https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61209
Bug ID: 61209
Summary: [4.10 Regression] internal compiler error: in
fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.c:1950
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44557
Sandra Loosemore changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sandra at codesourcery dot com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56811
Alexander changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alm at sibmail dot ru
--- Comment #10 from A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61208
--- Comment #1 from Mike Hommey ---
Created attachment 32812
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32812&action=edit
Corresponding assembly (compressed)
This is the assembly I got with the full normal command line. But I can
repro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61208
Bug ID: 61208
Summary: armhf: generated asm code produces "branch out of
range" error in gas with -Os
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61202
--- Comment #1 from Carrot ---
In arm_neon.h, we have
__extension__ static __inline int16x8_t __attribute__ ((__always_inline__))
vqdmulhq_n_s16 (int16x8_t a, int16_t b)
{
int16x8_t result;
__asm__ ("sqdmulh %0.8h,%1.8h,%2.h[0]"
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61207
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |4.9.0
Severity|major
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61207
Bug ID: 61207
Summary: Win64 gcc 4.9.0: ICE at -Os compiling some C++ code
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089
--- Comment #31 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Fri May 16 23:12:19 2014
New Revision: 210537
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210537&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/54089
* config/sh/predicates.md (negt_reg_shl31_oper
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51244
--- Comment #75 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Fri May 16 22:54:32 2014
New Revision: 210535
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210535&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/51244
* config/sh/sh.c (sh_eval_treg_value): Handle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61206
Bug ID: 61206
Summary: Duplicate -I- causes compiler to hang
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: driver
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61187
--- Comment #3 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Fri May 16 20:48:17 2014
New Revision: 210530
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210530&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 61187 Fix use of uninitialized data.
2014-05-16 Janne Blomqvist
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61187
--- Comment #2 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Fri May 16 20:42:56 2014
New Revision: 210529
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210529&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 61187 Fix use of uninitialized data.
2014-05-16 Janne Blomqvist
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61187
--- Comment #1 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Fri May 16 20:37:13 2014
New Revision: 210527
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210527&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 61187 Fix use of uninitialized memory.
2014-05-16 Janne Blomqvist
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61081
--- Comment #6 from Peter Eisentraut ---
This particular case is in system headers, but there are other cases that are
not, so this isn't going to help in general.
I think this is a legitimate way to write a function-like macro that has a
side-e
-bootstrap
--enable-checking=yes --disable-multilib --prefix=gcc_trunk/install
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.10.0 20140516 (experimental) (GCC)
The program is:
package main
func main() {
(<-(<-make(chan chan func([1]string, float64) (chan string,
[0]bool([1]string{string("
--disable-bootstrap
--enable-checking=yes --disable-multilib --prefix=gcc_trunk/install
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.10.0 20140516 (experimental) (GCC)
The program is:
package main
func main() {
type id2 chan map[uintptr]string
type id3 [0]string
type id4 float64
_ = <-<
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61203
Bug ID: 61203
Summary: [4.7/4.8/4.9/4.10 Regression]
g++.old-deja/g++.jason/rvalue2.C FAILs with -O2
-fno-inline
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56724
--- Comment #8 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Tom Tromey from comment #5)
> I tried this today with a recent-ish gcc trunk build, and
> there's been a regression.
I think the problem is that convert_for_assignment uses "location" inst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51640
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51640
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri May 16 17:42:23 2014
New Revision: 210521
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210521&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2014-05-16 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/51640
* parser.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60969
--- Comment #23 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Fri May 16 17:37:17 2014
New Revision: 210520
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210520&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-16 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/60969
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60969
--- Comment #22 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Fri May 16 17:21:04 2014
New Revision: 210519
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210519&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-16 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/60969
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60969
--- Comment #21 from H.J. Lu ---
MMX and x87 registers are aliases of each others. They can't be used
at the same time. Is there a way to pass this information to RA?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61202
Bug ID: 61202
Summary: gcc generates invalid sqdmulh instruction
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61201
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60969
--- Comment #20 from Vladimir Makarov ---
The problem is ira-costs.c. One pseudo gets equal costs for memory and all
classes. Therefore when non-mmx hard regs are not enough, a mmx is used.
After initialization of costs of reg classes for the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61201
Bug ID: 61201
Summary: Cross compile fails with SPARK_05 undefined
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61094
--- Comment #14 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
I'm not talking about restricting the general case where we've got cascaded
extensions. Just the case where one of the insns in the cascade has a
source/dest that are not the same register. Which is a cas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60969
--- Comment #19 from H.J. Lu ---
There is
#define VALID_MMX_REG_MODE_3DNOW(MODE) \
((MODE) == V2SFmode || (MODE) == SFmode)
and ix86_hard_regno_mode_ok returns TRUE for holding SFmode
in MMX registers. It is wrong to tell RA that MMX registe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51640
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|paolo at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61200
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56846
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61075
--- Comment #8 from Denes Matetelki ---
Just an observation:
The contained type also need to declare and define ctor(int).
Which can be tricky, if it is a template class and:
template
class Custom
{
public:
Custom(T t) : m_t(t) {}
Custom(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58962
--- Comment #4 from Bruce Merry ---
Incidentally, the workaround I have been using is to just run the script
through 2to3. Since Python only tells you things have gone wrong when you
execute the code I can't guarantee that this fixes everything,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58962
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Gutson
---
Please do not close this issue.(In reply to Bruce Merry from comment #1)
> I've now realised that this is actually just the tip of the iceberg - I
> suspect that libstdc++'s pretty printers aren't Python 3 r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58962
GonzaloBonigo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gonzalo.bonigo@tallertechno
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59904
--- Comment #6 from christophe.lyon at st dot com ---
I have re-run the tests with trunk@210140 and older binutils (Sept 2013).
The test fails at compilation with target arm-none-linux-gnueabi, and
CFLAGS=-Os -pie -fpie or -Os -pie -fPIE in the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61200
Bug ID: 61200
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault, assert &
openmp
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59904
--- Comment #5 from christophe.lyon at st dot com ---
Created attachment 32806
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32806&action=edit
ELF binary file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60758
--- Comment #4 from merzlyakovao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: merzlyakovao
Date: Fri May 16 13:16:33 2014
New Revision: 210515
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210515&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-16 Alexey Merzlyakov
PR libstdc++/6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61194
--- Comment #14 from vincenzo Innocente ---
provided that future patches will make the code in comment 1 and 2 (and bar) go
vectorize is fine with me.
if it ends up to vectorize also with "bool" instead of "int" even better.
(I am not sure that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61194
--- Comment #13 from vincenzo Innocente ---
I confirm that with last patch the regression is gone also in a more complex
actual application I had.
The regression concerns only comment 2 and 3.
all the other cases in comment 1 were various attem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61194
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
void bar2() {
for (int i=0; i<1024; ++i) {
k[i] = x[i]>0; j[i] = w[i]<0;
z[i] = ( k[i] & j[i]) ? z[i] : y[i];
}
}
has similar issues (non-single-uses due to CSE and propagating from the
conversi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61194
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> Created attachment 32805 [details]
> patch fixing the regression
>
> This would fix the regression (also without the previous patch?)
It does, on the 4.9 br
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61194
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 32805
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32805&action=edit
patch fixing the regression
This would fix the regression (also without the previous patch?)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61194
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri May 16 11:21:11 2014
New Revision: 210514
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210514&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-16 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/61194
* tree-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58899
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59352
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54316
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61199
torvald at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61199
Bug ID: 61199
Summary: [trans-mem] _cxa_free_exception is not transaction
safe
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61194
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 16 May 2014, vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61194
>
> --- Comment #7 from vincenzo Innocente ---
> great!
>
> the original versi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61194
--- Comment #7 from vincenzo Innocente ---
great!
the original version (that vectorized in 4.8.1)
void barX() {
for (int i=0; i<1024; ++i) {
k[i] = (x[i]>0) & (w[i]0) & (w[i]0.5f);
z[i] = c ? y[i] : z[i];
}
}
vectorized
if (c) z[i] =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61166
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri May 16 09:30:57 2014
New Revision: 210511
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210511&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-15 Ed Smith-Rowland <3dw...@verizon.net>
Jonathan Wakel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61194
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 32803
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32803&action=edit
patch
Like this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61198
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini ---
Closely related to c++/60767
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61198
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|blocker |normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61197
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Make sure to add all the various testcases.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61197
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Zhendong Su from comment #0)
> It seems different from PR 61140 and PR 61150 as -fno-tree-dce makes both
> disappear, but not this one.
Still the same bug (fixed by the same patch). I am sorry it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61197
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61094
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I vaguely remember it has been seen in the wild, not sure how often, but there
were several bugreports about that.
In any case, I'd say it is a pitty to stop optimizing this case for the
unlikely case there
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61196
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61166
--- Comment #12 from Kan Liu ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #11)
> (In reply to Kan Liu from comment #10)
> > _Select_type already does the overflow check, so *template implemented
> > operators* is still redundant I think.
>
> Yo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60966
--- Comment #26 from Thomas Sanchez ---
In the end the problem is quite simple :) One workaround would be to move the
promise into the lambda however I would be glad that your patch get accepted,
because IMHO it is not an expected behavior from a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60966
--- Comment #25 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Leon Timmermans from comment #24)
> > get_future() is non-const, set_value() is non-const.
>
> I can see your point from a C++ point of view, but this doesn't make sense
> from a usable threa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61166
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Kan Liu from comment #10)
> _Select_type already does the overflow check, so *template implemented
> operators* is still redundant I think.
You can't use _Select_type on a literal operator th
67 matches
Mail list logo
