:23:47 2016
New Revision: 239272
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239272=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/72809
* rtti.c (get_pseudo_ti_index): Return TK_CLASS_TYPE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71802
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38401
--- Comment #27 from Richard Biener ---
I'm testing my original patch now and have thrown it on one of our SPEC testers
as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71078
--- Comment #11 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Thomas Preud'homme from comment #10)
> Hi,
>
> The following tests are still failing for me on arm-none-eabi targets:
>
> FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr71078-1.c scan-tree-dump
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69742
--- Comment #9 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Aug 9 06:28:57 2016
New Revision: 239271
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239271=gcc=rev
Log:
2016-08-09 Thomas Koenig
Backport from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69742
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71629
--- Comment #1 from Arseny Solokha ---
-fstack-protector -fPIC are also necessary here, just like in PR71680.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43817
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72849
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71078
Thomas Preud'homme changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72835
kugan at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kugan at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72835
--- Comment #4 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Looks like it was a latent issue. In rewrite_expr_tree, when re-associate
operands, we should reset range_info for the LHS. We don’t do that now.
Following patch fixes the test case.
diff --git
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72743
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2016-07-29 00:00:00 |2016-8-9
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61636
Daniel Cooke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dan.cooke89 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43341
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38401
--- Comment #28 from Richard Biener ---
The issue with the patch is that it does speculation for expressions that might
invoke undefined behavior. Like for gcc.c-torture/execute/2801-2.c where
it speculates a load from the next-next
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72851
Bug ID: 72851
Summary: [6/7 Regression] memory hog with -O3 on
s390x-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39609
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65345
--- Comment #28 from mpf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mpf
Date: Tue Aug 9 12:36:18 2016
New Revision: 239278
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239278=gcc=rev
Log:
MIPS: Use create_tmp_var_raw in mips_atomic_assign_expand_fenv
gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72852
Bug ID: 72852
Summary: constexpr inside class template cannot be recognized
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71654
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72743
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 9 Aug 2016, tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72743
>
> Thomas Schwinge changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72851
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72772
--- Comment #10 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Aug 9 15:01:49 2016
New Revision: 239290
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239290=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/72772
* tree-ssa-loop-niter.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72849
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72852
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42015
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72843
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #3)
> Created attachment 39084 [details]
> Proposed patch
>
> HJ, can you please test this patch?
It works. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72772
--- Comment #11 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Aug 9 15:08:02 2016
New Revision: 239291
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239291=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/72772
* tree-ssa-loop-niter.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33707
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Aug 9 15:10:55 2016
New Revision: 239292
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239292=gcc=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite
PR tree-optimization/33707
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72834
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71824
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72849
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Aug 9 14:37:12 2016
New Revision: 239289
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239289=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/72849 - ICE with incomplete class.
* constexpr.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72849
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56701
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
New testcase fixed for GCC 7.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56701
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Aug 9 14:08:33 2016
New Revision: 239285
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239285=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/56701 - wrong type of &*this
* typeck.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36412
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
--- Comment #3 from mpf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mpf
Date: Tue Aug 9 14:36:45 2016
New Revision: 239288
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239288=gcc=rev
Log:
MIPS: Skip gcc.dg/loop-8.c due to additional invariants
gcc/
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28478
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27453
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72830
--- Comment #2 from Alex Henrie ---
All versions of GCC 5 and GCC 6 have the same problem.
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo