https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52345
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71153
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|pinskia at gcc do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25883
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79262
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is one case where perm cost model comes into play I think.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82151
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
How about this for the inner most loop:
ldr q0, [a, index]
ldr q1, [b, index]
zip1 v2.2d, v0.2d, v1.2d
zip2 v3.2d, v0.2d, v1.2d
sdr q2, [c, index]
sdr q3, [c, index+16]
If we did not have ld2/st4, this is w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82199
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|__builtin_shuffle sometimes |__builtin_shuffle sometimes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82275
Bug ID: 82275
Summary: gfortran rejects valid & accepts invalid reference to
dimension-remapped type selector
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81878
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82158
Peter Cordes changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|VERIFIED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|WONTFIX
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82158
Peter Cordes changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|VERIFIED
--- Comment #7 from Peter Cordes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82274
--- Comment #1 from Mats Palmgren ---
Created attachment 42214
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42214&action=edit
bug.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82274
Bug ID: 82274
Summary: __builtin_mul_overflow fails to detect overflow for
int64_t when compiled with -m32
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80697
--- Comment #10 from Michael Meissner ---
I believe this was ultimately due to reassociation, so Aaron probably should
chime in if it is believed to be fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81854
--- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Wed Sep 20 22:46:49 2017
New Revision: 253041
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253041&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix C++ testsuite fallout from r252976.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79162
--- Comment #24 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Sep 20 22:26:19 2017
New Revision: 253038
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253038&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/79162 Fix std::string regression due to LWG 2946 (old ABI)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81854
--- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Wed Sep 20 22:19:53 2017
New Revision: 253037
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253037&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix testsuite fallout from r252976.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81854
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #7)
Thanks for the heads up! There's an additional problem in target-supports.exp
that needs fixing for the ifunc support to be correctly detected, and a few
mo
ault (core dumped)
wws@w6ws-4:/tmp$ /usr/local/gcc-trunk/bin/gfortran --version
GNU Fortran (GCC) 8.0.0 20170920 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FIT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79162
--- Comment #23 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Sep 20 22:03:37 2017
New Revision: 253035
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253035&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/79162 Fix std::string regression due to LWG 2946 (old ABI)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77687
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Wed Sep 20 21:48:31 2017
New Revision: 253033
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253033&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: Don't touch below the stack pointer (PR77687)
With the 32-b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77631
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80697
--- Comment #9 from Bill Schmidt ---
Can this be closed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68256
Vladimir Mezentsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vladimir.mezentsev at oracle
dot c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8781
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #27
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77631
--- Comment #13 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Wed Sep 20 21:09:37 2017
New Revision: 253032
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253032&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/77631
Support for external debug info
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82270
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82272
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
I think they do have to expand to the tokens 0 and 1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81715
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note the patch failed bootstrap, but just the first hunk from it passed
bootstrap and is being regtested right now. I'll need to debug what's wrong
with the retval clobbers tomorrow.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81715
--- Comment #13 from Arnd Bergmann ---
Tested the fix with an x86 allmodconfig kernel (linux-next, with
-fsanitize-address-use-after-scope disabled manually). With an arbitrary limit
of 1500 bytes (the default is no limit when -fsanitize=kernel-a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79162
--- Comment #22 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Sep 20 18:52:56 2017
New Revision: 253025
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253025&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/79162 Fix std::string regression due to LWG 2946
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82273
Bug ID: 82273
Summary: unnecessary dwarf info
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assignee: un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80865
--- Comment #5 from Christian Cornelssen ---
Related MacPorts gcc7 ticket:
https://trac.macports.org/ticket/54215
That thread contains confirmations that the build succeeds with the patches of
comment 1 (cumulated in attachment 42124) and test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79162
--- Comment #21 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Sep 20 17:59:50 2017
New Revision: 253024
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253024&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/79162 Fix std::string regression due to LWG 2946
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82272
Bug ID: 82272
Summary: RFE: request a warning for ( == ) etc.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82150
--- Comment #9 from david.welch at netronome dot com ---
Basically gcc is generating a sequence where data starts to execute in the
pipe. I cant imagine that is a good idea to let the processor execute data
when you can avoid it
instead of a pop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81469
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81469
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Sep 20 16:34:49 2017
New Revision: 253018
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253018&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/81469 deprecate std::uncaught_exception for C++17
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82184
--- Comment #13 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
Many thanks - it's like currency exchange rate variations; <1% == 0%
Cheers
Paul
On 20 September 2017 at 16:01, andrey.y.guskov at intel dot com
wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59372
ensadc at mailnesia dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ensadc at mailnesia dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82263
--- Comment #2 from Chris Severance ---
I'm building gcc 6.4.1 6-20170913 with gcc 7.2.0. The -m32 version of java does
not build.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82263
Andrew John Hughes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gnu_andrew at member dot
fsf.org
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81715
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 42212
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42212&action=edit
gcc8-pr81715.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81863
--- Comment #16 from ard.biesheuvel at linaro dot org ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #15)
> (In reply to ard.biesheuvel from comment #13)
> > The kernel does not currently use -mword-relocations. We are looking into it
> > as a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82260
--- Comment #5 from Peter Cordes ---
> (not (match_test "TARGET_PARTIAL_REG_STALL"))
gcc is doing this even with -mtune=core2.
Core2 / Nehalem stall (the front-end) for 2-3 cycles to insert a merging uop
when reading a full register after w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82172
Elie Gédéon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||legoliester at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80986
--- Comment #6 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to linzj from comment #5)
> Is the following patch okay? Or should I add the new bit to indicate not to
> remove an attribute?
> diff --git a/gcc/cp/pt.c b/gcc/cp/pt.c
> index f8436b30b37..97
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81863
--- Comment #15 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to ard.biesheuvel from comment #13)
> The kernel does not currently use -mword-relocations. We are looking into it
> as an alternative to -fpic when building the kernel image as a PIE
> exec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82260
--- Comment #4 from Peter Cordes ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> From pure instruction size POV, for the first 2 alternatives as can be seen
> say on:
> ...
> movb $0x15, %al
> movl $0x15, %eax
> movb $-0x78, %bl
> movl $-0x78,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82271
Bug ID: 82271
Summary: loop gets miscompiled on powerpc at -O2
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81863
--- Comment #14 from Yvan Roux ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #12)
> No, this is too big a hammer.
Yes, and it doesn't work with -cmse testcases.
> It will disable movw / movt for constants and we don't want that. The aim o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82184
--- Comment #12 from Andrey Guskov ---
Okay, testing complete.
The performance delta is less than 1% (0.96% to be exact), but technically the
new solution is still faster than the one before r252781.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82248
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82270
Bug ID: 82270
Summary: incorrect warning [-Wignored-attributes]
Product: gcc
Version: 6.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82262
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82254
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82254
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Sep 20 14:22:25 2017
New Revision: 253014
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253014&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/82254 fix std::is_nothrow_invocable_r w.r.t throwing convers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82262
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Sep 20 14:22:29 2017
New Revision: 253015
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253015&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/82262 fix std::hash>
PR libstdc++/82262
* i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82260
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69728
--- Comment #22 from Sebastian Pop ---
> I put it on my TODO to figure out how to "DCE" a stmt
> (or in this case it's rather the whole "loop body", right?).
The code generator would not even see a statement to be generated: it would
just disapp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82184
--- Comment #11 from Andrey Guskov ---
Sorry Paul, we happened to be lacking automatic perf runs for 187.
I`ll try running it manually and then report back.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81863
--- Comment #13 from ard.biesheuvel at linaro dot org ---
The kernel does not currently use -mword-relocations. We are looking into it as
an alternative to -fpic when building the kernel image as a PIE executable so
we can self-relocate at boot ti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82269
--- Comment #4 from sgunderson at bigfoot dot com ---
This one is perhaps a better case:
../sql/parse_tree_column_attrs.h: In constructor
'PT_blob_type::PT_blob_type(Blob_type, const CHARSET_INFO*, bool)':
../sql/parse_tree_column_attrs.h:548:59:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82262
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Sep 20 13:24:45 2017
New Revision: 253010
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253010&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/82262 fix std::hash>
PR libstdc++/82262
* i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81697
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82269
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I agree that in this case the caller is wrong and should do pointer_cast not
pointer_cast. The warning found a bug.
In general the warning is a bit too noisy, but we already have a bug report
about it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82269
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82219
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sgunderson at bigfoot dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81828
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81863
--- Comment #12 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Yvan Roux from comment #8)
> On 7 branch the following should fix the issue, but as I mentioned in
> comment #5, maybe TARGET_USE_MOVT is a better place to do the checking but
> this will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82269
sgunderson at bigfoot dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resoluti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82269
Bug ID: 82269
Summary: -Wignored-qualifiers should not trigger on templated
code
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82242
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82268
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71351
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
I _think_ that the proper fix is to _not_ code-gen additional loop guards
because we can't possibly get the PHIs correct there. Iff a loop needs a guard
then it will be present before. So the only case we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71351
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81854
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The test gcc.dg/pr81854.c fails on darwin
/opt/gcc/_clean/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr81854.c:30:1: error: ifunc is not
supported in this configuration
f3 (void); /* { dg-error ".ifunc. resolver
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82260
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The insn has weird constraints:
[(set (match_operand:QI 0 "nonimmediate_operand"
"=q,q ,q ,r,r ,?r,m ,k,k,r,m,k")
(match_operand:QI 1 "general_operand"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80105
Bug 80105 depends on bug 69728, which changed state.
Bug 69728 Summary: [6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: in
outer_projection_mupa, at graphite-sese-to-poly.c:1175
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69728
What|Re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80069
Bug 80069 depends on bug 69728, which changed state.
Bug 69728 Summary: [6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: in
outer_projection_mupa, at graphite-sese-to-poly.c:1175
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69728
What|Re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69728
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59859
Bug 59859 depends on bug 69728, which changed state.
Bug 69728 Summary: [6/7 Regression] internal compiler error: in
outer_projection_mupa, at graphite-sese-to-poly.c:1175
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69728
What|Re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82177
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 20 Sep 2017, kristerw at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> --- Comment #5 from Krister Walfridsson ---
> Did you mean PR61502 - "== comparison on "one-past" pointer gives wrong
> result"?
Yes, bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81715
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Arnd Bergmann from comment #10)
> As far as I can tell, gcc doesn't merge stack slots that came from inline
> functions, as in comment 1, or this example:
>
> void baz (int *, int *, int *, int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80213
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|8.0 |
Summary|[7/8 Regression] IC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80213
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|8.0 |
Summary|[7/8 Regression] IC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81715
--- Comment #10 from Arnd Bergmann ---
As far as I can tell, gcc doesn't merge stack slots that came from inline
functions, as in comment 1, or this example:
void baz (int *, int *, int *, int *, int *, int *);
static inline void foo (int a, int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82265
--- Comment #3 from etienne_lorrain at yahoo dot fr ---
I do not know how I finished adding such packed attribute on my variables and
not seeing any warnings, on the gcc-4.7.1 I used at the time.
That looks indeed a bug in the documentation only -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64933
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60936
--- Comment #39 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Sep 20 12:01:44 2017
New Revision: 253007
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253007&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/60936 fix length calculation
Backport from mainline
2017-0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82260
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82177
Krister Walfridsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kristerw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82150
--- Comment #8 from david.welch at netronome dot com ---
gcc is treating these instructions as unconditional branches, but the core does
NOT treat these instructions as unconditional branches. The disconnect is
quite clear between the code produc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82150
--- Comment #7 from david.welch at netronome dot com ---
This is an armv6 not an armv7.
So far I have not seen that the mmu or cache or branch prediction is required
for proper operation of the core. I have so far not see this on other cores,
bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59859
Bug 59859 depends on bug 77932, which changed state.
Bug 77932 Summary: [GRAPHITE] gmp-6.1.0, 6.1.1 breaks because of
fgraphite-identity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77932
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77932
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82268
--- Comment #1 from Andrey Guskov ---
Option set:
-with-system-zlib --with-demangler-in-ld --with-fpmath=sse --enable-shared
--enable-host-shared --enable-clocale=gnu --enable-cloog-backend=isl
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,jit,lto --with-arch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59859
Bug 59859 depends on bug 69458, which changed state.
Bug 69458 Summary: [graphite] compiling gmp -floop-nest-optimize over
-fstrict-overflow produces wrong code (fpe)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69458
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69458
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82268
Bug ID: 82268
Summary: [8 regression] i386/pr82196-1.c fail
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59859
Bug 59859 depends on bug 69675, which changed state.
Bug 69675 Summary: [6/7/8 Regression] [graphite] ICE: verify_ssa failed
(definition in block 42 does not dominate use in block 34)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69675
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
