https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84625
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Mar 2 07:57:26 2018
New Revision: 258125
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258125&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR inline-asm/84625
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_print_opera
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84658
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84659
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82005
--- Comment #36 from Richard Biener ---
Ok, so now we have this workaround in which means in theory this bug should be
fixed... we seem to get a gcc-testresults posting for darwin about once a week
(possibly for each snapshot?) so I'll try to re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84427
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84427
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Mar 2 07:45:41 2018
New Revision: 258124
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258124&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-03-02 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/84427
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82005
--- Comment #35 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Mar 2 07:42:58 2018
New Revision: 258123
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258123&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-03-02 Richard Biener
PR target/82005
* config
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84620
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84660
Bug ID: 84660
Summary: Combine doing wrong optimization for 64 bits with
SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED target
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84659
Bug ID: 84659
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault (stack overflow
in bb_note) w/ selective scheduling
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84658
Bug ID: 84658
Summary: -O3 -fmerge-all-constants causes incorrect for-each
loop generation.
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84657
Bug ID: 84657
Summary: Wrong exception type matched in catch clause when
compiled with address sanitizer
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84534
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #8 from Peter Bergner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84534
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84534
--- Comment #6 from Peter Bergner ---
Author: bergner
Date: Fri Mar 2 02:54:40 2018
New Revision: 258122
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258122&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/84534
* gcc.target/powerpc/vec-setup-be-long.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66128
--- Comment #5 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 10:31:42PM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> (In reply to Harald Anlauf from comment #3)
> > Maybe some kind of "shortcut" (similar to Steve's fix for pr83998) can
> > solve this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84294
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84294
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Fri Mar 2 00:16:52 2018
New Revision: 258121
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258121&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/84294 - attributes on a function template redeclaration silently
di
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84513
--- Comment #2 from Erik Toussaint ---
Perhaps similar in the sense that in both cases the logic lacks a final check.
I don't know anything about the code that handles this, but it appears that the
source file gets parsed, and if a module is enc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70875
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Mar 1 23:28:31 2018
New Revision: 258117
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258117&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/70875
* gcc.dg/ubsan/bounds-3.c: Add -fno-sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84582
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84582
--- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Thu Mar 1 22:44:54 2018
New Revision: 258116
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258116&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/84582
* semantics.c (force_paren_expr): Create a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66128
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84553
--- Comment #5 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
I did not regression-test this patch on gcc testsuite but this patch fixes
TEXTREL on gcc and still produces working glibc and kernel on ia64.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71085
Harald Anlauf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84434
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84434
--- Comment #4 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Thu Mar 1 22:08:02 2018
New Revision: 258114
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258114&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR c++/84434] ICE with deduction guide
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84656
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66128
--- Comment #3 from Harald Anlauf ---
Maybe some kind of "shortcut" (similar to Steve's fix for pr83998) can
solve this. Not sure where this would fit in.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84632
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|paolo.carlin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84653
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84637
Jim Wilson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilson at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84656
Bug ID: 84656
Summary: -Wclass-memaccess spuriously warns in code paths that
cannot access nontrivial types
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84652
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84651
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84655
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84655
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Before that we printed a boatload of errors:
q.cc: In lambda function:
q.cc:4:26: error: parameter packs not expanded with ‘...’:
int d[] = [] { auto f(a); };
^
q.cc:4:26: note:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84655
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Status|U
ld_new_method_call_1
/home/vegard/git/gcc/gcc/cp/call.c:9285
$ xgcc --version
xgcc (GCC) 8.0.1 20180301 (experimental)
Built from git c435a9e730c6e8f10da09d58b4fc9aaeb401b0d5 (r258097).
7.3.0 seems to be fine with this.
Test case was minimised by C-Reduce.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83983
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|testsuite |ipa
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71569
--- Comment #13 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Oliver Tale-Yazdi from comment #6)
> I also need to point out that >= 5.1 accepts weird (invalid?) Code
Fixed as well (for 7.4/8).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71569
--- Comment #12 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Mar 1 19:47:18 2018
New Revision: 258111
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258111&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71569 - decltype of template.
* parser.c (cp_pars
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71569
--- Comment #11 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Mar 1 19:40:36 2018
New Revision: 258110
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258110&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71569 - decltype of template.
* parser.c (cp_pars
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 82455, which changed state.
Bug 82455 Summary: missing -Warray-bounds on strcpy offset in an out-of-bounds
range
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82455
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82455
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426
Bug 63426 depends on bug 84639, which changed state.
Bug 84639 Summary: gcc/c-family/c-attribs.c:1822:27: runtime error: shift
exponent -1 is negative
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84639
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84639
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84639
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Thu Mar 1 19:15:42 2018
New Revision: 258109
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258109&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/84639
* c-attribs.c (common_handle_aligned_attri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84654
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84654
Bug ID: 84654
Summary: libstdc++ tries to use __float128 when compiling with
-mno-float128
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83983
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou ---
> I think it may be a bug in the odr hash function with an accidental
> hash collision but I am not sure.
The ODR hash function essentially hashes the name only here so the collision is
apparently by design.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84632
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80546
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
void ptr4 (__int128_t *p)
{
__int128_t a = p[1];
__int128_t b;
__asm__ ("# gpr reg %0" : "+r" (a));
b = ~a;
__asm__ ("# gpr reg %0" : "+r" (b));
p[0] = b;
}
void ptr5 (__int128_t *p)
{
__int128
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80546
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #43536|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78420
--- Comment #26 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #25)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #23)
> > One possibility would be a __builtin_constant_p-like builtin that would fold
> > to false much earlier than the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84590
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84550
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Pedro Alves from comment #6)
> I see the same thing with your reduced testcase:
>
> ~~~
> infrun: TARGET_WAITKIND_STOPPED
> infrun: stop_pc = 0x400580
> infrun: stepped into subroutine
> infrun:
c/cp/parser.c:13063
0xfaf948 cp_parser_block_declaration
/home/vegard/git/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:12881
0x1002c05 cp_parser_declaration
/home/vegard/git/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:12778
$ xgcc --version
xgcc (GCC) 8.0.1 20180301 (experimental)
Built from git c435a9e730c6e8f10da09d58b4fc9aaeb401b0d5 (r258097)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84582
Bug 84582 depends on bug 84596, which changed state.
Bug 84596 Summary: [8 Regression] internal compiler error: unexpected
expression '(bool)c' of kind implicit_conv_expr (cxx_eval_constant_expression)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84596
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Thu Mar 1 17:08:35 2018
New Revision: 258107
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258107&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/84596
* constexpr.c (require_rvalue_constant_exp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84596
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78420
--- Comment #25 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #23)
> One possibility would be a __builtin_constant_p-like builtin that would fold
> to false much earlier than the current __builtin_constant_p, e.g. during
> gimpli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79410
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Mar 1 17:01:54 2018
New Revision: 258106
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258106&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-03-01 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/79410
* g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70875
--- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Ah, you're right, the buffer overflow is nasty, even when we diagnose at
> runtime it is better not to let it continue into the actual UB. Will test
> following then:
>
> 2018-03-01 Jakub Jelinek
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79410
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini ---
Let's add the testcase to trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78420
--- Comment #24 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #23)
> I'd fear about jump-threading vs. __builtin_constant_p issues like PR72785
> and others, were the optimizers break the __builtin_constant_p argument and
> the g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70875
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Ah, you're right, the buffer overflow is nasty, even when we diagnose at
runtime it is better not to let it continue into the actual UB. Will test
following then:
2018-03-01 Jakub Jelinek
PR sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72752
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comm
gard/git/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:27105
0xfc79db cp_parser_template_declaration_after_export
/home/vegard/git/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:27123
0x1003081 cp_parser_declaration
/home/vegard/git/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:12727
0xff9bdb cp_parser_declaration_seq_opt
/home/vegard/git/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:12654
$ xgcc --version
xgcc (GCC) 8.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70875
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou ---
Starting program: /home/ebotcazou/bounds-3
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
Using host libthread_db library "/lib/sparc64-linux-gnu/libthread_db.so.1".
bounds-3.c:13:11: runtime error: index 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70875
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou ---
> No, why do you think so? Something miscompiled on some target? If so,
> which?
Too much Ada I guess. :-) The test fails at -O0 on SPARC64/Linux:
FAIL: gcc.dg/ubsan/bounds-3.c -O0 execution test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84649
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71569
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6/7/8 regression] Crash: |[6 regression] Crash:
gcc/cp/parser.c:12654
0xffb203 cp_parser_translation_unit
/home/vegard/git/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:4561
0xffb203 c_parse_file()
/home/vegard/git/gcc/gcc/cp/parser.c:38986
0x15a6ba5 c_common_parse_file()
/home/vegard/git/gcc/gcc/c-family/c-opts.c:1132
$ xgcc --version
xgcc (GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78420
--- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #22)
> Hmm, this seems to work:
>
> typedef decltype(sizeof(1)) size_t;
>
> constexpr bool less (const int*a, const int*b)
> {
> if (__builtin_constant_p (a < b))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71569
--- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Mar 1 16:12:26 2018
New Revision: 258103
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258103&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71569 - ICE with redundant args on member variable template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71569
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jason at gcc dot gnu.org |
Assignee|paolo.carlini
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71569
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Mar 1 16:00:34 2018
New Revision: 258102
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258102&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71569 - ICE with redundant args on member variable template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78420
--- Comment #22 from Jason Merrill ---
Hmm, this seems to work:
typedef decltype(sizeof(1)) size_t;
constexpr bool less (const int*a, const int*b)
{
if (__builtin_constant_p (a < b))
return a < b;
return (size_t)a < (size_t)b;
}
int ar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84650
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84650
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70875
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
No, why do you think so? Something miscompiled on some target? If so, which?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84648
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70875
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84646
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84647
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84642
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71569
--- Comment #6 from Oliver Tale-Yazdi ---
It seems to be only dependent on the template specialization of the member.
–––
template
struct A {
template
static U u;
};
template
template
U A:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84630
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84623
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84625
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84005
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80546
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Unfortunately it breaks bootstrap on powerpc64le-linux:
> ../../../libgcc/libgcc2.c: In function ‘__mulvti3’:
> ../../../libgcc/libgcc2.c:396:1: internal compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84650
Bug ID: 84650
Summary: [8 Regression] [graphite] ICE: Segmentation fault (in
create_new_iv)
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84649
Bug ID: 84649
Summary: -Wstringop-truncation shouldn't warn on strncat() when
2nd argument is a char array
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84630
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80546
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82484
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82484
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Thu Mar 1 14:54:10 2018
New Revision: 258101
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258101&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Do not handled volatile arguments (PR sanitizer/82484).
2018-03-01 Marti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84642
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Vegard Nossum from comment #0)
> Seems potentially related to bug #84610?
Similar backtraces - and they both started with same commit - though this one
is a read-through-NULL, whereas bug #84610
1 - 100 of 181 matches
Mail list logo
