https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77427
--- Comment #7 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #4)
> This fixes the ICE:
> ...
> diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
> index 4531647..f13790f 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
> +++ b/gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77449
Bug ID: 77449
Summary: False ambiguity for variadic function with non-deduced
template parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77427
--- Comment #8 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 39537
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39537&action=edit
tentative patch
currently doing bootstrap and reg-test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72832
--- Comment #8 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Patch available at:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2016-09/msg7.html
Awaiting comments/review.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77439
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77450
Bug ID: 77450
Summary: [5/6/7 Regression] ICE: in verify_ssa, at
tree-ssa.c:1016 on very simple code with vectors
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77451
Bug ID: 77451
Summary: Cannot convert lambda [](auto&&...){} to
std::function
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #10 from John Marino ---
Okay, I bisected this.
SVN r239376 (August 11) is the last commit that works
I confirmed that r239378, the next commit on the TRUNK, fails to build,
resulting with the SIGBUS error.
The log for that commit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77452
Bug ID: 77452
Summary: [7 Regression] ICE: in plus_constant, at explow.c:87
with -fno-split-wide-types -mavx512f
--param=max-combine-insns=2
Product: gcc
Version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65467
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #39524|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77452
--- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka ---
(gdb) p mode
$4 = SImode
(gdb) p *x
$6 = {code = CONST_VECTOR, mode = V2SImode, ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77453
Bug ID: 77453
Summary: No builtin version of cbrtf
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77454
Bug ID: 77454
Summary: [7 Regression] IMM ERROR w/ -O2 and above
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77455
Bug ID: 77455
Summary: [AArch64] eh_return implementation fails
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77455
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||AArch64
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77453
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Most built-in versions of libm functions just optimize them for constant
arguments.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #12 from John Marino ---
I don't know. If you have a specific question or a test case that illustrates
it, I can bring up the topic to the DF developers.
I don't know if we are pointing fingers at the OS or GCC though, only that thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77454
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77452
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77453
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #13 from John Marino ---
I just want to remind that gcc 7 builds fine on DF when the Ada frontend is
excluded from the build. That's partially why it took so long to see this
regression.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77450
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |ice-on-invalid-code
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71956
--- Comment #5 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
This bug is fixed by
Author: ppalka
Date: Sat Aug 27 22:00:17 2016
New Revision: 239798
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239798&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix folding of VECTOR_CST comparisons
gcc/ChangeL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77450
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Fri, 2 Sep 2016, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> so it looks like COMPOUND_LITERAL_EXPR is an lvalue? Do we need to
Yes. Compound literals are lvalues; they represent anonymous var
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77453
Matthieu Schaller changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WONTFIX |FIXED
--- Comment #3 from Matthieu S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77449
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77456
Bug ID: 77456
Summary: Suboptimal code when returning a string generated with
a constexpr fn at compile time
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77453
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Sch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77457
--- Comment #1 from Ruslan ---
Same for version "GCC: (Ubuntu 6.1.1-3ubuntu11~14.04.1) 6.1.1 20160511"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77457
Bug ID: 77457
Summary: Print intended value of constants in assembly output
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|hjl at gcc dot gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77458
Bug ID: 77458
Summary: nvptx offloading ICEs after "Implement C _FloatN,
_FloatNx types"
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openacc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #15 from John Marino ---
to all:
I built August 28 snapshot of gcc7 with Ada frontend on FreeBSD 11.0-RC2, there
was no SIGBUS and it completed the build successfully. (Not good news for DF I
guess)
to H.J.Lu:
There's a complete log
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #16 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to John Marino from comment #15)
> There's a complete log showing where in the build the SIGBUG occurs but as
> far as the assembly code that causes it, I have no idea. If you provide me
> some instruct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #17 from John Marino ---
that's easier said than done. The command is over 1600 characters long
i'll try to script it but ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #18 from John Marino ---
does this help?
Program received signal SIGBUS, Bus error.
0x004cbb6e in osint.file_name_hash_table.set (k=k@entry=31291,
e=...) at ../rts/s-htable.adb:381
381 Tab.Set (new Element
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #19 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to John Marino from comment #18)
> does this help?
>
Please show the output of
(gdb) disass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #20 from John Marino ---
Dump of assembler code for function osint__file_name_hash_table__setX:
0x004cbae0 <+0>: mov%edi,%eax
0x004cbae2 <+2>: mov$0x80604837,%edx
0x004cbae7 <+7>: p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77393
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #7)
> > Works for me here!
>
> Are you sure that you have tested
>
> print "(f8.0)", huge(1.0)
> print "(f18.0)", huge(1.0_8)
> print "(f20.0)", huge(1.0_10)
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77421
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Sep 2 16:18:35 2016
New Revision: 239959
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239959&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR other/77421
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_expanded_args_b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77453
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #21 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to John Marino from comment #20)
> Dump of assembler code for function osint__file_name_hash_table__setX:
>0x004cbb5a <+122>: callq 0x60dc40 <__gnat_malloc>
>0x004cbb5f <+127>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #22 from John Marino ---
(gdb) p/x $rax
$1 = 0x800af0748
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #23 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to John Marino from comment #22)
> (gdb) p/x $rax
> $1 = 0x800af0748
Your __gnat_malloc doesn't return memory aligned to 16 bytes. This
violates x86-64 psABI.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77396
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Sep 2 17:11:42 2016
New Revision: 239961
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239961&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/77396
* sanopt.c: Include gimple-ssa.h, tree-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77444
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Sep 2 17:12:27 2016
New Revision: 239962
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239962&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/77444
* tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c (cand_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74600
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #24 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Your __gnat_malloc doesn't return memory aligned to 16 bytes. This
> violates x86-64 psABI.
To be exhaustive, __gnat_malloc is just a wrapper around the system malloc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #25 from John Marino ---
I'm being told (one source) that that 16-byte alignment is not a x86-64 abi
requirement. I don't know either way. Do you have an iron-clad reference
about this requirement?
(Yes I know __gnat_malloc is libc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #26 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to John Marino from comment #25)
> I'm being told (one source) that that 16-byte alignment is not a x86-64 abi
> requirement. I don't know either way. Do you have an iron-clad reference
> about this re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77459
Bug ID: 77459
Summary: undefined reference to `snprintf' when building
mingw-w64 cross-compiler
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65467
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Sep 2 18:38:07 2016
New Revision: 239964
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239964&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/65467
* gimplify.c (gimplify_adjust_omp_clauses_1):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77460
Bug ID: 77460
Summary: ICE when summing an overflowing array
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77460
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77434
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77449
--- Comment #2 from Roland B ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #1)
> As a human reader who doesn't know C++ very well I'd consider it to be
> ambiguous, too... maybe as a compromise the error could be downgraded to a
> warning?
"int" i
ttp://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
gfortran -v reports:
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc_trunk/configure --disable-multilib \
--enable-languages=fortran
Thread model: posix
gcc version 7.0.0 20160902 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77460
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lkrupp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77461
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #27 from Eric Botcazou ---
Does it help if you define MALLOC_OBSERVABLE_ALIGNMENT to 64 in
i386/dragonfly.h?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827
--- Comment #28 from Bill Schmidt ---
Just recording that, as expected, this patch had neutral performance on
SPECcpu2006.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #28 from John Marino ---
i can try. we're actually discussing modifying how malloc works right now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62052
Taiju Tsuiki changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mail+gnu at tzik dot jp
--- Comment #5 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77434
--- Comment #9 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #8)
> As a user, I'd prefer warning about the missing parentheses instead of the
> boolean context thing, the missing parentheses make a lot more sense to me
> an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77462
Bug ID: 77462
Summary: Error message prints source from wrong file after
#line
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68270
Peter Wu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||peter at lekensteyn dot nl
--- Comment #2 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77463
Bug ID: 77463
Summary: internal compiler error: in output_move_qimode, at
config/m68k/m68k.c:3160
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77427
--- Comment #9 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #8)
> Created attachment 39537 [details]
> tentative patch
>
> currently doing bootstrap and reg-test
succeeded
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77462
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77267
Peter Wu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||peter at lekensteyn dot nl
--- Comment #2 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77462
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Frey ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #1)
Indeed, this is even worse than I thought.
FWIW, here's a reduced example for my code:
static_assert( 2 + 2 == 4, "oops" );
#line 1
static_assert( 2 +
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77434
--- Comment #10 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #9)
> It seems to me that they are two different warnings that could be triggered
> on similar code. The one warned by the patch would also warn about:
>
> if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77393
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Can you test by changing the define in write.c line 1349:
>
> #define BUF_STACK_SZ 256
On x86_64-apple-darwin15 the threshold (minimal value without SIGSEGV) is 385
with -m64 and 596 with -m32.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62052
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
N.B. Only the gcc-5 branch is still open for changes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77405
--- Comment #29 from John Marino ---
The DFly malloc returned an 8-byte aligned chunk because the requested
structural size was not 16-byte aligned. However, we agree that any allocation
>= 16 bytes should probably be 16-byte aligned.
I tested
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77464
Bug ID: 77464
Summary: gcc -no-pie breaks -shared
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77464
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77465
Bug ID: 77465
Summary: rejected C-style cast involving casting away constness
from result of conversion operator
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
79 matches
Mail list logo
