[Bug lto/85451] [offloading] Improve lto-wrapper error message when not finding mkoffload
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85451 --- Comment #6 from Tom de Vries --- Author: vries Date: Wed May 2 07:12:15 2018 New Revision: 259821 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259821&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [lto] Add "could not find mkoffload" error message to lto-wrapper 2018-05-02 Tom de Vries PR lto/85451 * lto-wrapper.c (compile_offload_image): Add "could not find mkoffload" error message. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/lto-wrapper.c
[Bug lto/85451] [offloading] Improve lto-wrapper error message when not finding mkoffload
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85451 Tom de Vries changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |9.0 --- Comment #7 from Tom de Vries --- Patches committed, marking resolved-fixed.
[Bug tree-optimization/85579] [9 regression] SIGSEV in fortran test case gfortran.dg/pr51434.f90 starting with r259754
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85579 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2018-05-02 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone|--- |9.0 Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- I will have a look.
[Bug target/85430] [7 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in memory_operand at recog.c:1358/9 with -O2 -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-fre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85430 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[7/8/9 Regression] ICE: |[7 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV |SIGSEGV in memory_operand |in memory_operand at |at recog.c:1358/9 with -O2 |recog.c:1358/9 with -O2 |-fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-fre |-fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-fre --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed for 8.1+.
[Bug lto/85583] [9 Regression] lto1: internal compiler error: in lto_balanced_map, at lto/lto-partition.c:833
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85583 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code, lto CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone|--- |9.0 Summary|lto1: internal compiler |[9 Regression] lto1: |error: in lto_balanced_map, |internal compiler error: in |at lto/lto-partition.c:833 |lto_balanced_map, at ||lto/lto-partition.c:833 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- The sanity check was fixed one already. Honza?
[Bug c++/85587] [8/9 Regression] bogus error: ‘F’ was not declared in this scope
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85587 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Target Milestone|8.2 |8.0
[Bug middle-end/85586] [8/9 Regression] Optimizer produces different result on -O2 and -O3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85586 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1
[Bug fortran/85575] Acceptance of invalid code: ordering of declaration statements with implicit typing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85575 --- Comment #3 from Jürgen Reuter --- This seems to be a GNU extension. In fact, when compiling with -std=f2008 gfortran throws an error. So my guess is this a wanted extension for backwards compatibility with old programs, well not too old, as they must at least have modules. If that's the case (wanted extension) then that's probably a "worksforme" close case.
[Bug tree-optimization/85588] [6/7/8/9 Regression] -fwrapv miscompilation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85588 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone|--- |6.5 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Mine then.
[Bug rtl-optimization/85594] ICE during expand when compiling with -fwrapv -fopenmp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85594 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2018-05-02 Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- Confirmed.
[Bug middle-end/85586] [8/9 Regression] Optimizer produces different result on -O2 and -O3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85586 --- Comment #4 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: rsandifo Date: Wed May 2 07:40:22 2018 New Revision: 259822 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259822&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Tighten early exit in vect_analyze_data_ref_dependence (PR85586) The problem in this PR was that we didn't consider aliases between writes in the same strided group. After tightening the early exit we get the expected abs(step) >= 2 versioning check. 2018-05-02 Richard Sandiford gcc/ PR tree-optimization/85586 * tree-vect-data-refs.c (vect_analyze_data_ref_dependence): Only exit early for statements in the same group if the accesses are not strided. gcc/testsuite/ PR tree-optimization/85586 * gcc.dg/vect/pr85586.c: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr85586.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c
[Bug target/85595] __atomic_is_lock_free(sizeof(unsigned long long), &v) returns true on i686
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85595 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target||i?86-*-* Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2018-05-02 Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- A better example like...?
[Bug middle-end/85586] [8/9 Regression] Optimizer produces different result on -O2 and -O3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85586 --- Comment #5 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: rsandifo Date: Wed May 2 07:43:49 2018 New Revision: 259823 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259823&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Tighten early exit in vect_analyze_data_ref_dependence (PR85586) The problem in this PR was that we didn't consider aliases between writes in the same strided group. After tightening the early exit we get the expected abs(step) >= 2 versioning check. 2018-05-02 Richard Sandiford gcc/ PR tree-optimization/85586 * tree-vect-data-refs.c (vect_analyze_data_ref_dependence): Only exit early for statements in the same group if the accesses are not strided. gcc/testsuite/ PR tree-optimization/85586 * gcc.dg/vect/pr85586.c: New test. Added: branches/gcc-8-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr85586.c Modified: branches/gcc-8-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-8-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog branches/gcc-8-branch/gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c
[Bug tree-optimization/85597] [6/7/8/9 Regression] internal compiler error: in compute_live_loop_exits, at tree-ssa-loop-manip.c:229
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85597
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed||2018-05-02
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Mine then. SSA form is corrupt:
[local count: 858993466]:
vect_cst__66 = { 1.0e+0, 1.0e+0, 1.0e+0, 1.0e+0 };
_67 = {_6, _10, _13, _16};
vect_cst__68 = _67;
[local count: 6950038024]:
...
# ivtmp_73 = PHI
_6 = *S_32;
[Bug middle-end/85598] Incorrect warning only at -O2 and -O3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85598 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2018-05-02 CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- Confirmed.
[Bug c++/85587] [8/9 Regression] bogus error: ‘F’ was not declared in this scope
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85587 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Wed May 2 07:50:28 2018 New Revision: 259824 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259824&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/85587 - error with scoped enum in template. * semantics.c (finish_qualified_id_expr): Don't return an unqualified IDENTIFIER_NODE. Added: branches/gcc-8-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/scoped_enum8.C Modified: branches/gcc-8-branch/gcc/cp/ChangeLog branches/gcc-8-branch/gcc/cp/semantics.c
[Bug middle-end/85598] [7/8/9 Regression] Incorrect warning only at -O2 and -O3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85598 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Target Milestone|--- |7.4 Summary|Incorrect warning only at |[7/8/9 Regression] |-O2 and -O3 |Incorrect warning only at ||-O2 and -O3
[Bug c++/85600] [9 Regression] CPU2006 471.omnetpp fails starting with r259771
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85600 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Priority|P3 |P1 Target Milestone|--- |9.0
[Bug target/85582] [9 Regression] wrong code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu in 32-bit mode
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85582 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Wed May 2 07:52:08 2018 New Revision: 259825 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259825&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR target/85582 * config/i386/i386.md (*ashl3_doubleword_mask, *ashl3_doubleword_mask_1, *3_doubleword_mask, *3_doubleword_mask_1): If and[sq]i3 is needed, don't clobber operands[2], instead use a new pseudo. Formatting fixes. * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr85582-1.c: New test. * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr85582-2.c: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr85582-1.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr85582-2.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/config/i386/i386.md trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug middle-end/85602] [8/9 Regression] regression with strncat and -Wall in GCC 8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85602 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Priority|P3 |P2 Target Milestone|--- |8.2 Summary|regression with strncat and |[8/9 Regression] regression |-Wall in GCC 8 |with strncat and -Wall in ||GCC 8
[Bug middle-end/85567] [7/8/9 Regression] internal compiler error: in gimplify_modify_expr, at gimplify.c:5797 when using sincos()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85567 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Wed May 2 07:59:34 2018 New Revision: 259826 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259826&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-05-02 Richard Biener PR middle-end/85567 * gimplify.c (gimplify_save_expr): When in SSA form allow SAVE_EXPRs to compute to SSA vars. * gcc.dg/torture/pr85567.c: New testcase. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr85567.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/gimplify.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug middle-end/85567] [7/8 Regression] internal compiler error: in gimplify_modify_expr, at gimplify.c:5797 when using sincos()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85567 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||9.0 Summary|[7/8/9 Regression] internal |[7/8 Regression] internal |compiler error: in |compiler error: in |gimplify_modify_expr, at|gimplify_modify_expr, at |gimplify.c:5797 when using |gimplify.c:5797 when using |sincos()|sincos() --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Fixed on trunk sofar.
[Bug fortran/85599] invalid optimization: function not always evaluated in logical expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85599 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|wrong-code |diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2018-05-02 CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 Severity|normal |enhancement --- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig --- (In reply to kargl from comment #1) > 10.1.5.4.2 Evaluation of logical intrinsic operations > > Once the interpretation of a logical intrinsic operation is > established, the processor may evaluate any other expression > that is logically equivalent, provided that the integrity of > parentheses in any expression is not violated. > > Two expressions of type logical are logically equivalent > if their values are equal for all possible values of their > primaries. > > With 'flag = .false.', gfortran can determine that > check()'s return value is irrelevant. So, the > the values of 'flag .and. check()' and 'flag' are > logically equivalent. > > Note, 'check() .and. flag' is logically equivalent > to 'flag', but the standard does not require any order > in the evaluation of op1 and op2 in a binary operation. > > Also, note that this is my interpretation. I could > be wrong. You're right, the code relying on side effects is undefined. Confirming as enhancement request. Would be nice to add a warning to catch this, though.
[Bug fortran/85599] invalid optimization: function not always evaluated in logical expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85599 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization --- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig --- Additionally, I think check() should never be executed, at least not if optimizing.
[Bug tree-optimization/85579] [9 regression] SIGSEV in fortran test case gfortran.dg/pr51434.f90 starting with r259754
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85579 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon --- Seen on aarch64 and arm too.
[Bug tree-optimization/85579] [9 regression] SIGSEV in fortran test case gfortran.dg/pr51434.f90 starting with r259754
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85579
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
To me the testcase looks invalid:
integer, parameter :: n = 5
character(len=1), parameter :: s(n) = 'a'
type :: a
integer :: m = n
character(len=1):: t(n) = transfer('abcde ', s)
this initializes an array of size 5 with a sequence of too many chars:
bar ()
{
static struct a c = {.m=5, .t={"a", "b", "c", "d", "e", " ", " ", " ", " ", "
", " ", " ", " ", " ", " ", " ", " ", " "}};
OTOH maybe nothing cares. But we definitely do output the constants and for
aarch64 I see:
.set.LANCHOR0,. + 0
.type options.3.2654, %object
.size options.3.2654, 28
options.3.2654:
.word 102
.word 8191
.word 1
.word 1
.word 1
.word 0
.word 31
.zero 4
.type c.2640, %object
.size c.2640, 12
c.2640:
.word 5
.ascii "a"
.ascii "b"
.ascii "c"
.ascii "d"
.ascii "e"
.ascii " "
.ascii " "
.ascii " "
.ascii " "
.ascii " "
.ascii " "
.ascii " "
.ascii " "
.ascii " "
.ascii " "
.ascii " "
.ascii " "
.ascii " "
.zero 4
.type A.1.2647, %object
.size A.1.2647, 40
A.1.2647:
.xword .LC0
.xword .LC1
.xword .LC2
...
notice the bogus .size of c.2640. But then we get to both c and A via
adrpx0, .LANCHOR0
add x0, x0, :lo12:.LANCHOR0
add x3, x0, 32
add x0, x0, 48
which looks wrong.
Not sure why it worked before (or why it doesn't work on powerpc) but
clearly the frontend emits bogus IL here and/or the output machinery
should avoid emitting excess elements(?).
[Bug middle-end/85586] [8/9 Regression] Optimizer produces different result on -O2 and -O3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85586 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #6 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Patch applied. Thanks for reporting the bug!
[Bug lto/85583] [9 Regression] lto1: internal compiler error: in lto_balanced_map, at lto/lto-partition.c:833
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85583 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2018-05-02 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka --- I will take a look. Indeed it was buggy for empty files (where best cost is -1 rather than 0), but this is probably independent issue.
[Bug fortran/85599] invalid optimization: function not always evaluated in logical expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85599 --- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to kargl from comment #1) > The behavior may not be buggy, and it's best not to depend > on side-effects. From F2018, > > 10.1.5.4.2 Evaluation of logical intrinsic operations > > Once the interpretation of a logical intrinsic operation is > established, the processor may evaluate any other expression > that is logically equivalent, provided that the integrity of > parentheses in any expression is not violated. > > Two expressions of type logical are logically equivalent > if their values are equal for all possible values of their > primaries. > Thanks for the standard quote, Steve. It certainly goes in the right direction, but I feel like it's not quite to the point. Some other (possibly) relevant passages I found in the 2008 standard: * 7.1.7 Evaluation of operands 1 It is not necessary for a processor to evaluate all of the operands of an expression, or to evaluate entirely each operand, if the value of the expression can be determined otherwise. * That also sounds like optimizing away the function call might be valid, but then there is also this one: * 7.1.4 Evaluation of operations 2 The evaluation of a function reference shall neither affect nor be affected by the evaluation of any other entity within the statement. * The way I read it, gfortran's implementation currently violates this clause for the expression "flag = flag .and. check()", because the evaluation of the function reference "check()" is affected by the value of the variable "flag". So I'd argue that the bug here is not missed-optimization in the first case, but over-optimization in the second, after all. What worries me most is that other compilers choose different implementations. Can this kind of code really be processor-dependent?
[Bug c++/85604] New: Default template arguments in friend class template declarations should not be allowed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85604
Bug ID: 85604
Summary: Default template arguments in friend class template
declarations should not be allowed
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: adr26__gcc at nunsway dot co.uk
Target Milestone: ---
template struct Template_Class;
struct Other_Struct
{
template friend struct Template_Class;
};
template
struct Template_Class
{
};
template <>
struct Template_Class<0>
{
};
Per [temp.param]/12:
"A default template-argument shall not be specified in a friend class template
declaration."
All versions of G++ since at least 4.1.2 accept the code above.
Clang++ correctly rejects this code:
:5:26: error: default template argument not permitted on a friend
template
template friend struct Template_Class;
^
:14:8: error: too few template arguments for class template
'Template_Class'
struct Template_Class<0>
^
:9:8: note: template is declared here
struct Template_Class
^
https://godbolt.org/g/Tvf7Fr
[Bug rtl-optimization/85605] New: Potentially missing optimization under x64 and ARM: seemingly unnecessary branch in codegen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85605
Bug ID: 85605
Summary: Potentially missing optimization under x64 and ARM:
seemingly unnecessary branch in codegen
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: sergey.ignatchenko at ithare dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Code:
==
#include
#include
template
inline bool cmp(T a, T2 b) {
return a<0 ? true : T2(a) < b;
}
template
inline bool cmp2(T a, T2 b) {
return (a<0) | (T2(a) < b);
}
bool f(int a, int b) {
return cmp(int64_t(a), unsigned(b));
}
bool f2(int a, int b) {
return cmp2(int64_t(a), unsigned(b));
}
Functions cmp and cmp2 seem to be equivalent (at least under "as if" rule, as
side effects of reading and casting are non-observable). However, under
GCC/x64, cmp() generates code with branch, while seemingly-equivalent cmp2() -
manages to do without branching:
===
f(int, int):
testl %edi, %edi
movl $1, %eax
js .L1
cmpl %edi, %esi
seta %al
.L1:
rep ret
f2(int, int):
movl %edi, %edx
shrl $31, %edx
cmpl %edi, %esi
seta %al
orl %edx, %eax
ret
===
And f2() is expected to be significantly faster than f1() in most usage
scenarios (*NB: if you feel it is necessary to create a case to illustrate
detriment of branching - please LMK, but hopefully it is quite obvious*).
Per Godbolt, similar behavior is observed under both GCC/x64, and GCC/ARM;
however, Clang manages to do without branching both for f1() and f2().
*Godbolt link*: https://godbolt.org/g/ktovvP
[Bug c/65892] gcc fails to implement N685 aliasing of union members
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65892 --- Comment #62 from Andrew Haley --- Just a bit of clarification: (In reply to James Kuyper Jr. from comment #59) > > > 1) all type-based alias analysis is effectively impossible > > Alias analysis is only affected by the special guarantee if > a) the types involved are both struct types > b) both struct types are members of the same union > c) the struct types share a common initial sequence OK to all of those. > d) the code in question inspects the value of one of the members of the > common initial sequence. While this is a reasonable inference from what the text of the standard says, type-based alias analysis, by definition, does not pay any attention to what any piece of code does. The analysis is purely type-based: that is to say, it only uses the types, and the only question it answers is "Do these types alias?" > e) a completed declaration of the union type that they are members > of is visible at the point in the code where the inspection occurrs. As explained elsewhere, TBAA doesn't use visibility as a criterion. > It seems to me that the overwhelming majority of cases will fail to > meet at least one of those requirements, so type-based alias > analysis is still possible, it's just made more complicated by the > need to check for those things. That's not quite right, as explained above. If you use information other than types in alias analysis, it's no longer TBAA. It is a fundamental principle of TBAA that the result of an aliasing query never changes for any pair of types. We are extremely unlikely to redesign a big part of the optimizer for this dusty corner case.
[Bug rtl-optimization/85605] Potentially missing optimization under x64 and ARM: seemingly unnecessary branch in codegen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85605 --- Comment #1 from sergey.ignatchenko at ithare dot com --- Command line switches (see also Godbolt link above): -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
[Bug libstdc++/84654] libstdc++ tries to use __float128 when compiling with -mno-float128
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84654 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |9.0 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- Fixed for GCC 9. This might be suitable to backport to release branches after some soak time on the trunk.
[Bug fortran/85599] invalid optimization: function not always evaluated in logical expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85599 --- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Here is a variant of the original test case, now with a PURE procedure: program lazy logical :: flag flag = .false. flag = check() .and. flag flag = flag .and. check() contains pure logical function check() check = .true. end function end In this case I would think it's perfectly valid to optimize away both calls to 'check', in particular because there is actually no way to check for the user whether the function 'check' is being called (other than looking at the assembly code etc). However, I could not find any distinctions between pure and impure functions in the standard, when it comes to the question of function evaluation and optimizations. Any pointers appreciated.
[Bug c/65892] gcc fails to implement N685 aliasing of union members
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65892
--- Comment #63 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 2 May 2018, aph at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65892
>
> --- Comment #62 from Andrew Haley ---
> Just a bit of clarification:
>
> (In reply to James Kuyper Jr. from comment #59)
> >
> > > 1) all type-based alias analysis is effectively impossible
> >
> > Alias analysis is only affected by the special guarantee if
> > a) the types involved are both struct types
>
> > b) both struct types are members of the same union
> > c) the struct types share a common initial sequence
>
> OK to all of those.
>
> > d) the code in question inspects the value of one of the members of the
> > common initial sequence.
>
> While this is a reasonable inference from what the text of the
> standard says, type-based alias analysis, by definition, does not pay
> any attention to what any piece of code does. The analysis is purely
> type-based: that is to say, it only uses the types, and the only
> question it answers is "Do these types alias?"
>
> > e) a completed declaration of the union type that they are members
> > of is visible at the point in the code where the inspection occurrs.
>
> As explained elsewhere, TBAA doesn't use visibility as a criterion.
>
> > It seems to me that the overwhelming majority of cases will fail to
> > meet at least one of those requirements, so type-based alias
> > analysis is still possible, it's just made more complicated by the
> > need to check for those things.
>
> That's not quite right, as explained above. If you use information
> other than types in alias analysis, it's no longer TBAA. It is a
> fundamental principle of TBAA that the result of an aliasing query
> never changes for any pair of types.
>
> We are extremely unlikely to redesign a big part of the optimizer for
> this dusty corner case.
Just sth I noticed. The standard says
"it is permitted to inspect the common initial part of any of them"
and GCC already allows that. But the testcase in this PR access
this common initial part via the actual structure types containing
this common initial sequences. GCC has maintained the interpretation
of the standard that for struct S *p; an access like p->x is an
access of *p with respect to TBAA analysis. But the standard doesn't
say you may access both structures containing the initial sequence
but it only says you may inspect the common initial part. So if you
do
int f (struct t1 *p1, struct t2 *p2)
{
// union U visible here, p1->m and p2->m may alias
int *x = &p1->m;
int *y = &p2->m;
if (*x < 0)
*y = -*y;
return *x;
}
then it will work just fine.
I guess we all agree that the standards wording isn't 100% clear
and that it should be improved.
It may of course be that GCCs interpretation that p->x is an
access of *p isn't correct. But then I don't need the union
clause because if p1->m is an access of 'int' only with
respect to TBAA then of course 'int' aliases 'int'.
[Bug testsuite/85368] [8/9 regression] phi-opt-11 test fails on IBM Z
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85368 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug middle-end/84048] [8/9 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/tls/run-ld.c -O0 -pie -fPIE execution test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84048 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug fortran/85507] [6/7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_dep_resolver, at fortran/dependency.c:2258
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85507 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug rtl-optimization/83361] [7 Regression ?] ICE: verify_flow_info failed (error: non-cold basic block 3 reachable only by paths crossing the cold partition) on 32-bit BE powerpc targets
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83361 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug ada/82844] [8/9 Regression] Many ada tests time out on x32
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82844 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug target/84251] [8/9 Regression] Performance regression in gcc 8/9 when comparing floating point numbers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84251 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug regression/81331] [6/7 Regression] missed Eh delivery in partitioned function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81331 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug target/79166] [ARM] Implement neon_valid_immediate tricks for BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79166 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug c++/85046] [8/9 Regression] cp/name-lookup.c:6175:53: runtime error: member access within null pointer of type 'struct cp_binding_level'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85046 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug target/85512] [8/9 Regression] gcc generating non-existing sshr with immh == 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85512 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug target/82005] Early lto debug not implemented on Darwin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82005 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #39 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug rtl-optimization/71596] gcc bootstrap fails due to segv in genrecog
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71596 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug tree-optimization/80198] [6/7/8/9 Regression] does not vectorize generic inplace integer operation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80198 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug rtl-optimization/80791] [8/9 regression] test case gcc.dg/sms-1.c fail2 starting with r247885
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80791 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug ada/80590] [8/9 regression] non-bootstrap build failure of Ada runtime
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80590 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug tree-optimization/85459] [8/9 Regression] Larger code generated from GMP template meta-programming
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85459 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug target/83267] [8/9 regression] [armeb] gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/scalarize2.f90 fails since r255307
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83267 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug libstdc++/78595] Unnecessary copies in _Rb_tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78595 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug tree-optimization/78496] [7 Regression] Missed opportunities for jump threading
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78496 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug preprocessor/69543] [6/7/8/9 Regression] _Pragma does not apply within macro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69543 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug target/83838] Many gcc.target/i386/indirect-thunk*.c tests FAIL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83838 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug fortran/84135] [8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_trans_array_cobounds, at fortran/trans-array.c:6033
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84135 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug fortran/84848] [8/9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/coarray/event_3.f08/9 -fcoarray=single -O2 -latomic execution test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84848 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug ipa/85103] [8/9 Regression] Performance regressions on SPEC with r257582
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85103 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug go/84948] [8/9 regression] ICE in set_from, at go/gofrontend/types.cc:2660
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84948 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug tree-optimization/81018] [8/9 regression] gfortran.dg/graphite/pr14741.f90 FAILs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81018 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug target/83851] [8/9 regression] gcc.dg/vect/pr53185-2.c fails on armeb after r256634
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83851 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug middle-end/82407] [meta-bug] qsort_chk fallout tracking
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82407 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug tree-optimization/83403] Missed register promotion opportunities in loop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83403 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug tree-optimization/80511] [8/9 Regression] gcc.dg/Wstrict-overflow-18.c gcc.dg/Wstrict-overflow-7.c gcc.dg/pragma-diag-3.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80511 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug target/71991] Inconsistency for __attribute__ ((__always_inline__)) among LTO and non-LTO compilation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71991 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug target/84490] [8/9 regression] 436.cactusADM regressed by 6-8% percent with -Ofast on Zen and Haswell, compared to gcc 7.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84490 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug c++/84733] [8/9 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault (check_local_shadow())
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84733 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug libstdc++/83906] Random FAIL: libstdc++-prettyprinters/80276.cc whatis p4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83906 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug libfortran/78549] Very slow formatted internal file output
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78549 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #33 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug tree-optimization/78972] [6/7/8/9 Regression] poor x86 simd instruction scheduling
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78972 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug target/82258] [8/9 regression] allocate_zerosize_3.f fails since r251949
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82258 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug inline-asm/84941] [6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: in reg_overlap_mentioned_p, at rtlanal.c:1870 (reg_overlap_mentioned_p()/match_asm_constraints_1())
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84941 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug bootstrap/81033] [8/9 Regression] there are cases where ld64 is not able to determine correct atom boundaries from the output GCC currently produces
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81033 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #35 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug tree-optimization/82446] [8/9 Regression] Missed equalities in dr_group_sort_cmp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82446 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug rtl-optimization/83530] [7 Regression] ICE in reset_sched_cycles_in_current_ebb, at sel-sched.c:7150
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83530 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug target/84413] -mtune=skylake-avx512,cannonlake,icelake disable many optimizations
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84413 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug libstdc++/70472] is_copy_constructible>>::value is true
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70472 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug fortran/83088] [8/9 Regression] ICE with -init-derived
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83088 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug fortran/85506] ICE in gfc_assign_data_value, at fortran/data.c:448
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85506 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug target/83760] [7 Regression] [SH] ICE in maybe_record_trace_start building glibc tst-copy_file_range.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83760 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug testsuite/80759] gcc.target/x86_64/abi/ms-sysv FAILs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80759 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #65 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug target/84923] [8/9 regression] gcc.dg/attr-weakref-1.c failed on aarch64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84923 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug middle-end/78809] Inline strcmp with small constant strings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #34 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug fortran/85314] gcc/fortran/resolve.c:9222: unreachable code ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85314 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug libstdc++/77866] Add SystemTap probe points to libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77866 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug tree-optimization/82255] Vectorizer cost model overcounts cost of some vectorized loads
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82255 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug c++/84598] [8/9 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault (cp_default_conversion())
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84598 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug bootstrap/82856] --enable-maintainter-mode broken by incompatiblity of gcc's required automake and modern Perl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82856 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug target/78176] [MIPS] miscompiles ldxc1 with large pointers on 32-bits
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78176 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #22 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug tree-optimization/84353] [8/9 Regression] [graphite] ICE in set_codegen_error, at graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c:206
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84353 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug libstdc++/79422] Use ACX_BUGURL for error in snprintf_lite.cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79422 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug fortran/84472] Missing finalization and memory leak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84472 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug tree-optimization/58454] Potentially wrong(or at least weird/inconsistent) code generation with -O2 -fno-strict-overflow
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58454 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug c++/85481] [8/9 Regression] ICE in maybe_explain_implicit_delete
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85481 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug target/80938] [7 Regression] ICE in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2330
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80938 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug rtl-optimization/82982] [8/9 Regression] ICE: qsort checking failed (error: qsort comparator non-negative on sorted output: 5) in ready_sort_real in haifa scheduler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82982 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug middle-end/77568] [7/8/9 regression] CSE/PRE/Hoisting blocks common instruction contractions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77568 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
[Bug target/84711] AArch32 big-endian fails when taking subreg of a vector mode to a scalar mode.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84711 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|8.0 |8.2 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 8.1 has been released.
