https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96015
--- Comment #16 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
If I looks at bad-bug.c.190t.dse3 I see 'self' and 'other' refer to the same
.MEM_10 memory location in 'basic block 5'. I think it should not, 'basic block
4' jumps into bb5 only when self != other. Do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92002
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #14 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95940
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96018
--- Comment #6 from martin.schlipf at damnthespam dot com ---
Sorry, if that has not been clear enough. I already know how to work around
this issue. You can simply check the error flag [if (ierr /= 0) return].
What I do not understand is why gfo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95584
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8f8ea4a47f3ab0b44b2bbf1c77db6111325d4841
commit r11-1777-g8f8ea4a47f3ab0b44b2bbf1c77db6111325d4841
Author: Mark Eggleston
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96025
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96024
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95706
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96023
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96022
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95109
--- Comment #6 from G. Steinmetz ---
And reducing especially the directives :
$ cat z1.f90
program p
!$omp target data map(tofrom:n,r)
!$omp target teams reduction(+:r)
!$omp distribute parallel do simd collapse(2)
do i = 1, 10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95940
--- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #6)
> > From the look of it, something is already miscompiled.
>
> No, not at all, it's just warnings turned into errors.
Not obvious, but I see from the comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96017
--- Comment #9 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #8)
> At first, I thought that split_live_ranges_for_shrink_wrap() split this
> nicely, but what I found is that IRA assigned a volatile register to a
> pseudo that is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96017
--- Comment #8 from Peter Bergner ---
Interesting, if I rewrite the test case so that foo is a parameter and not a
global var, then we get the code we want:
extern void slowpath(int *);
int
test (int *val, int foo)
{
int ret = foo;
if (__b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96017
--- Comment #7 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #6)
> There is ira.c:split_live_ranges_for_shrink_wrap(). I'll have a look to see
> why it's not catching this test case.
So it looks like it only splits pseudos tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96017
--- Comment #6 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #5)
> But it is r31 already before
> shrink-wrapping -- we need some renaming / copying of registers (like
> in Peter's code) to get rid of it. In an example like
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96017
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-07-01
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95952
--- Comment #9 from Mikael Pettersson ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #7)
> I've tried many 32-bit builds, but cannot reproduce the error. I tried with
> top of the releases/gcc-8 branch, using releases/gcc-8 branch at commit
> 09f22
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95282
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95282
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:161fb9dfc886afb70dcfb45a51571df5e3fce9eb
commit r10-8410-g161fb9dfc886afb70dcfb45a51571df5e3fce9eb
Author: Jonathan Wakel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95952
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94627
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e4490e7771e4df28427cca5e113afe58a7fff8d5
commit r9-8713-ge4490e7771e4df28427cca5e113afe58a7fff8d5
Author: Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94627
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94627
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4c994586cbd40a33f223aaaf90887afe97208543
commit r10-8409-g4c994586cbd40a33f223aaaf90887afe97208543
Author: Jonathan Wakel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52279
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96024
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96024
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96025
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96025
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94882
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94882
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:553c6572061f6f9ef92514e8f13de95d509ad614
commit r11-1771-g553c6572061f6f9ef92514e8f13de95d509ad614
Author: Jeff Law
Date: Wed Jul 1 14
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96014
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94627
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a1a0dc4548979f8a340a7ea71624a52a20e1e0b3
commit r11-1770-ga1a0dc4548979f8a340a7ea71624a52a20e1e0b3
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95921
--- Comment #4 from Rich Felker ---
The related issue I meant to link to is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93681 which is for x87, but the
equivalent happens on m68k due to FLT_EVAL_METHOD being 2 here as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52622
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #15 from Dominiqu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96025
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52622
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96024
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-07-01
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95880
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71706
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0c6cec5ce99a7f532d66373e0ba340c94ef688a6
commit r9-8712-g0c6cec5ce99a7f532d66373e0ba340c94ef688a6
Author: Harald Anlauf
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95880
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f60918f960594ab6aa6d3082d342385210e8ac90
commit r9-8711-gf60918f960594ab6aa6d3082d342385210e8ac90
Author: Harald Anlauf
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96025
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #1 from G
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96025
Bug ID: 96025
Summary: [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in expr_check_typed_help, at
fortran/expr.c:5437
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96018
--- Comment #5 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to martin.schlipf from comment #4)
> Finally, I reproduced it with gfortran 9.3.0 + hdf 1.12.0 and gfortran 10.0
> + hdf 1.10.4. With older versions of gfortran 7.3.0 it does not appear.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96024
Bug ID: 96024
Summary: [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in mio_name_expr_t, at
fortran/module.c:2159
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95613
--- Comment #3 from G. Steinmetz ---
And for the sake of completeness, with another incarnation of goto :
$ cat zz2.f90 # etc.
program p
select case (0)
2 end select
stop
call s(*2)
end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96014
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:039a630d787dc18c76b81f08a322ba1e0d91082d
commit r11-1769-g039a630d787dc18c76b81f08a322ba1e0d91082d
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96015
--- Comment #15 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Created attachment 48822
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48822&action=edit
bad-bug.c.190t.dse3
bad-bug.c.190t.dse3 previous tree phase for comparison.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96021
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95109
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Reduced testcase:
! { dg-do compile }
module target1
contains
subroutine foo (n, o, p, q, r, pp)
integer :: n, o, p, q, r, s, i, j
integer :: a (2:o)
integer, pointer :: pp
!$omp targ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96015
--- Comment #14 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Created attachment 48821
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48821&action=edit
bad-bug.c.191t.cddce3
bad-bug.c.191t.cddce3 is the full file generated by -fdump-tree-all-all.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96023
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96023
Bug ID: 96023
Summary: Line number for error message differs for x86-64 vs
all other architectures
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96015
--- Comment #13 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Hmm, there's a control dependency though in bb13:
[local count: 242478389]:
# result_21 = PHI <1(5), sign_17(6)>
switch (op_14(D)) [33.33%], case 0: [16.67%], case 1:
[50.00%], case 3: [50.00%],
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91807
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|redi at gcc dot gnu.org|ville.voutilainen at
gmail do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77595
--- Comment #4 from Olivier Kannengieser ---
The bug is still there in GCC 10.1, and was the cause of a question of
stackoverflow:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/62659801/constrained-member-functions-and-explicit-template-instantiation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96022
Bug ID: 96022
Summary: ICE during GIMPLE pass: slp in operator[], at
vec.h:867
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95984
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96015
--- Comment #12 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
The block in question goes away because it serves no purpose:
[local count: 242478389]:
_13 = *self_11(D);
_16 = *other_12(D);
sign_17 = _13 - _16;
if (sign_17 == 0)
goto ; [34.00%]
else
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96021
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|11.0|8.4.1
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96021
Bug ID: 96021
Summary: missing -Wnonnull passing nullptr to a nonnull
variadic lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52279
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0a7183f6d173cbd69025a3deb30d16f91e6392b2
commit r11-1764-g0a7183f6d173cbd69025a3deb30d16f91e6392b2
Author: Mark Eggleston
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96015
--- Comment #11 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Looking at -fdump-tree-all:
$gcc/xgcc -B$gcc -lm -Wsign-compare -Wall -fno-PIE -no-pie
-fno-stack-protector -O2 -S bug_test.c -o bad-bug.S -fdump-tree-all
I see that stores are eliminated at 'bad-b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93711
--- Comment #7 from Boris Staletic ---
I don't know if this is the same problem, since the actual
`std::istream_iterator` isn't empty, unlike in the other test cases. If
the following is a different problem, sorry up front for the noise.
https:/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96016
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96015
--- Comment #10 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Created attachment 48820
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48820&action=edit
good-bug.S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96015
--- Comment #9 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #7)
> There's ASM diff in between GCC 9 and 10 version:
>
> diff -u good.s bad.s
> --- good.s2020-07-01 15:04:58.315839436 +0200
> +++ bad.s 202
0-07-01 15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95999
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96014
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|msebor at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95189
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jerryfromearth at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96007
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |middle-end
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95446
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:685d8dafb4a1cb29ee219ad7857614ff66a78022
commit r11-1761-g685d8dafb4a1cb29ee219ad7857614ff66a78022
Author: Mark Eggleston
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86568
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8461191b826654a30eaaa57257bcca8e548f11c2
commit r11-1760-g8461191b826654a30eaaa57257bcca8e548f11c2
Author: Martin Sebor
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96020
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 48819
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48819&action=edit
the verifier
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96020
Bug ID: 96020
Summary: FRE uses not available def across EH edges
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96019
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
> So AFAIU
>
> int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
> uint8_t raw[] = { 0xaa, 0xbb, 0xcc, 0xdd, 0x11, 0x22 };
> SS instance;
> memcpy (&instance, raw, sizeof (SS));
> printf("%x, %x\n", instanc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96017
--- Comment #4 from Peter Bergner ---
To be pedantic, "val" is assigned r3, the incoming arg reg. The compiler
temporary that holds "*val" is assigned r9 which is a volatile register. The
only non-volatile in use is r31 which was assigned to ho
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96019
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
So AFAIU
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
uint8_t raw[] = { 0xaa, 0xbb, 0xcc, 0xdd, 0x11, 0x22 };
SS instance;
memcpy (&instance, raw, sizeof (SS));
printf("%x, %x\n", instance.a, instance
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95989
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I have a fix for std::this_thread::get_id() but we also need the same fix in
and I'd rather refactor that first to only need to fix it in one
place.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96019
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95989
Florian Weimer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95992
--- Comment #2 from Takatoshi Kondo ---
Thank you.
I understood that I should use appropriate types.
I also understood why libc++ and libstdc++ behavior are different.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96015
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
And first change happens in pr96015.c.299r.bbro which is likely a reason why a
jump table is partially copied.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96015
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
There's ASM diff in between GCC 9 and 10 version:
diff -u good.s bad.s
--- good.s 2020-07-01 15:04:58.315839436 +0200
+++ bad.s 2020-07-01 15:04:30.684040487 +0200
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@
.L15:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95829
markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95829
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-8 branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:88b44ed719378a52e001a474bcf963ea4c4841b1
commit r8-10337-g88b44ed719378a52e001a474bcf963ea4c4841b1
Author: Mark Eggleston
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96018
--- Comment #4 from martin.schlipf at damnthespam dot com ---
Hdf5 doesn't have native support for complex datatypes, so we convert to real
and write that it is a complex as an attribute. If you replace the conversion
logic by an array instead of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96019
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96019
Bug ID: 96019
Summary: Optimization forgets non-default scalar_storage_order
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94743
--- Comment #24 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Christophe Lyon :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aa8b5ca0b540fde5890f3114f2d7076d5238fc2e
commit r11-1759-gaa8b5ca0b540fde5890f3114f2d7076d5238fc2e
Author: Christophe Lyon
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96018
--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
You are not using HDF5's "native" Fortran interface directly, but a
clumsy way with c_f_pointer to obscure your code. Any reason for that?
Have you considered using RESHAPE for what you seem to t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95829
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a833478ca9898fe287ad423e5af8462938886758
commit r9-8710-ga833478ca9898fe287ad423e5af8462938886758
Author: Mark Eggleston
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96018
--- Comment #2 from martin.schlipf at damnthespam dot com ---
Well hdf5 is not developed by me, its a huge library. You can install it
manually if you want (https://www.hdfgroup.org/solutions/hdf5/), but it is
available on Ubuntu as mentioned
sud
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96018
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96018
Bug ID: 96018
Summary: Optimization issue with external HDF5 library
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 95839, which changed state.
Bug 95839 Summary: Failure to optimize addition of vector elements to vector
addition
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95839
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95839
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95839
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7b3adfa7bb47e4ebde91634caa5a7e13175558f1
commit r11-1757-g7b3adfa7bb47e4ebde91634caa5a7e13175558f1
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
Eric Botcazou writes:
>> It's fine to file these ice-on-invalid bugs, but don't be surprised if
>> nobody has time to work on bugs that are only triggered by unrealistic
>> garbage input.
>
> Right, an ICE is a perfectly valid outcome for garbage input and there are
> hundreds of assertions in th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96010
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
You're doing well, but as said, we have quite some GCOV issues that are quite
similar to this one. And it seems quite low priority to me for now.
You can inspire about what bugs we have here:
https://gcc.gnu.
1 - 100 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
