https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831
--- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Fri Sep 2 02:14:50 2016
New Revision: 239953
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239953&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/71831 - __builtin_object_size poor results with no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71831
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77448
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=75402
Nick Fitzgerald [:fitzgen] [⏰PDT; UTC-7]
changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77448
Bug ID: 77448
Summary: Incorrect code generation for calling stack object's
method
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77393
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Works for me here!
Are you sure that you have tested
print "(f8.0)", huge(1.0)
print "(f18.0)", huge(1.0_8)
print "(f20.0)", huge(1.0_10)
print "(f40.0)", huge(1.0_16)
end
?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77442
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77416
--- Comment #6 from Peter Bergner ---
Looking closer, it does seem remat is trying to handle these hard coded
registers via its hard_regs field. One thing that strikes me as I look at that
code, it checks for reg->type being == OP_IN or != OP_IN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77393
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle ---
The update to the test case should correct any platform specific KIND issues.
May need to upsize the bufers a little for Dominique's issue. I set the
buffers tight so we could catch different behaviors on p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77393
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Thu Sep 1 21:17:42 2016
New Revision: 239945
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239945&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-09-01 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran/77393
* gf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77434
--- Comment #7 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #6)
> On Thu, 1 Sep 2016, bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de wrote:
>
> > + warning_at (location, 0,
> > + "?: expression using intege
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77434
--- Comment #6 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Thu, 1 Sep 2016, bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de wrote:
> + warning_at (location, 0,
> + "?: expression using integer constants in boolean
> context");
This shou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77427
--- Comment #6 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #5)
> Hmm, PR52830 looks similar.
This more generic patch fixes PR52830 as well:
...
diff --git a/gcc/tree.c b/gcc/tree.c
index 33e6f97..f5c1f6a 100644
--- a/gcc/tree.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77434
--- Comment #5 from Bernd Edlinger ---
This is an idea for a warning that does not focus on parentheses:
Here we had: a ? c1 : c2;
but in a context where a boolean is requested.
It is always suspicious, when c1, and c2 are integer constants
whic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77393
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #3)
> At revision r239908 the second test in comment 0 still gives
>
>
> **
>
> Program received signal SIGSEGV: Segmentation fault -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77416
--- Comment #5 from Peter Bergner ---
So this is a latent bug in LRA's rematerialization code. For this test case,
we have insn:
Basic BlocK 6:
...
(insn 179 178 92 6 (parallel [
(set (reg/v:SI 175 [ pD.2425 ])
(plus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77447
malithyapa at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77447
--- Comment #3 from malithyapa at gmail dot com ---
Yes! sorry, didn't think it'd matter, i even saw that in the original configure
line. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72832
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77447
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I suspect you did not use --with-float=hard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77447
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77447
Bug ID: 77447
Summary: /usr/arm-linux-gnueabihf is not in xgcc include path
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72832
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P4 |P3
Assignee|unassign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77427
--- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries ---
Hmm, PR52830 looks similar.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7652
--- Comment #60 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Thu Sep 1 14:59:50 2016
New Revision: 239939
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239939&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/7652
gcc/c-family/
* c-common.c (resolve_overloade
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827
--- Comment #26 from Bill Schmidt ---
The original patch direction was impossible to make work, as with a base
register of r31 (frame pointer) and an offset register of r0 (not allowed as a
base register), there is no legitimate way to update the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827
--- Comment #25 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Thu Sep 1 14:43:55 2016
New Revision: 239938
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239938&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-09-01 Bill Schmidt
Michael Meissner
PR ta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77446
Bug ID: 77446
Summary: Suspicious "non-constant condition for static
assertion" error
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71607
Thomas Preud'homme changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Preu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71607
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
(In reply to Christophe Monat from comment #4)
> (In reply to Thomas Preud'homme from comment #3)
>
> Thomas,
Hi Christophe,
>
> I am seeing that the assignee name has been reset : does it mean that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71607
--- Comment #4 from Christophe Monat ---
(In reply to Thomas Preud'homme from comment #3)
Thomas,
I am seeing that the assignee name has been reset : does it mean that you
definitely disengage from looking at this problem ?
If this is the case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77443
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||compile-time-hog
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77445
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65467
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Actually, firstprivate on _Atomic vars in target construct could be implemented
just by forcing it into a temporary with non-_Atomic qualified type on the host
side (i.e. atomically loading it), firstprivati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77436
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.0
Summary|[5/6/7 Regressio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77434
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot
de
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77436
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Sep 1 13:38:25 2016
New Revision: 239937
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239937&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-09-01 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/77436
* tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77416
--- Comment #4 from Pat Haugen ---
Didn't really think of this before, but the call isn't necessarily the problem,
addze sets the CA bit too. So it's invalid to remataterialize the addze after
an addze.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25814
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77427
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
This fixes the ICE:
...
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
index 4531647..f13790f 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
@@ -10551,6 +10551,8 @@ ix86_build_b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69601
--- Comment #6 from Eric Gallager ---
Seems to be fixed for September.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77445
--- Comment #1 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
Created attachment 39535
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39535&action=edit
test-case to reproduce
It is sufficient to compile it with -Ofast option.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77445
Bug ID: 77445
Summary: [7 Regression] Performance drop after r239219 on
coremark test
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77427
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |vries at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77352
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Sep 1 11:48:54 2016
New Revision: 239933
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239933&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2016-08-31 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77374
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Sep 1 11:48:02 2016
New Revision: 239932
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239932&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2016-08-31 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72866
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Sep 1 11:46:57 2016
New Revision: 239931
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239931&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2016-08-30 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77421
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #11)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
> > cand_value_at in tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c does:
> >
> > tree type = TREE_TYPE (iv->base);
> > tree stept
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77363
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Sep 1 11:43:15 2016
New Revision: 239930
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239930&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2016-08-30 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77377
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Sep 1 11:42:22 2016
New Revision: 239929
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239929&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2016-08-30 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77444
Bug ID: 77444
Summary: Bogus assignments in cand_value_at
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimizatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71014
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Sep 1 11:41:34 2016
New Revision: 239928
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239928&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2016-08-19 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72744
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Sep 1 11:38:57 2016
New Revision: 239927
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239927&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2016-08-19 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69281
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Sep 1 11:38:16 2016
New Revision: 239926
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239926&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2016-08-19 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77259
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Sep 1 11:36:50 2016
New Revision: 239924
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239924&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2016-08-17 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71910
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Sep 1 11:29:55 2016
New Revision: 239922
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239922&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2016-08-16 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77425
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #1)
> There is also this example:
>
> odr_type
> get_odr_type (tree type, bool insert)
> {
>
> odr_types[val->id] = 0;
> gcc_assert (val->derived_ty
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77443
Bug ID: 77443
Summary: Empty initializer on huge object array member slow
down the compilation dramatically with -O1
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77425
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77438
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Profitability also depends on the ABI in this case as well as the ability to
do the required extensions/extractions (and resource availability). For
bit operations that directly map to the integer represent
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71911
--- Comment #6 from 鍾 ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #5)
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 Administrator None 1.7K 六月 14 00:12 a-assert.ali
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 Administrator None 16K 六月 14 00:12 a-btgbso.ali
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 Administrator None 2.7K 六月
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77438
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |tree-optimization
Summary|MM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77427
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71911
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou ---
> -rw-r--r-- 1 Administrator None 1.7K 六月 14 00:12 a-assert.ali
> -rw-r--r-- 1 Administrator None 16K 六月 14 00:12 a-btgbso.ali
> -rw-r--r-- 1 Administrator None 2.7K 六月 14 00:12 a-calari.ali
> -rw-r--r-- 1 A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77442
Bug ID: 77442
Summary: error: ‘free’ is not a member of ‘std’
std::free(ptr);
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77436
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71911
--- Comment #4 from 鍾 ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #3)
> > I use the administrator user and administrator permissions in Windows host,
> > so, normally I use the same permission map to root permissions in Cygwin
> > host.
>
> Plea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77441
Bug ID: 77441
Summary: Cygwin64: g++ linker: infinite loop when linking a
shared library from objects compiled with std=c++14
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77439
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77281
--- Comment #3 from mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mwahab
Date: Thu Sep 1 08:57:21 2016
New Revision: 239918
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239918&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM] Fix an invalid check for vectors of the same floating-po
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77440
Bug ID: 77440
Summary: [[noreturn]] does not work at end of main().
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77393
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
At revision r239908 the second test in comment 0 still gives
**
Program received signal SIGSEGV: Segmentation fault - invalid memory reference.
at run time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77436
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77438
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> I belive that's on purpose because the compiler cannot introduce MMX
> usage because of the overlap with the x87 register stack.
True. It is even worse, x87 stac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77426
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77438
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77418
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Status|RESOLVE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77424
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68687
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
-Dconst= should work, right?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77439
Jiong Wang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77422
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
I agree with Jakub.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77421
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
> Remaining issues:
>
> find_structure in gengtype.c does:
>
> structures = s;
> s->kind = kind;
> s->u.s.tag = name;
> structures = s;
>
> The first
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77420
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77418
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Component|fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77439
Bug ID: 77439
Summary: [6/7 regression] wrong code for sibcall with
longcall, APCS frame and VFP
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77430
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
87 matches
Mail list logo
