https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88521
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lokeshjanghel91 at gmail dot
com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88528
Pavel Roskin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Regression in gcc 7.4 |ICE with templated operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88528
Bug ID: 88528
Summary: Regression in gcc 7.4
Product: gcc
Version: 7.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: una
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86315
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gerald at pfeifer dot com
See
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84897
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78394
--- Comment #8 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #7)
> -O0 has none of the analysis necessary and I believe you get no warnings at
> all.
>
> A minimum of -Og is needed, but -Og is inherently going to give many fals
eck_failed(tree_node const*, char const*, int, char const*,
...)
/var/tmp/portage/cross-powerpc-e300c3-linux-gnu/gcc-9.0.0_alpha20181216/work/gcc-9-20181216/gcc/tree.c:9757
0x6bc34d tree_check(tree_node const*, char const*, int, char const*, tree_code)
/var/tmp/portage/cross-powerpc-e300c3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85314
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Mon Dec 17 02:19:58 2018
New Revision: 267196
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267196&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-12-16 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/85314
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85314
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88524
--- Comment #5 from Ruslan Nikolaev ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> Still is a binutils (assembler rather than the linker issue):
> .file "t.c"
> .text
> #APP
> a: .long func@plt - 4
> #NO_APP
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88526
Bug ID: 88526
Summary: gcc accepts ill-formed program with sizeof (int [*])
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88524
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88524
Ruslan Nikolaev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|MOVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88525
Bug ID: 88525
Summary: gcc thinks that C11 program does not declare anything
but it does.
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88477
--- Comment #4 from Anders Granlund ---
In general the standard seems to be a bit inprecise when it talks about types
beeing complete.
The same type may be incomplete at one point in the program, but complete at
another point. The standard shoul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88462
--- Comment #12 from Iain Buclaw ---
(In reply to Johannes Pfau from comment #10)
> I guess the proper fix to the alignment problem is using
> 'https://dlang.org/phobos/std_traits.html#classInstanceAlignment' (or rather
> the druntime equivalent)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88524
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88524
--- Comment #1 from Ruslan Nikolaev ---
btw, I have just compared the output with clang/llvm 7.0; the generated code
seems to be correct in both cases there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88523
--- Comment #3 from sasho648 at gmail dot com ---
The included phrase in the standard would read something like:
If an incomplete structure type is the composite type of a function - it's
allowed to be completed inside its prototype in which case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88524
Bug ID: 88524
Summary: PLT32 relocation is off by 4
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88523
--- Comment #2 from sasho648 at gmail dot com ---
I'm referring to the function without linkage main. The one with linkage that
is declared at file scope has no relation at all with my proposal - I'm just
using the opportunity to introduce as few
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88523
sasho648 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Allow slick and sick|Allow slick and sick
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88523
Bug ID: 88523
Summary: Allow slick and sick incomplete variably modified
function return type.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88522
Bug ID: 88522
Summary: Error: operand size mismatch for `vpgatherqq'
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: targe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80477
zed.three at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zed.three at gmail dot com
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85544
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Koenig ---
The problem with the patch in comment #6 is that it pessimizes code
like
b = (-1)**a
So, some more thinking required...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88467
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88116
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88521
Bug ID: 88521
Summary: gcc 9.0 from r266355 miscompile x265 for mingw-w64
target
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88467
--- Comment #7 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Sun Dec 16 17:00:33 2018
New Revision: 267190
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267190&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-12-16 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/88116
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88116
--- Comment #9 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Sun Dec 16 17:00:33 2018
New Revision: 267190
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267190&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-12-16 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/88116
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88116
--- Comment #8 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Sun Dec 16 16:29:43 2018
New Revision: 267189
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267189&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-12-16 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/88116
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88467
--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Sun Dec 16 16:29:43 2018
New Revision: 267189
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267189&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-12-16 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/88116
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88513
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88519
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88520
Bug ID: 88520
Summary: improve warning when `struct` is required
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88514
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 45245
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45245&action=edit
gcc9-pr88514-wip.patch
Untested WIP patch. With this I can vectorize the above testcase fine, but the
testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84863
--- Comment #3 from Arnd Bergmann ---
The problem in the kernel then is that we then have to turn off the sanitizers
for the 'allmodconfig' build, since the recommended minimum regression testing
for kernel changes involves building a kernel with
nfigured with: /home/toon/compilers/trunk/configure
--prefix=/home/toon/compilers/install --with-gnu-as --with-gnu-ld
--enable-languages=all,go,ada --disable-multilib --disable-nls
Thread model: posix
gcc version 9.0.0 20181216 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79342
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu ---
index_st
0.16.1-7.0.fc29.x86_64
libmpc-1.1.0-2.0.fc29.x86_64 mpfr-3.1.6-2.fc29.x86_64
(gdb) p *node
$26 = {
str = 0x7fffea9554e0 "GNU C17 9.0.0 20181216 (experimental) -march=skylake
-mrtm -mabm -m32 -gsplit-dwarf -g3 -O2", refcount = 2, form = 0, label = 0x0,
index = 0}
(gdb)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88518
--- Comment #2 from Matthew Wilcox ---
Thanks! What I actually want to do is annotate g() to the effect that it reads
the pointed-to variable before it writes it. IOW, I want to write something
like:
void g(unsigned long __attribute__((read_be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41453
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Koenig ---
Also still to do: Do some more precise clobbering for
the case of PR88364, i.e. for
call foo(a&x)
clobber a%x, which is currently not done.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88364
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88363
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Dec 16 14:32:46 2018
New Revision: 267187
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267187&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-12-16 Thomas Koenig
PF fortran/88364
* trans-ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88512
--- Comment #5 from Jonny Grant ---
ICC 19.0.1 output
(7): error: no instance of overloaded function
"std::__cxx11::basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Alloc>::erase [with _CharT=char,
_Traits=std::char_traits, _Alloc=std::allocator]" matches the
arg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88483
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88483
--- Comment #3 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Sun Dec 16 13:55:18 2018
New Revision: 267186
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267186&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
x86: Revert reversion 267133
Revert commit:
commit 76c21b271247cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88422
--- Comment #5 from Nidal Faour ---
i've used the RV gcc official toolchain and reverted the patch as Jim did.
and it passed in the test case, but when i moved to a bigger code, i failed
again to build. and it turned out that it passed only if i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26732
Harald van Dijk changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||harald at gigawatt dot nl
--- Comment
50 matches
Mail list logo
