https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95420
--- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw ---
(In reply to Iain Buclaw from comment #0)
> Configuring with --target=arm-wrs-vxworks7 --with-cpu=arm8 and the selftests
> pass.
>
I was going to ignore that you need to set VSB_DIR in order for the selftests
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95446
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95439
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95151
Bug 95151 depends on bug 95439, which changed state.
Bug 95439 Summary: Incorrect zero count check in cmpstrnsi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95439
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95448
Bug ID: 95448
Summary: Missing optimization: pointer untag, re-tag should be
no-op
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95447
Bug ID: 95447
Summary: cmpstrn peepholes are out of date
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95428
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you provide a full testcase?
>From the sound of it, this might be a LLVM bug.
As mentioned you can't extend a final class which means base object constructor
can't be called. If LLVM is producing a call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95402
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95446
Bug ID: 95446
Summary: False positive for optional arguments of elemental
procedure
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95445
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||87403
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95445
Bug ID: 95445
Summary: diagnose incompatible calls to functions declared
without prototype
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95444
Bug ID: 95444
Summary: Incorrect constraints on length operand in cmpstrnqi
patterns
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95443
Bug ID: 95443
Summary: cmpstrnqi patterns update string length
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95442
Bug ID: 95442
Summary: LRA inserts a reload insn for REG_DEAD register
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: mi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95441
Bug ID: 95441
Summary: Failure to reuse flag from float compare
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95418
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95373
--- Comment #10 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Master should be fixed now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95373
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dd38c765a04d06c775134a135f68b18c3b7c9c78
commit r11-743-gdd38c765a04d06c775134a135f68b18c3b7c9c78
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: Sat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95090
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bf5fbbbd8c9a3385c1083cc80683bdb0195b1ffc
commit r11-742-gbf5fbbbd8c9a3385c1083cc80683bdb0195b1ffc
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64794
--- Comment #2 from Atul Sharma ---
Is there any update on the issue
I am facing this issue on the newer version of gcc(10.1.) as well
Added the details of compilation failure as attachement
I have been facing issue for the following mention co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64794
Atul Sharma changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||atulsharma406 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95440
Bug ID: 95440
Summary: [coroutines] ICE with static members in promise_type
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95389
--- Comment #3 from Ulrich Teichert ---
BTW, I can reproduce the same strange reflect.Type.PkgPath issue on AMD64/Linux
with gccgo 10.1.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95379
--- Comment #14 from Luc Van Oostenryck ---
(In reply to Tom Tromey from comment #7)
> The feature was added specifically to mimic what sparse does.
> If sparse changes, I think changing gcc would be appropriate.
Sparse warnings issued when usin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95437
--- Comment #1 from Pedro Alves ---
> This "missing template parameters info" issue also prevents setting
> breakpoints > using the alias template with GCC-built binaries.
This GDB commit adds a testcase exercising this issue:
https://source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95438
--- Comment #1 from bouanto at zoho dot com ---
The opposite does not work as well:
libgccjit.so: error: gcc_jit_context_new_cast: cannot cast (long long)(unsigned
long long)*&binopResult from type: long long to type: unsigned char * *
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95439
Bug ID: 95439
Summary: Incorrect zero count check in cmpstrnsi
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95438
Bug ID: 95438
Summary: Cannot cast pointer to int
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: jit
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95437
Bug ID: 95437
Summary: DW_TAG_typedef for template alias missing template
type parameters
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95151
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
Initial attempt failed on
[hjl@gnu-cfl-2 pr95151]$ cat saved.c
#include
#include
#include
#include
unsigned char *buf1, *buf2;
int ret;
size_t page_size;
static void
do_one_test (char *dst, char *src, const
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92455
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95436
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-May/546851.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95436
Bug ID: 95436
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in store_expr, at expr.c:5845
since
r11-711-g43a4fc095e30188392cc42299c4081297e321104
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95436
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435
--- Comment #4 from Jan ---
Sorry bad wording on my site. I meant the code is getting slower with znver2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86-*-*
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435
--- Comment #2 from Jan ---
Created attachment 48643
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48643&action=edit
source code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435
Bug ID: 95435
Summary: bad builtin memcpy performance with znver1/znver2 and
32bit
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95435
--- Comment #1 from Jan ---
Created attachment 48642
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48642&action=edit
gcc -g -m32 -march=skylake -O1 -s testmem_modified.c -o tm32
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95241
Mateusz Tabaka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|VERIFIED
--- Comment #6 from Mateusz Ta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95348
--- Comment #16 from Martin Liška ---
> For our application, all processes generating profiling feedback data to a
> single directory seems is not a choice.
Why is it problem? You need to provide reasoning for that.
> We chose -fprofile-dir=%p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95429
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
43 matches
Mail list logo
