https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #31 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 43781
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43781&action=edit
Partially reduced test-case
I've got 120KB partially reduced test-case. Any further reduction is not much
possi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84973
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84968
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84789
--- Comment #7 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Wed Mar 28 05:05:30 2018
New Revision: 258915
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258915&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR c++/84789] adjust testcase for -fconcepts
When compiling with -fco
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84973
--- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Wed Mar 28 05:05:14 2018
New Revision: 258914
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258914&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR c++/84973] don't defer output of uninstantiated templates
When an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84968
--- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Wed Mar 28 05:04:59 2018
New Revision: 258913
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258913&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR c++/84968] reject stmt-exprs in noexcept constexprs
We reject exte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85100
Nathaniel J. Smith changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||njs at pobox dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85105
Bug ID: 85105
Summary: missing -Wignored-qualifiers with const decltype
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82411
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82411
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Mar 27 23:28:25 2018
New Revision: 258909
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258909&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: -mreadonly-in-sdata (PR82411)
This adds a new option -mread
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84914
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Tue Mar 27 23:14:22 2018
New Revision: 258908
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258908&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2018-03-27 Michael Meissner
PR target/84914
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82411
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Mar 27 23:13:02 2018
New Revision: 258907
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258907&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: -mreadonly-in-sdata (PR82411)
This adds a new option -mread
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83964
--- Comment #11 from Steven Munroe ---
The requirement was to reduce the use of (in-line) assembler in libraries. Asm
is error prone in the light of 32/64-bit ABI difference and the compiler
(usual) generates the correct code for the target.
Flo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85104
Bug ID: 85104
Summary: double underline in a C++ error: duplicate const
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83665
--- Comment #18 from Pat Haugen ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #17)
> Pat, please open a new bug for the regression caused by the fix.
Done, pr85103.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85103
Bug ID: 85103
Summary: Performance regressions on SPEC with r257582
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85093
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85060
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85067
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85067
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Mar 27 21:19:25 2018
New Revision: 258904
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258904&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2018-03-27 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/85067
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68155
Harald Anlauf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment #9 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85102
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #30 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #29)
> Thanks. I can't reproduce that on my openSUSE package nor on my build
> gcc-7-branch. However I downloaded Debian binary and I can confirm that.
> I'm bisecting n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85088
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #5)
> (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #4)
> > It seems that there is some inconsistencies
>
> Right, in particular regarding INTENT_INOUT vs DECL_INOU
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85077
--- Comment #8 from Matthias Kretz ---
Thanks! FWIW my abs implementation now uses:
template
[[gnu::optimize("finite-math-only,no-signed-zeros")]]
constexpr Storage abs(Storage v)
{
return v.d < 0 ? -v.d : v.d;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85076
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6/7/8 Regression] ICE with |[6/7 Regression] ICE with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85077
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85077
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 27 20:00:56 2018
New Revision: 258903
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258903&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/85077
* cp-gimplify.c (cp_fold) : For ctors with ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85061
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 27 19:59:30 2018
New Revision: 258902
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258902&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/85061
* c-common.c (fold_offsetof_1) : Assert that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85076
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 27 19:58:30 2018
New Revision: 258901
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258901&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/85076
* tree.c (cp_build_reference_type): If to_typ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85043
--- Comment #11 from Paolo Carlini ---
That approach would be definitely Ok with me, Eric.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85083
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85043
--- Comment #10 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #2)
> Thanks. I'm seriously wondering if this is also a problem with the name of
> the warning, because, I suppose, the same warning named
> -Wcast-to-the-same-type wo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85079
--- Comment #3 from John Ackerman ---
I thought I had attached it, but apparently the file was too big. It's now
attached. Let me know if you need anything else!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85079
--- Comment #2 from John Ackerman ---
Created attachment 43780
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43780&action=edit
Prepocessed Source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85043
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|paolo.carlini at oracle dot com|
--- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85043
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85088
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #4)
> It seems that there is some inconsistencies
Right, in particular regarding INTENT_INOUT vs DECL_INOUT etc. Therefore the
patch in comment #2 is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85102
Bug ID: 85102
Summary: ICE in gfc_conv_intrinsic_dot_product, at
fortran/trans-intrinsic.c:4464
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85101
--- Comment #1 from Pavel Roskin ---
Created attachment 43779
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43779&action=edit
Preprocessed source
me/roskinp/src/gcc/configure --enable-languages=c++ --disable-multilib
--prefix=/opt/gcc
Thread model: posix
gcc version 8.0.1 20180327 (experimental) (GCC)
$ /opt/gcc/bin/g++ -c Chrono.ii -std=c++17
/home/roskinp/chrono/Source/Utility/Chrono.cpp: In function
‘std::__cxx11::string VG::Utility::to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #29 from Martin Liška --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85100
Bug ID: 85100
Summary: __builtin_cpu_supports avx does not verify OS supports
it
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85081
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85084
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Mar 27 18:42:02 2018
New Revision: 258900
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258900&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-03-27 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/85084
* frontend
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85081
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85095
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85084
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #2)
> I cannot reproduce this on my system.
Actually, I can.
Let's see how this survives regression-testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #28 from Vadim Zeitlin ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #26)
> complete output of:
> diff -u nowarn.s warn.s
Attached, but most of it is just noise from the label renumbering due to the
extra label being created, as previou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84780
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85084
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #27 from Vadim Zeitlin ---
Created attachment 43777
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43777&action=edit
Diff between assembly generated with and without the warning options
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85084
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig ---
I cannot reproduce this on my system.
However, could you check if
Index: frontend-passes.c
===
--- frontend-passes.c (revision 258845)
+++ f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #26 from Martin Liška ---
complete output of:
diff -u nowarn.s warn.s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85083
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig ---
Fixed on trunk, closing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #25 from Vadim Zeitlin ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #24)
> > Please let me know if I can do anything else.
>
> Can you please attach full diff?
Sorry, diff between what and what?
> Am I correct that your native compil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85083
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Mar 27 17:28:35 2018
New Revision: 258899
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258899&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-03-27 Thomas Koenig
Harald Anlauf
PR fortran/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84514
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc-*-* |powerpc*-*-*
--- Comment #1 from Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #24 from Martin Liška ---
> Please let me know if I can do anything else.
Can you please attach full diff? Am I correct that your native compiler is on
x86_64? Please attach output of --verbose.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81652
Bug 81652 depends on bug 85044, which changed state.
Bug 85044 Summary: ENDBR is missing in ix86_trampoline_init
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85044
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85044
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85044
--- Comment #3 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Tue Mar 27 17:18:51 2018
New Revision: 258897
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258897&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386: Insert ENDBR to trampoline for -fcf-protection=branch -mibt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83462
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #23 from Vadim Zeitlin ---
Just to confirm that this is not specific to MinGW-w64, I've attached the test
case (and a preprocessed version of it) allowing to reproduce the same problem
with Linux x86_64 version of g++ 7.3 (7.3.0-12 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84733
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery
Priority|P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83462
--- Comment #11 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Tue Mar 27 17:08:41 2018
New Revision: 258896
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258896&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR testsuite/83462 - c-c++-common/Warray-bounds-3.c fails on arm-none-eab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82004
--- Comment #38 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 43776
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43776&action=edit
gcc8-pr82004.patch
Variant fix, instead of trying to optimize it some way (which is even less
precise than wha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #22 from Vadim Zeitlin ---
Created attachment 43775
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43775&action=edit
Compressed preprocessed test case for native Linux gcc 7.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #21 from Vadim Zeitlin ---
Created attachment 43774
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43774&action=edit
Reduced test case showing the problem with native g++ 7.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #20 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #19)
> (In reply to Mathieu Malaterre from comment #18)
> > The first diff seems to be here:
> >
> > +Use of uninitialised value of size 8
> > + at 0x98CBD7: spa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #19
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83009
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P3
Target Milestone|8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67297
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83009
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Tue Mar 27 16:52:10 2018
New Revision: 258894
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258894&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[AArch64] XFAIL gcc.target/aarch64/store_v2vec_lanes.c for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #18 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
The first diff seems to be here:
+Use of uninitialised value of size 8
+ at 0x98CBD7: sparseset_bit_p (sparseset.h:147)
+ by 0x98CBD7: process_bb_node_lives(ira_loop_tree_node*) (ira-lives.c:1226)
+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #17 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Here is what I did over here:
# debootstrap --arch amd64 sid /srv/chroot/sid-amd64
http://httpredir.debian.org/debian
# mount -t proc proc /srv/chroot/sid-amd64/proc
# chroot /srv/chroot/sid-amd64 apt i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #16 from Vadim Zeitlin ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #13)
> It corresponds to
>
> if(!(!std::signbit(bourn_cast( From(0) {
> lmi_test::record_error(); };
> if(!(std::signbit(bourn_cast(-From(0) {
> l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
Mathieu Malaterre changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #15 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Created attachment 43773
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43773&action=edit
valgrind output (not ok)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85099
Bug ID: 85099
Summary: [meta-bug] selective scheduling issues
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85088
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
It seems that there is some inconsistencies between
/* TODO: Call match_intent_spec from here. */
if (gfc_match (" ( in out )") == MATCH_YES)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #13 from Alexander Monakov ---
> (in the diffs, plus-lines correspond to -Wnonnull added to command line)
No, sorry, it was the other way around. Here's the reverse diff with more
context:
if (0)
{
<;
}
- if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82004
--- Comment #37 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 43771
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43771&action=edit
gcc8-pr82004.patch
Untested hack. With this it works even with -flto. Though, the rounding
errors because we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85088
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The block
/* TODO: Call match_intent_spec from here. */
...
has been introduced at revision r128028, September 2 2007, by Roger Sayle, see
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2007-08/msg00655.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83860
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Confirmed. Works with GCC 5
Well, it doesn't segfault, but ASan still shows the problem:
ASAN:SIGSEGV
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85090
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
The problem lies in:
(insn 4214 4213 4219 2 (parallel [
(set (subreg:DI (reg:V32HI 4037 [ i ]) 0)
(ior:DI (reg:DI 4040)
(reg:DI 4038 [ _7 ])))
(clobb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85068
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6/7/8 Regression] ICE with |[6/7 Regression] ICE with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85097
--- Comment #2 from Boldizsár Palotás ---
More specifically, this seems to fail on every version of GCC that supports
"-std=c++11" -- since 4.7.1, based on testing on Compiler Explorer. It is
compiled (I assume correctly) by Clang and MSVC.
A si
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85098
Bug ID: 85098
Summary: undefined reference to std::regex::extended
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83462
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85091
--- Comment #12 from Alexander Monakov ---
I can reproduce it with downloaded Debian's cc1plus, and for me -Wnonnull alone
is sufficient to cause diverging codegen. It diverges very early, in the
frontend: diff of .tu dumps starts with:
--- a/1/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85090
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at redhat dot com,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85096
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85097
Boldizsár Palotás changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE in doub |ICE in double parameter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85090
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hmm, I don't have access to AVX512F hardware so I can't reproduce the runtime
failure.
The vector simplifications that my patch introduces look correct to me from
looking at the dumps.
I'm not v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85095
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85097
Bug ID: 85097
Summary: ICE in doub
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85096
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.5
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80791
--- Comment #13 from Bill Schmidt ---
Actually it appears that the IVOPTS change results in worse code going into
SMS, regardless of whether SMS can succeed on the loop. It comes down to the
fact that IVOPTS formerly pulled a multiply (left-shif
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85096
Bug ID: 85096
Summary: [6/7/8 Regression] Unnecessary(?) MOV instructions for
int128 addition
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
1 - 100 of 206 matches
Mail list logo
