https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92950
Andreas Krebbel changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92950
Bug ID: 92950
Summary: Wrong load instructions emitted for movv1qi
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77992
Lei YU changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mine260309 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #18 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92949
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 47502
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47502&action=edit
one testcase
This is just one example expanded; note scan-tree-dump-times needed to be
updated as I added a few
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92949
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|bswap/store merging does|bswap/store merging does
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48200
--- Comment #41 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #40)
> I posted initial patch here
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-11/msg01334.html
I applied it into gcc-9.2.0 and it works. But, unfortunately, the problem wit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92949
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Created attachment 47501 [details]
> The current bit-field lowering patch
I attached the current bit-field lowering patch so if someone wants to work on
this, th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92949
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 47501
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47501&action=edit
The current bit-field lowering patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90374
--- Comment #20 from Jerry DeLisle ---
While working on this I found another issue:
program test
implicit none
real(8) :: rn
character(32) :: afmt, aresult
rn = 0.000314e8_8
write (*,fmt="(E0.8e0, a3)") rn, "<<<"
end
$ gfc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92591
--- Comment #8 from Arseny Solokha ---
Is there a backport pending, or can this PR be closed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92794
--- Comment #4 from Arseny Solokha ---
% powerpc-e300c3-linux-gnu-gcc-10.0.0-alpha20191208 -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=powerpc-e300c3-linux-gnu-gcc-10.0.0-alpha20191208
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/libexec/gcc/powerpc-e300c3-linux-gnu/10.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92794
--- Comment #3 from fxue at gcc dot gnu.org ---
What's configure option for 32 be powerpc?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92947
--- Comment #1 from Ville Voutilainen ---
Based on some debugging work, build_functional_cast_1 looks like a plausible
place where we might need to add understanding of parenthesized aggregates. The
previous bug report has an incomplete (because
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92946
--- Comment #2 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Filed as: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=946792
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92946
--- Comment #1 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Michael Karcher has figured out that this might be a bug in Debian's gcc-9, in
particular the patch
https://sources.debian.org/src/gcc-9/9.2.1-21/debian/patches/gcc-search-prefixed-as-ld.diff.
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92949
Bug ID: 92949
Summary: bswap/store merging does not handle BIT_INSERT_EXPR
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92947
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92948
Bug ID: 92948
Summary: internal compiler error: in tsubst_copy, at
cp/pt.c:15788
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92947
Bug ID: 92947
Summary: Parenthesized aggregate initialization doesn't work
with the library types it's supposed to work with
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92946
Bug ID: 92946
Summary: [9 Regression] [SH] Native GCC crashes when invoking
with -m4 -m4-nofpu -pipe
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91651
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87103
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andreas at skeidsvoll dot no
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91773
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91534
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92913
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #47483|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92878
--- Comment #10 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Ville Voutilainen from comment #7)
> __is_constructible is incorrectly false for such an aggregate:
>
> struct aggressive_aggregate
> {
> int a;
> int b;
> };
>
> int main()
> {
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92945
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||asolokha at gmx dot com
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89597
Agner Fog changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||agner at agner dot org
--- Comment #1 from A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92945
--- Comment #2 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Rebuilt isl with debugging symbols. gdb says 'bmap' is NULL:
Thread 2.1 "f951" received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to process 1944963]
isl_basic_map_underlying_set (bmap=0x0) at ../i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92945
--- Comment #1 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
The crash happens somewhere in internals of isl-0.22:
Thread 2.1 "f951" received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to process 1919154]
0x77e50a74 in isl_basic_map_underlying_set ()
: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 10.0.0 20191215 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92944
Bug ID: 92944
Summary: [concepts] redefinition error when using constrained
structure template inside namespace
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83464
--- Comment #6 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #5)
> I'm not sure this is an acceptable solution. It disables various other
> optimizations and reduces in worse code than normally should be. When you
> reb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83464
--- Comment #5 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #4)
>
> I have to try. I'll run a testbuild. Currently the package has the following
> workaround for PR/81426:
>
> # See https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bu
34 matches
Mail list logo
