https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68654
--- Comment #10 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
I've just scanned the provided dumps. This is almost certainly a difference in
the SSA_NAME_VERSIONs causing different coalescing. The tell-tale sign is
seeing identical code in the .optimized dump, excep
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68654
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Without looking at the dumps or the code we generate, the only thing that makes
any sense would be the different SSA_NAME_VERSIONs resulting in different
coalescing.
If that is indeed the case, then that's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68695
--- Comment #18 from Dominik Vogt ---
Defining PROMOTE_MODE is not really an option on S/390. Whether it's
profitable or expensive to promote a value mostly depends on the way a value is
used and the context. Experiments with using PROMOTE_MODE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68828
Bug ID: 68828
Summary: [concepts] ICE in fold with requires and function call
around parameters
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68827
Bug ID: 68827
Summary: [concepts] ICE in fold where requires parameter
shadows function argument
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68826
Bug ID: 68826
Summary: [concepts] ICE in fold expression with requires
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61139
kugan at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|DUPLICA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53223
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63586
kugan at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #36908|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68115
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68825
Bug ID: 68825
Summary: testsuite/experimental/memory/shared_ptr/cons/copy_cto
r_neg.cc fails to compile on powerpc64
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68115
--- Comment #8 from John David Anglin ---
Author: danglin
Date: Thu Dec 10 01:08:13 2015
New Revision: 231485
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231485&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 68115/libfortran
* configure.ac: Set libbacktrace
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68729
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68729
--- Comment #6 from John David Anglin ---
Author: danglin
Date: Thu Dec 10 00:46:41 2015
New Revision: 231484
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231484&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/68729
* config/pa/pa.c (pa_emit_move_seque
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63586
kugan at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincenzo.innocente at cern dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61139
kugan at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68729
--- Comment #5 from John David Anglin ---
Author: danglin
Date: Thu Dec 10 00:44:13 2015
New Revision: 231483
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231483&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/68729
* config/pa/pa.c (pa_emit_move_seque
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68729
--- Comment #4 from John David Anglin ---
Author: danglin
Date: Thu Dec 10 00:41:17 2015
New Revision: 231482
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231482&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/68729
* config/pa/pa.c (pa_emit_move_seque
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68390
--- Comment #3 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Fixed in trunk. We also need to back-port this to branches.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68805
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68717
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68824
Bug ID: 68824
Summary: [6 Regression] libtsan is missing the
__interceptor___tls_get_addr symbol without bumping
the soname
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68811
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25140
--- Comment #16 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Dec 9 23:28:01 2015
New Revision: 231478
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231478&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/61886
PR middle-end/25140
* tree-ssa-alia
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #50 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Dec 9 23:28:01 2015
New Revision: 231478
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231478&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/61886
PR middle-end/25140
* tree-ssa-alia
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68811
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Dec 9 22:37:02 2015
New Revision: 231477
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231477&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR lto/68811
* lto.c (lto_fixup_prevailing_decls): Do not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68358
--- Comment #15 from Nenad Vukicevic ---
Just updated Xcode to 7.2. Still the same issue, even though dsymutil
changed.
On 12/7/2015 1:19 AM, iains at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68358
>
> --- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68302
--- Comment #15 from Steve Ellcey ---
Created attachment 36978
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36978&action=edit
patch to put debug statements in cselib.c
I still cannot reproduce the failure. I have built cross compilers o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12212
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68815
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus ---
Simple bits committed, still to do:
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #1)
> For expr.c's gfc_check_conformance - used by intrinsic.c and check.c, it
> enters as
>"%s", buffer
> And the same seems t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13806
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42525
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68816
--- Comment #6 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #5)
> GCC warns for this case with -O2 -Wstrict-overflow=3 so I think this bug can
> be closed as invalid.
I tried out the flag you suggest and it generated lots of f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68819
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68819
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 36977
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36977&action=edit
Work-in-progress patch to fix this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68811
--- Comment #8 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #7)
>
> does this patch fix the issue for you?
Yes, it does. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65534
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
Yep, if __setuent_static and known to not have address taken this should be
possible
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68811
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka ---
Hi,
does this patch fix the issue for you?
Honza
Index: lto/lto.c
===
--- lto/lto.c (revision 231472)
+++ lto/lto.c (working copy)
@@ -2517,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68811
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
> Thanks.
>
> I now get:
>
> lto1: internal compiler error: in lto_fixup_prevailing_decls, at
> lto/lto.c:2533
> 0x1017ce37 lto_fixup_prevailing_decls
> ../../gcc/gcc/lto/lto.c:2533
Fun, I wonder wh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68814
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19165
--- Comment #23 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #21)
> One other issue is that column numbering is rather a mess right now. From
> my rich-location patch:
>
> /* Both gcc and emacs number source *lines* star
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68819
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #3)
> (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #1)
> > Is it a file with many includes? libcpp can go into a fallback mode where
> > it stops supplying column numbers,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68811
--- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Thanks.
I now get:
lto1: internal compiler error: in lto_fixup_prevailing_decls, at lto/lto.c:2533
0x1017ce37 lto_fixup_prevailing_decls
../../gcc/gcc/lto/lto.c:2533
0x1017ce37 lto_fixup_decls
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68819
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #1)
> Is it a file with many includes? libcpp can go into a fallback mode where
> it stops supplying column numbers, when location_t goes >=
> LINE_MAP_MAX_LOCATION_WI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68822
--- Comment #2 from David Edelsohn ---
Actually this needs support through divmodti4 pattern that falls back to
divmodtidi4 for DImode divisor.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68810
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
Error is emitted here in potential_constant_expression_1, in cp/constexpr.c:
4306 error_at (EXPR_LOC_OR_LOC (t, input_location),
4307"reinterpret_cast from integer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #49 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Dec 9 19:40:10 2015
New Revision: 231474
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231474&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/61886
* ipa-visibility.c (function_and_variable_v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68811
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Dec 9 19:35:18 2015
New Revision: 231473
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231473&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR lto/68811
* g++.dg/lto/pr68811_0.C: New testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #48 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Dec 9 19:29:38 2015
New Revision: 231471
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231471&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/61886
PR middle-end/25140
* ipa-reference
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68815
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Wed Dec 9 19:29:46 2015
New Revision: 231472
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231472&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-12-09 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/68815
* decl.c (g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25140
--- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Dec 9 19:29:38 2015
New Revision: 231471
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231471&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/61886
PR middle-end/25140
* ipa-reference
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68823
Bug ID: 68823
Summary: [graphite] tramp3d-v4 compiled with
-floop-nest-optimize crashes
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68810
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
The location of the error does indeed move from line 21 to line 20 upon adding
-m32:
Here's recent trunk (r231296) on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, running manually (without
the -fno-diagnostics-show-caret from the t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68810
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to vries from comment #3)
> The line of the error test seems to be recent:
>
> d2c63826 (jason 2015-11-14 00:08:05 + 21) } // { dg-error
> "reinterpret_cast" "" }
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68822
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53223
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68822
Bug ID: 68822
Summary: Enable PowerPC divde instruction
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68775
--- Comment #4 from William Seurer ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Can you try to bisect to an affected source file (just use
> -fno-tree-vectorize on all but one) and there to whether it is basic-block
> or loop vectorization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65604
--- Comment #3 from Steve Ellcey ---
I have submitted a patch for this problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg01049.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68767
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5 regression] spurious |[6 regression] spurious
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68792
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68821
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68810
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68811
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
The bug is that we can not prevail builtin decl refered by the global tables by
non-builtin. The following restores the previous behaviour of not merging.
Next stage1 I can clean this up finally.
Index: lto-sy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68815
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68767
--- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #4)
> Interestingly, the problem seems specific to C++ and 6.0. GCC (in C mode)
> or 5.1 in either C or C++ mode don't issue the warning. I've changed the
> Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68821
Bug ID: 68821
Summary: g++ does not warn/error when virtual function return
type is different than the one it overrides
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68767
--- Comment #5 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke from comment #3)
> (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #2)
> > I don't understand. It is indeed passing NULL to a non-null function. What
> > is wrong with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68816
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Last reconfirmed|2015-12-09 00
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68811
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68811
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2015-12-09 00:00:00 |
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68820
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68767
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68767
--- Comment #3 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #2)
> I don't understand. It is indeed passing NULL to a non-null function. What
> is wrong with the warning?
When you look at the original testcase clo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68799
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt ---
Hi Matthias,
Attempted to recreate with powerpc64le-linux-gnu running on POWER8 using latest
gcc-5-branch. I get a different failure within lto1; output shown below. This
indicates a problem streaming in a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68819
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68767
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68816
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #2)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> > there is no overflow in your example to detect,
>
> AFAIK, the if statement can only be true if overflow oc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68670
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68730
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
The dominator ICE started with r228231.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60218
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Version|4.9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68816
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60218
--- Comment #1 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Dec 9 16:59:26 2015
New Revision: 231460
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231460&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2015-12-09 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/60218
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53223
--- Comment #10 from benzejaa at gmail dot com ---
I wanted to add that it looks like decltype(auto) also has the same bug as
auto&& in this context.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68819
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #0)
> I get the following bogus warning:
>
> Quadtree.h:210:0: warning: statement is indented as if it were guarded by...
> [-Wmisleading-indentation]
>unsigned in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68820
Bug ID: 68820
Summary: [6 regression] FAIL:
gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/memops-asm.c execution,
-O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32643
--- Comment #21 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
Not to sound pedantic, but https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/management.html says:
The target milestone should be set to the next release of the newest active
release branch that needs fixing (the rationale is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66616
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53223
benzejaa at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||benzejaa at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68730
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
Note that if you want to reproduce this by running cc1, add -march=x86-64:
$ ./cc1 -quiet v.c -O2 -fno-if-conversion -m32
$ ./cc1 -quiet v.c -O2 -fno-if-conversion -m32 -march=x86-64
v.c: In function ‘fn1’:
v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68730
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
And now I can only reproduce the ICE but not the hang. Eh.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68348
--- Comment #13 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #12)
> Sorry, I didn't notice that until I posted my version.
Heh ;) No problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68348
--- Comment #12 from Marek Polacek ---
Sorry, I didn't notice that until I posted my version.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68348
--- Comment #11 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #10)
> Indeed, seems to be fixed. I'll add the testcase.
Perhaps you can look at [1] ?
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg01001.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68819
Bug ID: 68819
Summary: Invalid "-Wmisleading-indentation" warning if code is
all in one line
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68816
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> there is no overflow in your example to detect,
AFAIK, the if statement can only be true if overflow occurs.
> I assume you're asking for the anti-pattern t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68818
Bug ID: 68818
Summary: Issue switching stacks on x86 with -fdefer-pop and
-fomit-frame-pointer
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68817
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
lds/trunk/64/20151209/bin/../libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/6.0.0/f951':
double free or corruption (!prev): 0x02b23f30 ***
=== Backtrace: =
/lib64/libc.so.6[0x3c71a77d9e]
/lib64/libc.so.6(cfree+0x5b5)[0x3c71a839f5]
/gnumnt/msticlxl60_users/gnutester/stability/builds/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68348
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
1 - 100 of 176 matches
Mail list logo
