https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86131
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86197
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Aug 10 20:46:04 2018
New Revision: 263479
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263479=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2018-06-19 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86908
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Kostya Frumkin from comment #3)
> Hi, for example msvc2013 calls base class's virtual method when msvc2015
> calls derived class's virtual method.
It's undefined behaviour. Anything can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86771
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
So, what is happening at all? What is different during/after combine, etc.?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68210
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Or maybe:
int main ()
{
void *p = operator new (1, std::nothrow);
VERIFY (p != 0);
VERIFY (1 == new_called);
VERIFY (0 == new_handler_called);
VERIFY (!bad_alloc_thrown);
operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68210
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86197
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Aug 10 20:14:11 2018
New Revision: 263477
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263477=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2018-06-19 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86197
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57160
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84094
Bug 84094 depends on bug 57160, which changed state.
Bug 57160 Summary: short-circuit IF only with -ffrontend-optimize
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57160
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68210
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Aug 10 20:20:27 2018
New Revision: 263478
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263478=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/68210 adjust operator new and delete for LWG 206
Ensure that nothrow
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86913
Bug ID: 86913
Summary: Sending a nil message using a method signature
returning a struct corrupts the stack
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86914
Bug ID: 86914
Summary: gcc 8.1 -O2 generates wrong code with strlen() of
pointers within one-element arrays of structures
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68210
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86684
--- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool ---
So, ignoring all the configury stuff: the problem is that TARGET_VSX does
not imply TARGET_FPRND. It should.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86684
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|ppc64le-linux-gnu |powerpc*-*-*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86908
--- Comment #5 from Kostya Frumkin ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> (In reply to Kostya Frumkin from comment #3)
> > Hi, for example msvc2013 calls base class's virtual method when msvc2015
> > calls derived class's virtual
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86915
Bug ID: 86915
Summary: Segmentation fault for an array of auto in template
parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86910
--- Comment #3 from Steffen Schuemann ---
Sorry, g++-8 -v:
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++-8
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/8/lto-wrapper
OFFLOAD_TARGET_NAMES=nvptx-none
OFFLOAD_TARGET_DEFAULT=1
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86900
--- Comment #2 from Jan Kratochvil ---
Created attachment 44523
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44523=edit
1.cc.xz
Sorry, the 1.cc file somehow did not get attached.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86684
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #5)
> I cannot reproduce this, not on gcc14 either. I notice you use
> ppc64le-linux,
> while the canonical name is powerpc64le-linux; maybe that matters?
No it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85799
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri Aug 10 09:31:51 2018
New Revision: 263465
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263465=gcc=rev
Log:
Strip only selected predictors after early tree passes (PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85799
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86900
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86905
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85904
--- Comment #10 from sh at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: sh
Date: Fri Aug 10 06:29:58 2018
New Revision: 263462
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263462=gcc=rev
Log:
libstdc++-v3: Have aligned_alloc() on Newlib
While building for Newlib, some
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85904
--- Comment #11 from sh at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: sh
Date: Fri Aug 10 06:31:57 2018
New Revision: 263463
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263463=gcc=rev
Log:
libstdc++-v3: Have aligned_alloc() on Newlib
While building for Newlib, some
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85904
--- Comment #9 from sh at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: sh
Date: Fri Aug 10 06:27:35 2018
New Revision: 263461
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263461=gcc=rev
Log:
libstdc++-v3: Have aligned_alloc() on Newlib
While building for Newlib, some
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86908
Kostya Frumkin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86911
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86133
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc |powerpcspe-*-*
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86684
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Something wrong with that tarball then, maybe? Please try trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86911
Bug ID: 86911
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in gcc/c-family/c-indentation.c:403
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86684
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #7)
> Something wrong with that tarball then, maybe? Please try trunk.
I see it day by day on my periodic tester machine that pulls GCC tip.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86896
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86912
Bug ID: 86912
Summary: Function pointer imposes an optimization barrier
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83610
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
On 09/08/18 21:08, dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86904
>
> Bug ID: 86904
>Summary: Column numbers ignore tab characters
>Product: gcc
>Version: unknown
> Status: UNCONFIRMED
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86904
--- Comment #1 from richard.earnshaw at arm dot com ---
On 09/08/18 21:08, dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86904
>
> Bug ID: 86904
>Summary: Column numbers ignore tab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85559
Bug 85559 depends on bug 83610, which changed state.
Bug 83610 Summary: Come up with __builtin_expect_with_probabilty
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83610
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86908
Bug ID: 86908
Summary: static_cast(
bject)->virtualMehod() calls base version of
virtualMethod()
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82418
--- Comment #8 from Alexander Monakov ---
Author: amonakov
Date: Fri Aug 10 10:13:37 2018
New Revision: 263467
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263467=gcc=rev
Log:
i386: do not use SImode mul-highpart on 64-bit (PR 82418)
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86904
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to richard.earnshaw from comment #1)
> On 09/08/18 21:08, dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
[...snip...]
> > Maybe:
> > -fdiagnostics-x-coord=bytes : count of bytes
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86909
--- Comment #1 from Antony Polukhin ---
Another std::variant related example where GCC fails to eliminate
subexpressions and generates 6 times bigger assembly:
using size_t = unsigned long long;
struct A {} a;
static const size_t variant_npos
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86910
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86900
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82418
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86908
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This makes the program correct:
strategyPtr = new() AStrategy;
static_cast(std::launder())->doIt();
strategyPtr->doIt();
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83610
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri Aug 10 09:43:06 2018
New Revision: 263466
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263466=gcc=rev
Log:
Introduce __builtin_expect_with_probability (PR target/83610).
2018-08-10 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86908
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86843
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Hmm, many of the checks in algorithms rely on the fact that the iterators are
Debug Mode iterators (e.g. to check that the end iterator is reachable from the
begin one, or that the iterators are not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86909
Bug ID: 86909
Summary: Missing common subexpression elimination for types
other than int
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86910
Bug ID: 86910
Summary: std::filesystem::create_directories doesn't set error
code or throw while violating postcondition.
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86910
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Steffen Schuemann from comment #0)
> std::filesystem::create_directories should create all directories that don't
> exists in the given path. It is not an error if some of the directories
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86728
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86911
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Sounds very probable, this is what I see in GDB:
$ Breakpoint 1, get_visual_column (exploc=..., loc=2147489278,
out=0x7fffca24, first_nws=0x0) at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86684
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #9 from Segher
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86684
--- Comment #10 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Also happens on native builds:
~/build/tot/gcc/f951 -quiet -Wall -W -O2 bounds_check_19.f90 -mabi=elfv2
-mlittle -mno-fprnd
Error: unrecognizable insn:
(insn 79 78 80 6 (set (reg:DI 175)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85640
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57160
--- Comment #14 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Fri Aug 10 14:08:53 2018
New Revision: 263471
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263471=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-08-10 Janus Weil
PR fortran/57160
* invoke.texi
60 matches
Mail list logo
