https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80650
Bug ID: 80650
Summary: #pragma do not control -Wcpp
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80648
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80647
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80648
Bug ID: 80648
Summary: Valid C++11 null pointer constant (1-1) is rejected
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80647
Bug ID: 80647
Summary: vectorized loop crashes from wrongly assuming 16 byte
alignment
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80636
--- Comment #2 from Peter Cordes ---
> The same possibly applies to all "zero-extending" moves?
Yes, if a vmovdqa %xmm0,%xmm1 will work, it's the best choice on AMD CPUs,
and doesn't hurt on Intel CPUs. So in any case where you need to copy a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53896
--- Comment #3 from Paul Eggert ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> it's still up to user to mark the function as pure.
Thanks for looking into it. We have worked around the problem in GNU Emacs by
avoiding the -Wsuggest-attribute=p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80646
Bug ID: 80646
Summary: [Regression] wrong type info for extern inline
function when compiling Emacs
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80349
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:55:29 2017
New Revision: 247702
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247702&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-04-12 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80501
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:56:08 2017
New Revision: 247703
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247703&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-04-25 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80385
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:54:52 2017
New Revision: 247701
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247701&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-04-11 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80394
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:54:06 2017
New Revision: 247700
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247700&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-04-11 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80363
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:53:18 2017
New Revision: 247699
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247699&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-04-11 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80176
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:52:40 2017
New Revision: 247698
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247698&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-04-10 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80297
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:52:00 2017
New Revision: 247697
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247697&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-04-04 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80286
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:51:14 2017
New Revision: 247696
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247696&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-04-04 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80321
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:50:27 2017
New Revision: 247695
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247695&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-04-13 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79255
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:50:27 2017
New Revision: 247695
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247695&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-04-13 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79572
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:49:20 2017
New Revision: 247694
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247694&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-03-31 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80025
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:48:02 2017
New Revision: 247693
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247693&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-03-31 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80168
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:45:42 2017
New Revision: 247691
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247691&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-03-27 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80112
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:44:21 2017
New Revision: 247690
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247690&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-03-24 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80141
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:43:38 2017
New Revision: 247689
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247689&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-03-22 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80129
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:42:51 2017
New Revision: 247688
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247688&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-03-22 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80097
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:42:05 2017
New Revision: 247687
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247687&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-03-21 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79896
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:41:16 2017
New Revision: 247686
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247686&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-03-10 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79944
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:40:10 2017
New Revision: 247685
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247685&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-03-09 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79932
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:39:18 2017
New Revision: 247684
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247684&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-03-09 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79932
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:38:35 2017
New Revision: 247683
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247683&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-03-09 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79940
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:37:47 2017
New Revision: 247682
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247682&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-03-08 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79901
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:36:54 2017
New Revision: 247681
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247681&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-03-07 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79901
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:35:58 2017
New Revision: 247680
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247680&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-03-07 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79807
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:35:28 2017
New Revision: 247679
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247679&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-03-03 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79681
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:34:36 2017
New Revision: 247678
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247678&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-03-01 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79729
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:33:43 2017
New Revision: 247677
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247677&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-02-28 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79396
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:32:50 2017
New Revision: 247676
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247676&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-02-25 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79664
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:31:37 2017
New Revision: 247675
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247675&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-02-22 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79639
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:30:03 2017
New Revision: 247674
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247674&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-02-21 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79570
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:29:10 2017
New Revision: 247673
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247673&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-02-21 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79641
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:28:09 2017
New Revision: 247672
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247672&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-02-21 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79494
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:27:17 2017
New Revision: 247670
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247670&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-02-21 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79568
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:25:59 2017
New Revision: 247669
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247669&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-02-20 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79559
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:24:50 2017
New Revision: 247668
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247668&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-02-18 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79512
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 21:23:09 2017
New Revision: 247667
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247667&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-02-16 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.0 |7.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68800
Bug 68800 depends on bug 80121, which changed state.
Bug 80121 Summary: Memory leak with derived-type intent(out) argument
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
--- Comment #14 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Fri May 5 21:00:53 2017
New Revision: 247662
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247662&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-05-05 Janus Weil
Backport from trunk
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79202
--- Comment #6 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Fri May 5 20:21:15 2017
New Revision: 247657
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247657&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-05-05 Michael Meissner
PR target/79038
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79038
--- Comment #7 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Fri May 5 20:21:15 2017
New Revision: 247657
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247657&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-05-05 Michael Meissner
PR target/79038
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79203
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Fri May 5 20:21:15 2017
New Revision: 247657
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247657&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-05-05 Michael Meissner
PR target/79038
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80392
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80260
--- Comment #3 from Damian Rouson ---
The same code causes an ICE with the 7.1.0 release. Is there a fix on the 8
branch or any related updates?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80392
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Fri May 5 20:09:20 2017
New Revision: 247655
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247655&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-05-05 Janus Weil
Backport from trunk
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80635
--- Comment #11 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8)
> Something like __builtin_unreachable() to say "trust me" would be nice, but
> I can't think how to do it.
Some __builtin_unreachable() in _M_get might (?) be us
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80645
Bug ID: 80645
Summary: [8 regression] FAIL:
gfortran.dg/elemental_subroutine_3.f90 -O1 (test
for excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: U
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80643
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80643
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80644
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80643
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80644
Bug ID: 80644
Summary: [8 regression] many test cases fails starting with
247622
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77684
--- Comment #4 from Andi Kleen ---
Thanks for tracing that down.
So perf runs out of memory for the locked trace buffers
Increasing the limit is a good workaround
ulimit -l may also work, but also needs root.
We could just pass a smaller -m v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80643
Bug ID: 80643
Summary: NA->FAIL: gcc.dg/pr79214.c gcc.dg/pr79222.c
gcc.dg/pr79223.c
gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtins-folding-gimple-ub.c
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66139
Carlo Wood changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||carlo at gcc dot gnu.org
Version
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80632
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 16:02:44 2017
New Revision: 247642
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247642&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/80632
* tree-switch-conversion.c (str
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80558
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80558
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 5 15:43:22 2017
New Revision: 247641
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247641&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/80558
* tree-vrp.c (extract_range_fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71607
--- Comment #14 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
Author: thopre01
Date: Fri May 5 15:41:28 2017
New Revision: 247640
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247640&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM] PR71607: Fix ICE when loading constant
2017-05-05 Andre V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77728
--- Comment #57 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri May 5 15:38:04 2017
New Revision: 247639
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247639&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/77728
* config/arm/arm.c: Include gimple.h.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80635
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Pedro Alves from comment #9)
> I had tried that last night, but unfortunately it couldn't get it to work,
> because the warning triggers in A, not optional.
Bah! When we want the warning loca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80635
--- Comment #9 from Pedro Alves ---
> So maybe we just want to use a #pragma around the std::optional destructor to
> suppress this warning.
I had tried that last night, but unfortunately it couldn't get it to work,
because the warning triggers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77684
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77684
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80590
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Backtrace looks similar to PR 80556 comment 3. Problem in that PR also is
> with g-exptty.adb.
If it is a duplicate of pr80556, it should start at r247301.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80641
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80640
--- Comment #6 from Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin
---
Ok. So there's something wrong :)
I'll make a work around for SUSE while waiting for a fix in GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80635
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Something like __builtin_unreachable() to say "trust me" would be nice, but I
can't think how to do it. So maybe we just want to use a #pragma around the
std::optional destructor to suppress this warning.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80263
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80640
--- Comment #5 from Alexander Monakov ---
I think the bug is that on x86 __atomic_thread_fence(x) is expanded into
nothing for x!=__ATOMIC_SEQ_CST, it should place a compiler barrier similar to
expansion of __atomic_signal_fence.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80628
--- Comment #1 from George R. ---
Created attachment 41326
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41326&action=edit
Preproccessed source file.
Added preprocessed source file.
Use:
1) gcc UnifyFunctionExitNodes.cpp -c -ggnu-pubnames
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80640
--- Comment #4 from Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin
---
I agree the volatile shoud fix thing> I'll have to see with the ompi guys to
fix that.
But shouldn't __atomic_thread_fence () have a side effect here and force the
memory to be reloaded ?
If it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80640
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80613
--- Comment #9 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
As suggested by Richard, the commit partially reverts r247407 by removing the
hunk from propagate_necessity().
Thanks,
Prathamesh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80613
--- Comment #8 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: prathamesh3492
Date: Fri May 5 13:21:28 2017
New Revision: 247635
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247635&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-05-05 Prathamesh Kulkarni
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80590
--- Comment #8 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #7)
> Backtrace from gdb is more complete:
Backtrace looks similar to PR 80556 comment 3. Problem in that PR also is with
g-exptty.adb.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80590
--- Comment #7 from Tom de Vries ---
Backtrace from gdb is more complete:
...
(gdb) bt
#0 0x767811e2 in ?? () from /lib/libc.so.6
#1 0x027412bd in libiberty_vprintf_buffer_size (format=0x2752b6b
"%s:%d["00"]", args=0x7fffbe7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80635
--- Comment #7 from Marc Glisse ---
The warning comes from
_Z3setiD.6701 (maybe_a$D6763$m_dummy_6);
which is protected by
_9 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR(maybe_a$4_7);
if (_9 != 0)
with
# maybe_a$D6763$m_dummy_6 = PHI
# maybe_a$4_7 = PHI <0(6),
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80640
--- Comment #2 from Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin
---
Created attachment 41325
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41325&action=edit
Test case
Previous tarball was too big. I stripped all debug info from the lib and it
should work
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80642
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80642
Bug ID: 80642
Summary: lambdas made constexpr in cases where they don't
satisfy the requirements for it
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63407
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79665
--- Comment #17 from wilco at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to wilco from comment #16)
> (In reply to wilco from comment #14)
> > (In reply to PeteVine from comment #13)
> > > Still, the 5% regression must have happened very recently. The fast gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80635
--- Comment #6 from Pedro Alves ---
That kind of makes sense if you look at optional in isolation, but why does
it _not_ warn if you remove anything related to B and leave only A? That's
what's truly mystifying to me.
Even this change makes the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80635
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Pedro Alves from comment #4)
> Looks like I over reduced in the minimal reproducer. std::optional has a
> boolean field to track whether the contained object had been fully
> initialized, whic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54924
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Indeed, it's what allows us to use variadic templates in C++98 mode, for
example. And I don't think there's any way to use
__attribute__((__extension__)) on template parameter packs to do that
differently.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64238
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Ian can you please take a look?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64238
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64636
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53896
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
1 - 100 of 122 matches
Mail list logo