https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89929
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80960
--- Comment #16 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 2 Apr 2019, segher at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80960
>
> --- Comment #15 from Segher Boessenkool ---
> It seems to be that this happens for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89936
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89942
Bug ID: 89942
Summary: std::function __is_location_invariant breaks ABI
compatibility
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89941
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89929
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89929
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
> In addition, it seems that gcc recognizes this as valid syntax:
>
> __attribute__((target("avx512bw", "avx512f")))
>
> But actually ignores everything after the comma in target's arguments. Not
> sure if I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89942
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89896
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Apr 3 08:46:00 2019
New Revision: 270112
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270112&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-04-03 Richard Biener
PR lto/89896
* lto-wrappe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89896
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Apr 3 08:46:35 2019
New Revision: 270113
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270113&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-04-03 Richard Biener
PR lto/89896
* lto-wrappe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89896
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89896
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Apr 3 08:47:19 2019
New Revision: 270114
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270114&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-04-03 Richard Biener
PR lto/89896
* lto-wrapp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89906
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89906
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89908
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89910
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Component|tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89913
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89914
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89911
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89929
--- Comment #4 from Nikolay Bogoychev ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> > In addition, it seems that gcc recognizes this as valid syntax:
> >
> > __attribute__((target("avx512bw", "avx512f")))
> >
> > But actually ignores everyth
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89929
--- Comment #5 from Nikolay Bogoychev ---
Created attachment 46080
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46080&action=edit
multiple attributes weirdnes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89917
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89919
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89375
--- Comment #3 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Wed Apr 3 09:00:27 2019
New Revision: 270115
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270115&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-04-03 Dominique d'Humieres
PR fortran/89375
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89375
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89921
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89922
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89923
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89924
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89925
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89926
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89928
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89906
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
*** Bug 89928 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67694
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gs...@t-online.de
--- Comment #2 from R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89932
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89933
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89934
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89940
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89910
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||asolokha at gmx dot com
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89905
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-debug
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85184
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Apr 3 09:47:51 2019
New Revision: 270117
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270117&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/85184 remove debug assertions from std::variant
The __glibc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85184
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89877
--- Comment #2 from claziss at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: claziss
Date: Wed Apr 3 09:53:03 2019
New Revision: 270118
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270118&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARC]PR 88409: miscompilation due to missing cc clobber in l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89892
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89905
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||89892
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47660
Thomas Henlich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89929
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
>
> Hey Martin,
>
> Something fishy is going on with multiple attributes. Eg:
>
> __attribute__((target("avx512bw", "avx512f")))
"avx512bw" argument is broken right now (and will be fixed).
Using a differ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89905
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89892
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
*** Bug 2 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82738
Bug 82738 depends on bug 89905, which changed state.
Bug 89905 Summary: gcc generates wrong debug information at -Og
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89905
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89892
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
*** Bug 89905 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89892
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89943
Bug ID: 89943
Summary: Submodule functions are not allowed to have C binding
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89927
Paul le roux changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89943
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84101
--- Comment #25 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Apr 3 12:30:16 2019
New Revision: 270123
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270123&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-04-03 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/84101
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84101
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89900
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini ---
I think that ultimately this boils down to this code in grokdeclarator:
if (type_was_error_mark_node && template_parm_flag)
/* FIXME we should be able to propagate the error_mark_node as is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89582
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89582
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> So compared to the already mitigated PR84101 this one returns in
>
> (parallel:TI [
> (expr_list:REG_DEP_TRUE (reg:DF 20 xmm0)
> (const_int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89927
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71598
--- Comment #15 from Christophe Lyon ---
Author: clyon
Date: Wed Apr 3 13:17:04 2019
New Revision: 270126
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270126&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[testsuite] PR71598: Fix testcases
2019-04-13 Christophe Lyon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64095
Seyyed Soroosh Hosseinalipour changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||soorosh_abi at hotmail do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88643
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #8 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89582
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Looks like LLVM has all the ABI details exposed very early but also in a very
awkward way(?). The vfloat one shows
define { <2 x float>, <2 x float> } @f(<2 x float> %x.coerce0, <2 x float>
%x.coerce1, <2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82501
--- Comment #31 from Andrey Drobyshev ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #30)
> in a couple of most common data sections
In which sections exactly? If we cover only the most common ones (thus leaving
other sections which might need prot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88643
--- Comment #9 from Дилян Палаузов ---
With the patch applied to ld.bfd “clang -flto -fuse-ld=bfd -Wl,--wrap=read t.c”
does work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88643
--- Comment #10 from Дилян Палаузов ---
With the patch applied this works:
clang -flto -fuse-ld=bfd -Wl,--wrap=read -O3 t.c
gcc -flto -fuse-ld=bfd -Wl,--wrap=read -O3 t.c
gcc -flto -fuse-ld=bfd -Wl,--wrap=read -O2 t.c
gcc -flto -fuse-ld
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88643
--- Comment #11 from Дилян Палаузов ---
Reported for ld.gold at https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24415 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64095
--- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Seyyed Soroosh Hosseinalipour from comment #15)
> @jason what is work around for gcc6 ?
See comment 6. Name the pack.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68567
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Packaging submitted at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2019-04/msg7.html.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89582
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89798
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89919
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87770
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roman.s.dubtsov at intel dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89797
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47488
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89833
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89878
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89331
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89596
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86521
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jleahy+gcc at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89596
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81025
--- Comment #17 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Wed Apr 3 16:03:37 2019
New Revision: 270129
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270129&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/81025
* reorg.c (skip_consecutive_labe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81025
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9 Regression] gcc ICE|[8 Regression] gcc ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87431
--- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Proposed new patch posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-04/msg00142.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89929
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu ---
__attribute__((target("foo"))) can be used in 2 different ways:
1. Enable FOO, which works for both C and C++.
2. Function versioning with FOO, which works only for C++.
2 is a subset of 1. We should improve err
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89934
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |ice-on-invalid-code
Status|NE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89944
Bug ID: 89944
Summary: [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in mark_jump_label_1, at
jump.c:1152
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89399
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
So I think in the immediate term any time we're using PATTERN (cand->insn) we
really should be using single_set (cand->insn). We already know we've passed
the single_set test when we put the insn onto the c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89945
Bug ID: 89945
Summary: [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gen_lowpart_general, at
rtlhooks.c:63
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89945
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |target
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86567
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86518
Bug 86518 depends on bug 86567, which changed state.
Bug 86567 Summary: [8/9 Regression] -Wnonnull/-Wformat/-Wrestrict affect code
generation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86567
What|Removed |Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89946
Bug ID: 89946
Summary: [8/9 Regression] ICE in assemble_start_function, at
varasm.c:1871
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89947
Bug ID: 89947
Summary: Resolution of base classes fail for some automatic
types in template struct functions
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89934
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo