https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88393
--- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Sat Feb 2 09:23:30 2019
New Revision: 268474
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268474=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-02-02 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/88393
* trans-expr.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87485
--- Comment #23 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Because these testcases uncover real problems in the code base, please see
> comment #19.
But there are hundreds open PRs in the database for *real* code with
*realistic* combinations of options. This
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54880
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The assert is meaningful, it is a bug if something is created with one context
once and then something tries to change that context to something else. So
whatever wants to change that is doing something
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54880
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87485
--- Comment #22 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #21)
> Why are we wasting any time or energy on useless PRs like this one involving
> an improbable combination of options on nonsensical code, especially
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60091
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
Severity|minor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60144
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
Severity|minor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88980
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Sat Feb 2 09:16:44 2019
New Revision: 268473
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268473=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-02-02 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/88980
* trans-array.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89158
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88685
--- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Sat Feb 2 09:10:58 2019
New Revision: 268472
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268472=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-02-02 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/88685
* expr.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88298
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sat Feb 2 17:07:40 2019
New Revision: 268479
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268479=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-02-02 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/88298
Backport from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43565
--- Comment #11 from Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen ---
If ISO C allows such linkage to be created outside of the standard, a number of
other assumption would be violated as well:
In 6.2.4 (2) it says that "an object exists, has a constant address, and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89159
Bug ID: 89159
Summary: limited with, tagged record and access to function
confuse the linker
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85563
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #9)
> --- gimple-ssa-evrp-analyze.c (revision 268474)
> +++ gimple-ssa-evrp-analyze.c (working copy)
> @@ -217,7 +217,8 @@ evrp_range_analyzer::record_ranges_from_
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85563
--- Comment #12 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
> I think there are cases where we set useful range even on other SSA_NAMEs
> than the single one used in the condition, and in some cases it should be
> good
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89158
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32630
Bug 32630 depends on bug 57048, which changed state.
Bug 57048 Summary: [7/8 Regression] Handling of C_PTR and C_FUNPTR leads to
reject valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57048
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57048
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85563
--- Comment #9 from Marc Glisse ---
--- gimple-ssa-evrp-analyze.c (revision 268474)
+++ gimple-ssa-evrp-analyze.c (working copy)
@@ -217,7 +217,8 @@ evrp_range_analyzer::record_ranges_from_
push_value_range (vrs[i].first,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57048
--- Comment #13 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sat Feb 2 16:35:47 2019
New Revision: 268476
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268476=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-02-02 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/57048
Backport from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88298
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sat Feb 2 16:53:28 2019
New Revision: 268477
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268477=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-02-02 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/88298
Backport from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78351
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89161
Bug ID: 89161
Summary: Bogus -Wformat-overflow warning with value range known
Product: gcc
Version: 7.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60144
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #5 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88298
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sat Feb 2 16:21:43 2019
New Revision: 268475
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268475=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-02-02 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/88298
* arith.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57048
--- Comment #14 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sat Feb 2 16:57:39 2019
New Revision: 268478
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268478=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-02-02 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/57048
Backport from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89158
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
When reference_binding creates the conversion const int -> const int & the
expression is still VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR(Val) so it doesn't set
conv->need_temporary_p. Only then do we call mark_rvalue_use which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88298
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53576
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88147
--- Comment #10 from David Malcolm ---
FWIW I'm able to reproduce this with r265875 and am running a reduction script
over this weekend to see if I can isolate what the issue is/was.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85563
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Paul Eggert from comment #8)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
>
> > Or just rewrite whatever you are doing to something that doesn't suffer from
> > this. Say:
> > (tail) =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89139
--- Comment #4 from Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen ---
P.S.: This issue showed up when I tried to analyze why no optimization is
happening in bug #89152.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89160
Bug ID: 89160
Summary: -Wattributes too eager on C++11 attributes
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89165
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is warned about:
t.c: In function ‘g’:
t.c:7:1: warning: SSE vector return without SSE enabled changes the ABI
[-Wpsabi]
7 | simd4f g(simd4f a,simd4f b) {return f(a)+f(b);}
| ^~
t.c:7:8:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89165
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |target
--- Comment #1 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85563
--- Comment #13 from eggert at cs dot ucla.edu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> I don't understand that. You had:
> ((CONSP (Vframe_list)) ? (void) 0 : __builtin_unreachable ());
> for ((tail) = Vframe_list; (CONSP (tail)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89165
Bug ID: 89165
Summary: miscompile calling SSE function from non-SSE code
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64397
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
This PR seems to have been fixed by revision r268474.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57360
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81344
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89078
Bug 89078 depends on bug 81344, which changed state.
Bug 81344 Summary: Can't disable -ffpe-trap (or not documented)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81344
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42118
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35844
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89160
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86368
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64066
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89162
Bug ID: 89162
Summary: libgo build is broken on powerpc64-linux
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
Priority: P3
Component: go
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89162
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87625
--- Comment #6 from Neil Carlson ---
Yes, can this please be back-ported? Still broken on at least 8.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35844
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81679
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59065
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89160
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
Thanks, yes, that's an exact duplicate that I failed to find despite several
searches in bugzilla :-(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89161
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89163
Bug ID: 89163
Summary: Missed optimization: sar and shr equivalent for
non-negative numbers
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81344
--- Comment #5 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Sat Feb 2 21:44:34 2019
New Revision: 268480
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268480=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-02-02 Dominique d'Humieres
PR fortran/81344
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85130
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P4 |P5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64973
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P4 |P5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64962
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55179
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31592
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89154
--- Comment #1 from Segher Boessenkool ---
The new version needs to save r4 because it reuses the reg for storing r7+r8.
And we still don't wrap CR separately, sigh.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89164
Bug ID: 89164
Summary: can construct vector with
non-copyable-but-trivially-copyable elements
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78398
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89162
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89162
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Ha, my last build was r268452 :-)
Thanks for the fix, and sorry for the noise.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69485
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55534
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89112
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
The patch in #c5 is pre-approved everywhere. Thanks!
#c4... Do you *want* to keep it together? Is it in fact cold? If it is not,
maybe you can improve the execution estimate for it?
69 matches
Mail list logo
