https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66203
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> By the way I will doing some bare metal aarch64 work soon but will be using
> a different triplet for this env as it supports a few things the standard
> bare met
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81836
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
--- Comment #24 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #23)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #22)
> > So, while it isn't correct to replace x % 3U == 1 by (x - 1) % 3U == 0,
> > because
> > for x == 0 the test will yield
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wdijkstr at arm dot com
--- Comment #23 from Wil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
--- Comment #22 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, while it isn't correct to replace x % 3U == 1 by (x - 1) % 3U == 0, because
for x == 0 the test will yield a different value, as 0xU % 3U is 0 and
0 % 3U is also 0, x % 3U == 1 is equivalent to (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87210
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Mon, 3 Sep 2018, pjp at fedoraproject dot org wrote:
> As from the reply, it would be nice to have four options/features available
> from the compiler, from least to most performance impa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87210
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
http://wiki.c2.com/?TheKenThompsonHack
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87210
Bug ID: 87210
Summary: [RFE] introduce build time options to zero initialize
automatic stack variables
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87209
Bug ID: 87209
Summary: Wuninitialized or Wmaybe-uninitialized doesn't warn
when malloc's return value is used without being
initialized
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87208
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Dup of PR 51577 ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
--- Comment #21 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Probably should punt early if integer_onep (treeop1), that case should have
been optimized earlier, but if it isn't, we shouldn't miscompile.
Another thing is if *arg1 is < 0 or >= treeop1, again, I'd hope
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87205
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85065
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87182
--- Comment #6 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
In my testing I don't see any reference to -lz in libbacktrace.la.
It is not the case that using
AC_CHECK_LIB([z], [compress],
[AC_DEFINE(HAVE_ZLIB, 1, [Define if -lz is available.])])
in libbacktra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87205
Glen Joseph Fernandes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||glenjofe at gmail dot com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47425
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gs...@t-online.de
--- Comment #5 from G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34500
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gs...@t-online.de
--- Comment #5 from G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Testcase I've been eyeballing so far:
unsigned f1 (unsigned x) { return (x % 679U) == 0; }
unsigned f2 (unsigned x, unsigned *y) { *y = x / 679U; return (x % 679U) == 0;
}
unsigned f3 (unsigned x) { return (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 44656
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44656&action=edit
gcc9-pr82853-wip.patch
Untested WIP patch which does this during expansion if it is cheaper according
to targe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87177
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87177
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 3 17:41:05 2018
New Revision: 264069
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264069&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-09-03 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/87177
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87182
--- Comment #5 from Stefan Vigerske ---
The AC_CHECK_LIB([z], [compress], []) adds -lz to the LIBS variable in the
Makefile, if successful. This results in calling the libtool that builds
libbacktrace.la with -lz, which then results in having dep
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87208
Bug ID: 87208
Summary: dependent name resolution selects a function it should
have NEVER considered
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87182
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
--- Comment #4 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87188
--- Comment #4 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
Created attachment 44655
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44655&action=edit
S.cpp.035t.esra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87188
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
It looks like the function pointers disappear in the esra pass.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87207
--- Comment #1 from blastrock at free dot fr ---
Created attachment 44653
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44653&action=edit
output of gcc -v when compiling the test case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87207
Bug ID: 87207
Summary: ODR issue with static functions and lambda templates
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87189
--- Comment #9 from Paul Pluzhnikov ---
Thanks, H.J.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5784 has a few references, and
in particular https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2012-09/msg00192.html is
important to consider.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85065
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85137
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68737
--- Comment #5 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2018-09-03 12:03 PM, dave.anglin at bell dot net wrote:
> (gdb) p/x __hi - __lo
> $6 = 0x
(gdb) frame 3
#3 std::num_put > >::_M_insert_float
(this=0x83fffdde37a0, __s=...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77609
--- Comment #7 from Gabriel Rauter ---
(In reply to Gabriel Rauter from comment #6)
> This change breaks the .noinit section on avr which now gets set to PROGBTIS
> because the section type is omitted. It should be NOBITS.
.noinit regression fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87206
Bug ID: 87206
Summary: Suboptimal code generation for
__atomic_compare_exchange_n followed by a comparison
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87189
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu ---
Here is a very old proposal:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/generic-abi/K1lUiNsmM6c/Pl9-7ngPVXIJ
I am not sure if it will completely fix:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5784
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68737
--- Comment #4 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2018-09-03 10:57 AM, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Could this be due to using alloca? The tests should not require a huge stack,
> so either alloca isn't usable or maybe there's a bug causi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87204
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
There are lots of glibc strtod fixes that postdate the last merges of
strtod code to libquadmath. I don't know if any of them are relevant to
this issue, but merging in those fixes would s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87191
--- Comment #4 from Rich Felker ---
Regarding ASan, absolutely, but this is a case that can be caught without heavy
memory tracking machinery, and that seems to be documented as being caught by
-fsanitize=object-size but isn't.
In my particular
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87182
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Host libbacktrace would need to use GCC's host zlib and target
libbacktrace would need to use GCC's target zlib for the same target
multilib (which would require appropriate dependencies to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77691
--- Comment #24 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think this would make the tests pass, so you could remove the xfail
directives:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/experimental/memory_resource
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/experimental/memory_resource
@@ -421,7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87189
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
gthr.h is used heavily e.g. in libstdc++, so your solution doesn't really work
at all.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87189
--- Comment #6 from Paul Pluzhnikov ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Because it is very expensive.
One impractical solution is to require '-pthread' on the compile and link line,
and link a libgcc_mt that has non-weak reference
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87193
--- Comment #3 from W E Brown ---
Sorry; hadn't seen or recalled the note cited by comment 1.
Agreed with comment 2 that this need not be a priority. My (admittedly
hostile) experimental code caught it, so I thought to note it for the record.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87189
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Paul Pluzhnikov from comment #4)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> > This is a glibc bug
>
> I (obviously) disagree.
>
> , coming up with a set of weakref checks for gthr.h that
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87189
--- Comment #4 from Paul Pluzhnikov ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> This is a glibc bug
I (obviously) disagree.
, coming up with a set of weakref checks for gthr.h that
> would satisfy static linking of glibc and all possible
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
--- Comment #18 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #17)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16)
> > For unsigned x % y == z if y is odd constant we can handle it for any
> > constant z, by computing m = mul_inv (y,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68737
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|2018-08-16 00:0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87194
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|ASSIG
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78179
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78179
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Sep 3 14:54:28 2018
New Revision: 264063
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264063&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/78179 run long double tests separately
Split the long doubl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87200
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 3 14:29:00 2018
New Revision: 264062
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264062&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-09-03 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/87200
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87200
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78595
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87194
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Sep 3 14:25:25 2018
New Revision: 264060
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264060&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/87194 fix range insertion into maps and sets
Since C++11 ra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78595
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Sep 3 14:25:12 2018
New Revision: 264059
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264059&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/78595 implement insertion into maps in terms of emplace
C+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87205
Bug ID: 87205
Summary: Inefficient code generation for switch
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87177
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||asolokha at gmx dot com
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87202
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87201
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87201
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Mon Sep 3 13:35:35 2018
New Revision: 264058
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264058&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix thinko (PR tree-optimization/87201).
2018-09-03 Martin Liska
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87197
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 3 13:28:25 2018
New Revision: 264057
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264057&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-09-03 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/87197
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87169
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 3 13:28:25 2018
New Revision: 264057
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264057&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-09-03 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/87197
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87169
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87197
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87204
Bug ID: 87204
Summary: strtoflt128 produces different results for subnormals
with -m32 and -m64
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
For unsigned x % y == z if y is odd constant we can handle it for any constant
z, by computing m = mul_inv (y, 2^prec) and d = (2^prec / y) and using x * m -
(z * m) < d .
For even y, not sure if it can work
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68737
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2016-01-29 00:00:00 |2018-08-16 0:00
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87194
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
http://duriansoftware.com/joe/Optimizing-is-multiple-checks-with-modular-arithmetic.html
Do we want to do this at GIMPLE time ignoring costs, or during expansion time?
Doing it later has the benefit that we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87200
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
The underlying issue is that match-and-simplify invoked via
vn_nary_build_or_lookup_1 valuezies captures according to availability.
But in the end we'd like to have a value-number back.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87184
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2018-09-03 5:20 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87184
>
> Richard Biener changed:
>
> What|Removed |Ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87203
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #13
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87199
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87203
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
Dup of PR 82853 ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87191
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
I believe it's nice example where ASAN can help:
$ cat pr87191.c
void bar(void *ptr)
{
__builtin_putchar (*(char *)ptr);
}
int main()
{
char a[10];
bar(&a+2);
}
$ =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87198
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #2)
> > I think you also need:
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/common/config/i386/i386-common.c
> > b/gcc/common/config/i386/i386-co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87201
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87203
Bug ID: 87203
Summary: Optimize x % constant ==/!= 0
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78595
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|ville.voutilainen at gmail dot com |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
Targe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87201
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87200
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87201
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87202
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87176
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
The issue here is similar to that of PR87132 - this time we get at memory state
from the previous iteration by means of a virtual PHI that was value-numbered
to its backedge value.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87198
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #2)
> I think you also need:
>
> diff --git a/gcc/common/config/i386/i386-common.c
> b/gcc/common/config/i386/i386-common.c
> index 70b3c3f2fc31..edb55e542451 100644
> -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87198
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
I think you also need:
diff --git a/gcc/common/config/i386/i386-common.c
b/gcc/common/config/i386/i386-common.c
index 70b3c3f2fc31..edb55e542451 100644
--- a/gcc/common/config/i386/i386-common.c
+++ b/gcc/comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87198
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85859
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85859
--- Comment #10 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Mon Sep 3 10:14:52 2018
New Revision: 264055
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264055&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
backport "[tail-merge] Fix side-effect test in stmt_local_def"
2018-09-03
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87050
--- Comment #11 from Janne Blomqvist ---
(In reply to Gerald Pfeifer from comment #10)
> (In reply to Janne Blomqvist from comment #0)
> > So apart from the headers, little work ought to be needed for the
> > conversion itself.
>
> Well, no. :-}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87201
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85859
--- Comment #9 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Mon Sep 3 10:04:08 2018
New Revision: 264054
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264054&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
backport "[tail-merge] Fix side-effect test in stmt_local_def"
2018-09-03
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87202
Bug ID: 87202
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in vn_reference_insert_pieces, at
tree-ssa-sccvn.c:2752
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87201
Bug ID: 87201
Summary: [9 Regression] Segfault in GIMPLE pass: switchlower_O0
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87200
Bug ID: 87200
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in set_ssa_val_to, at
tree-ssa-sccvn.c:3629
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87178
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Ah I misread it then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85859
--- Comment #8 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Mon Sep 3 09:43:46 2018
New Revision: 264053
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264053&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
backport "[tail-merge] Fix side-effect test in stmt_local_def"
2018-09-03
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
