https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82304
Bug ID: 82304
Summary: GCC compiles constexpr function with double
reinterpret_cast in a constant context
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82303
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu ---
A static PIE option can be used for both kernel
as well as user space.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82292
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82303
Bug ID: 82303
Summary: Better PIE/PIC code generation for kernel code (x86_64
& arm64)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82267
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|hjl at gcc dot gnu.org |hjl.tools at gmail dot
com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35691
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81929
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556
--- Comment #58 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #57 from Iain Sandoe ---
[...]
>> Now running an i386-apple-darwin11.4.2 bootstrap, which will take
>> another day.
> Dominique reported OK on Darwin16 and Darwin10 on ir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35691
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to prathamesh3492 from comment #2)
> Fixed on targets when LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT is true.
> When LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT is false, the conversion of
> truth_andif_expr to bit_and_expr do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82302
Bug ID: 82302
Summary: LTO producing bad code
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
Assignee: un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81926
--- Comment #35 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri Sep 22 20:20:40 2017
New Revision: 253110
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253110&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/81926
* cp-objcp-common.c (cp_get_debug_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81926
--- Comment #34 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri Sep 22 20:20:25 2017
New Revision: 253109
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253109&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/81926
* cp-objcp-common.c (cp_get_debug_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82300
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
If this PR appears at or before r 252896, The problem I see is different.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82300
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uros at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82301
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82301
Bug ID: 82301
Summary: [8 regression] Updated test case
g++.dg/ext/attr-ifunc-1.C (and others) in r253041
segfault on powerpc64
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82272
--- Comment #2 from H. Peter Anvin ---
Since it doesn't seem to be clear from the text, perhaps an interpretation
request to the committee is in order. If this indeed is the requirement, I
would suggest implementing it as a gnu99/gnu11 extension
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81929
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Sep 22 19:00:03 2017
New Revision: 253108
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253108&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/81929
* tree.c (struct replace_placeholders_t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35691
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Sep 22 18:56:23 2017
New Revision: 253107
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253107&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/35691
* match.pd: Simplify x == -1 & y == -1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81929
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Sep 22 18:55:21 2017
New Revision: 253106
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253106&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/81929
* tree.c (struct replace_placeholders_t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82300
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82300
Bug ID: 82300
Summary: Bootstrapping gcc-8 does not work on darwin
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: boo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82172
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I have no idea what PREVAILING_DEF_IRONLY means, but a web search found
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12370 -- I can't tell if that's
relevant.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82299
Bug ID: 82299
Summary: -Wuseless-cast errors on typed enums used in member
data initializers in c++1z
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82289
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82289
--- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Fri Sep 22 17:04:51 2017
New Revision: 253103
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253103&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR82289: Computing peeling costs for irrelevant drs
Thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81854
--- Comment #12 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Fri Sep 22 16:30:35 2017
New Revision: 253100
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253100&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix testsuite fallout from r252976.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82298
Bug ID: 82298
Summary: x86 BMI: no peephole for BZHI
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65579
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|paolo.carlin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65579
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|msebor at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82278
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82172
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at ucw dot cz
--- Comment #13 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82172
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely ---
N.B. this bug has been latent for years. The reason people are only seeing it
now is that usually the "extern template class std::basic_string"
explicit instantiation declarations prevent this symbol being
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82296
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82296
--- Comment #3 from Ingo ---
Just to be sure:
On a real machine this code is certainly not "undefined behavior", because
gMyUnion.numbers[ARRAYSIZE] aliases gMyUnion.dummy[ARRAYSIZE] and
gMyUnion.dummy[ARRAYSIZE] is a valid memory location.
So
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82172
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82296
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77631
--- Comment #17 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
Tamar: Thanks for letting me know. I just committed a patch that should fix
that problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77631
--- Comment #16 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Fri Sep 22 13:38:10 2017
New Revision: 253095
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253095&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/77631
* configure.ac: Check for lstat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82297
--- Comment #4 from joel falcou ---
Created attachment 42227
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42227&action=edit
repro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81860
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|wrong-code |link-failure
--- Comment #4 from Jonat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82285
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82285
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Simplified test-case:
$ cat ~/Programming/testcases/pr82285.c
#define MAX (16)
enum tst {
first = 0,
second = 1
};
int
main (void)
{
enum tst data[MAX];
for (unsigned i = 0; i < MAX; i++)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81860
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||joel.falcou at lri dot fr
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82297
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82297
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This is a dup of an existing bug, use -fno-new-inheriting-ctors as a
workaround.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65579
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82297
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82297
Bug ID: 82297
Summary: Link error when templated inherited constructor has
default arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82296
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82296
Bug ID: 82296
Summary: Wrong code with optimization -O2
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82291
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Target Milestone|8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82291
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Sep 22 12:00:55 2017
New Revision: 253093
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253093&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-09-22 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/82291
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968
--- Comment #22 from Richard Biener ---
Testcase (takes a bit too long / time for the testsuite):
#define F(i) int F ## i () { return i; }
#define FS(x) F(x ## 0) F(x ## 1) F(x ## 2) F(x ## 3) F(x ## 4) F(x ## 5) F(x
## 6) F(x ## 7) F(x ## 8) F(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968
--- Comment #21 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 42225
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42225&action=edit
patch to really remove discarded sections
The attached removes discarded sections and thus should avoid one c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82289
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82282
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, nunoplopes at sapo dot pt wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82282
>
> --- Comment #4 from Nuno Lopes ---
> There are two major transformations going on:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82282
--- Comment #4 from Nuno Lopes ---
There are two major transformations going on:
if (u != v) {
v = u;
}
=>
v = u
(with v, u integers)
and:
glb = (int*)(uinptr_t)foo)
=>
glb = foo
Doing both triggers the end-to-end miscompilatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77631
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82286
--- Comment #3 from Herman ten Brugge ---
If I put:
if (p_input_matrix->nof_rows > MAX_MATRIX_SIZE || p_input_matrix->nof_cols >
MAX_MATRIX_SIZE) return;
at the start of my function I still get the warning.
I removed some assert statement at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82274
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82282
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, nunoplopes at sapo dot pt wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82282
>
> --- Comment #2 from Nuno Lopes ---
> This is different from PR82177. That bug is in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82291
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Odd bisection result, it seems to be a latent issue in if-conversion which
doesn't handle false predicates correctly as it simply skips predicating
writes in that case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82282
--- Comment #2 from Nuno Lopes ---
This is different from PR82177. That bug is in AA, this one is not.
See the C source:
uintptr_t u = (uintptr_t) (x + 1);
uintptr_t v = (uintptr_t) y;
// if b1 true, then b2 must be true as well
int b1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82295
Bug ID: 82295
Summary: Two errors produced with private/protected deleted
methods
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82285
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82286
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|marxin at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82294
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82291
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82290
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |8.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82284
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82282
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||82177
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52832
--- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Fri Sep 22 08:38:31 2017
New Revision: 253091
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253091&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-09-22 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/52832
* gfortran.dg/as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82294
Bug ID: 82294
Summary: Array of objects with constexpr constructors
initialized from space-inefficient memory image
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82286
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82281
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82293
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |8.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82288
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Status|UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82289
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82290
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82291
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82293
Bug ID: 82293
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in nonlambda_method_basetype at
gcc/cp/lambda.c:886
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82292
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Component|bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82292
--- Comment #3 from Matthias Klose ---
trying, however this is changed behavior compared to the gcc-7-branch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82292
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Try also adding:
--disable-libquadmath-support
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82292
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
>--disable-libquadmath
That is most likely the cause.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82292
Bug ID: 82292
Summary: [8 Regression] bootstrap fails in libgfortran on
powerpc64le-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
87 matches
Mail list logo
