https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56145
--- Comment #20 from Vincent ---
Awesome, thanks so much for fixing it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71578
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72785
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68797
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Does this still happen?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69772
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69832
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Depends on|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72801
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #3 from M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72802
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72801
--- Comment #2 from Zhendong Su ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #1)
> I can confirm the ICE but not the regression part. My bisection script
> shows an ICE goes all the way back to 4.3.0. The first revision I have
> access to that cr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72783
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72802
Bug ID: 72802
Summary: powerpc64le: -mcpu=power9 emits lxssp instruction with
offset that isn't a multiple of 4
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72801
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72797
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor ---
-ftrack-macro-expansion=0 is set in a number of tests that define helper macros
to help reduce clutter from repetitive constructs. Without the setting,
diagnostic messages in these tests would point to the ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72801
Bug ID: 72801
Summary: ICE on invalid C++ code with ill-formed class member
specialization: tree check: expected class
‘expression’, have ‘type’ (integer_type) in
t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72800
Bug ID: 72800
Summary: ICE on invalid C++14 code with initialized lambda
capture: tree check: expected class ‘type’, have
‘exceptional’ (error_mark) in add_capture, at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70920
--- Comment #5 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to mwahab from comment #4)
> (In reply to prathamesh3492 from comment #3)
> > Fixed on trunk.
>
> I think that this is the cause of a failure in gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr22051-2.c
> for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72797
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72798
--- Comment #2 from Rich Townsend ---
Hmm, I can understand why having an internal pure attribute makes sense from an
optimiser point of view. But it results in having lots of compilation cascades
during debugging, which sucks.
Is there a way to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72798
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72799
--- Comment #1 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Uhh, sorry, I pasted the error messages from a compiler with changes that
attempted to fix the problem. Here's what gcc version 5.3.1 20160406 (Red Hat
5.3.1-6) (GCC) reports:
/l/tmp/build/gcc/trunk/gcc/te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72799
Bug ID: 72799
Summary: [C++11] ref-qualifiers are dropped from some function
types
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72796
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72798
Bug ID: 72798
Summary: Module (.mod) file changes even when interface does
not
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60933
--- Comment #15 from Leif Leonhardy ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #14)
> Fixed.
In trunk that is.
In GCC 6.1.0 we still have
$ egrep -iw 'gmp|mpfr|mpc' src/gcc-6.1.0/contrib/download_prerequisites
MPFR=mpfr-2.4.2
GMP=gmp-4.3.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72795
--- Comment #3 from Peter Cordes ---
Based on further discussion
(http://chat.stackoverflow.com/rooms/119045/discussion-between-a3f-and-peter-cordes),
the only bug (or feature?) here is that asm("":::"memory") doesn't count as a
reference for `y`
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72796
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72796
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69004
--- Comment #23 from PeteVine ---
> updating URL to latest 1.4.8 version. Can you please check that the problem
> is still reproducible?
Thanks, forgot to mention my last reproduction used 1.4.6 source.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71876
--- Comment #14 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Author: edlinger
Date: Wed Aug 3 19:05:45 2016
New Revision: 239092
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239092&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-08-03 Bernd Edlinger
PR middle-end/71876
* c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72778
--- Comment #8 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Wed Aug 3 18:54:49 2016
New Revision: 239091
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239091&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-08-03 Vladimir Makarov
PR middle-end/72778
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72795
--- Comment #2 from Ahmad Fatoum ---
The write that can't be optimized away is the final assignment to x.
The `movl$1, x(%rip)` prior to the barrier should've been optimized out,
IMO.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72795
Peter Cordes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||peter at cordes dot ca
--- Comment #1 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72778
--- Comment #7 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #6)
Hi, Uros. Thanks for reporting this. It was my mistake that I did not check
bootstrap with GO. I am going to fix it soon.
> Before the patch, register allocato
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72797
Bug ID: 72797
Summary: bogus -Wmisleading-indentation with
-ftrack-macro-expansion=0 on a multi-statement macro
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72759
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72796
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
markus@x4 js % cat jsarray.ii
struct a;
template struct b { typedef a c; };
struct d {
void e(int);
};
struct a : d {
void e(int) = delete;
};
template struct g : b::c {
g(int) { this->d::e(0);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71748
--- Comment #7 from Nathan Sidwell ---
*** Bug 70616 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70616
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72796
Bug ID: 72796
Summary: [7 Regression] Firefox build error: use of deleted
function
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72795
Bug ID: 72795
Summary: Missed optimization of external-linkage variables in
presence of barriers
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71978
Rian Quinn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65033
--- Comment #11 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Wed, 3 Aug 2016, torvald at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> The difference is unfortunate, but C11 specifies that atomic_is_lock_free is
> *per object*. I suppose that any change there would h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72794
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72794
--- Comment #2 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
Yes, this option cures CF. Does it mean that we must compile spec2000
with this flag?
2016-08-03 19:08 GMT+03:00 pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72794
>
> --- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72783
--- Comment #1 from Florian Weimer ---
Martin and I discussed this for a bit.
The %ms hack does not work due to embedded NULs, which are copied to the
destination buffer by scanf, do not terminate the string, and are (in most
cases) detectable b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69848
--- Comment #14 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jim Wilson from comment #13)
> I think it was poc_ref_pic_reorder() in slice.c that triggered the ICE. I
> don't know if the original code shows the vectorization reduction problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72794
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you try with -std=gnu90 and see if that fixes the issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69848
--- Comment #13 from Jim Wilson ---
I think it was poc_ref_pic_reorder() in slice.c that triggered the ICE. I
don't know if the original code shows the vectorization reduction problem.
That might only be present in the reduced testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72794
Bug ID: 72794
Summary: [7 regression'] CF on spec2000/176.gcc after r238862.
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71815
--- Comment #7 from Bill Schmidt ---
I have a prototype that fixes this in the obvious way and it causes both
slsr-35.c and slsr-36.c to pass again without turning off code hoisting. I'll
do a regstrap and then work on some benchmark testing. I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70677
--- Comment #7 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Author: gjl
Date: Wed Aug 3 15:46:11 2016
New Revision: 239080
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239080&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 70677
* common/config/avr/avr-common.c (avr_option_opt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70920
mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72790
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72791
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Patrick Seewald from comment #0)
> I get an internal compiler error (Segmentation fault) when compiling the
> following program
>
> program reshape_bug
>integer, dimension(2) :: or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69848
--- Comment #12 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi Jim,
May I ask which function in h264ref also shows this issue? I instrumented GCC
and could not found a case in it. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72787
--- Comment #5 from martin ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #4)
> On Wed, 3 Aug 2016, ranjan.winner at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72787
> >
> > --- Comment #2 from martin ---
> > (In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69004
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2015-12-23 00:00:00 |2016-8-3
--- Comment #22 from Martin Lišk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72772
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72792
Bug ID: 72792
Summary: allocator_traits is too strict about rebinding
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72793
Bug ID: 72793
Summary: pointer_traits is too strict about rebinding
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72787
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 3 Aug 2016, ranjan.winner at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72787
>
> --- Comment #2 from martin ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72772
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
The patch has quite some fallout, including ICEs and wrong-code :/
FAIL: c-c++-common/ubsan/pr71403-1.c -O3 -g execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/graphite/pr35356-1.c scan-tree-dump graphite "if (P_9 >= P_1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72787
--- Comment #3 from martin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> You can't rely on __builtin_object_size this way, please look up its
> documentation.
Hi Richard,
Sorry, can you kindly throw some more pointers over this.
Here is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72787
--- Comment #2 from martin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> You can't rely on __builtin_object_size this way, please look up its
> documentation.
Hi Richard,
Sorry, can you kindly throw some more pointers over this.
Here is t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72791
Bug ID: 72791
Summary: Internal compiler error for reshape intrinsic
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72699
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72786
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Thanks for filing this.
A two-liner fix for this would be to detect in
best_match::get_best_meaningful_candidate
if m_best_distance is 0, and if so return NULL, i.e. to not give a suggestion
if somehow we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69004
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|http://te4.org/dl/t-engine/ |http://te4.org/dl/t-engine/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69004
--- Comment #20 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to PeteVine from comment #19)
> Here's what I've been doing to arrive at that profile-use crash:
>
> In the unpacked archive's top-level directory (see URL), edit premake4.lua
Can you please check
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71984
mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72790
Bug ID: 72790
Summary: MOVE_ALLOC() of character looses content data
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58250
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72775
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72779
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72789
Bug ID: 72789
Summary: add -Wunused-private-field
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72771
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Needs -O3 -mcpu=power9 -mno-lra, and a binutils that supports power9,
to fail. Same on BE as on LE.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72787
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67288
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72788
Bug ID: 72788
Summary: Stack unwinding fails since GCC 4.9 on i686 without
-fexceptions
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72778
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72415
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Started with r238558.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71881
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |6.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71824
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |6.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72415
--- Comment #2 from lucdanton at free dot fr ---
I completely failed to make note that this used to compile on GCC 6.1, too
(modulo the missing definition, again).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72787
Bug ID: 72787
Summary: Query related to gcc-4_6-branch fix for Bug-49279
(Getting issue with __restrict type qualifier)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65151
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72764
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |5.5
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72707
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |5.5
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72714
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |5.5
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72763
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |5.5
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72786
Bug ID: 72786
Summary: Odd spelling suggestion with later defined macro:
Suggestion is identical to unknown identifier
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71860
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |5.5
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71784
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |5.5
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71827
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |5.5
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71861
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |5.5
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71795
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |5.5
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71762
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |5.5
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71575
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |6.2
Summary|[4.9/6/7 Regress
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71748
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |5.5
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71747
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |5.5
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener
1 - 100 of 420 matches
Mail list logo
