https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101383
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101383
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:018eac577730e1a8b0d589b4223c23fdaf030a5f
commit r11-8753-g018eac577730e1a8b0d589b4223c23fdaf030a5f
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101459
--- Comment #1 from ashimida ---
(In reply to ashimida from comment #0)
> As descripted in online doc [1], -falign-functions is enable at levels
> -O2/-O3.
> But from source code and test result, this options is worked for all options
> except
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101459
Bug ID: 101459
Summary: Mismatch in description of option "-falign-functions"
between source code and documentation
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101458
Bug ID: 101458
Summary: An invalid covaraint return type is accepted
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101383
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4f3b383cf8825197e714a4a21852eca071f8e67e
commit r12-2318-g4f3b383cf8825197e714a4a21852eca071f8e67e
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101457
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |tnfchris at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101095
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0b7a11874d4eb428c18a91f38786032ce0e77a96
commit r12-2313-g0b7a11874d4eb428c18a91f38786032ce0e77a96
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101447
--- Comment #3 from ashimida ---
Submitted at https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/575252.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101397
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101456
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Arjan van de Ven from comment #1)
> Actually it's not that they're zero (they are) but they're in "init" state
> since the vpxor wrote to xmm not ymm
We generate:
vxorpd %xmm0, %xmm0, %xmm0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101456
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 51153
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51153&action=edit
A patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101457
Bug ID: 101457
Summary: [12 regression] new test cases in r12-2300 fail
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101456
Arjan van de Ven changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arjan at linux dot intel.com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101456
Bug ID: 101456
Summary: Unnecessary vzeroupper when upper bits of YMM
registers already zero
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100299
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101223
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101223
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b977e6b29c67be81df882d1f5cc7eb6a5d8c98a0
commit r11-8751-gb977e6b29c67be81df882d1f5cc7eb6a5d8c98a0
Author: Andrew MacLeo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101014
--- Comment #21 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:85c22c517e9571d1f0f487fd708fbb01f36f172a
commit r11-8750-g85c22c517e9571d1f0f487fd708fbb01f36f172a
Author: Andrew MacLeo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101148
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:85c22c517e9571d1f0f487fd708fbb01f36f172a
commit r11-8750-g85c22c517e9571d1f0f487fd708fbb01f36f172a
Author: Andrew MacLeod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100781
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:263a7e20c88a35bdfaebfac3c9abb313c5867590
commit r11-8747-g263a7e20c88a35bdfaebfac3c9abb313c5867590
Author: Andrew MacLeod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100299
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:52f0aa4dee8401ef3958dbf789780b0ee877beab
commit r11-8746-g52f0aa4dee8401ef3958dbf789780b0ee877beab
Author: Andrew MacLeod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101129
--- Comment #8 from Bill Schmidt ---
Small change required to actually check that it's a SET insn. (oops)
Otherwise looks like it passed regstrap. Testing the revised patch now.
Thanks for the pre-review!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101129
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
That patch is pre-approved (if it works ;-) ) Bill. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101095
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101129
--- Comment #6 from Bill Schmidt ---
Testing this patch.
diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-p8swap.c
b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-p8swap.c
index 21cbcb2e28a..00693e6dc60 100644
--- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-p8swap.c
+++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88252
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bebd8e9da838c51a7f911985083d5a2b2498a23a
commit r12-2309-gbebd8e9da838c51a7f911985083d5a2b2498a23a
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82632
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101438
--- Comment #3 from Andrey Vihrov ---
Created attachment 51152
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51152&action=edit
Alternative testcase using __builtin_alloca()
Thanks.
This code is the result of minimization. It seems that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101453
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-14
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101153
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101437
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
--- Comment #6 from Andrew P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100081
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101438
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
This code is almost definitely invalid:
"m"(arr)
You are asigning the array/pointer that the VLA is.
This is very much related to PR 71572 for similar reasons.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100809
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101455
Bug ID: 101455
Summary: missing -Wstringop-overflow on buffer overflow by a
complex number
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100809
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Michael Meissner
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8ebcd3608584e544ae8e7c422b3f2400758c47f5
commit r11-8743-g8ebcd3608584e544ae8e7c422b3f2400758c47f5
Author: Michael Meis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101454
Bug ID: 101454
Summary: debug info for unreachable var forces another var to
be output
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
--- Comment #236 from The Written Word
---
(In reply to John Buddery from comment #235)
> Interesting - that's with a 32 bit gas?
$ file bin/gcc111/ia64-hp-hpux11.31/bin/as
bin/gcc111/ia64-hp-hpux11.31/bin/as:ELF-32 executable object file -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67288
--- Comment #23 from Segher Boessenkool ---
-m32 is required here. With -fno-unroll-loops -m32 you now get
flush_dcache_range:
rlwinm 3,3,0,0,27
addi 4,4,15
subf 4,3,4
srwi. 4,4,4
beqlr 0
mtctr 4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
--- Comment #235 from John Buddery ---
Interesting - that's with a 32 bit gas ?
It does look like you have got past the point in stage1 where ld was crashing.
It could be a change between 2.30 and 2.36 I guess, I might see if I can narrow
it dow
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
--- Comment #234 from The Written Word
---
(In reply to John Buddery from comment #233)
> One additional note - when building the patched binutils 2.36, it must be
> built as 64 bit executables.
>
> It seems that a 32 bit gas does not produce 6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101361
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|libstdc++ |c++
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101411
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101361
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a8ae5dbc60eedade3514e51e3cb35fd28ec1d4c8
commit r10-9982-ga8ae5dbc60eedade3514e51e3cb35fd28ec1d4c8
Author: Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101411
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a34c0973c994d750fb1231da7af96038417b7fe3
commit r10-9981-ga34c0973c994d750fb1231da7af96038417b7fe3
Author: Jonathan Wake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101371
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] |[9/10/11 Regression]
: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20210714 (experimental) [master revision
:8b95b2de5:a7098d6ef4e4e799dab8ef925c62b199d707694b] (GCC)
$ cat mutant.c
__attribute__((optimize(0x8080808080808080ull))) bak() {}
$ gcc-trunk mutant.c
*** buffer overflow detected ***: terminated
mutant.c:1:1: internal compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
--- Comment #233 from John Buddery ---
One additional note - when building the patched binutils 2.36, it must be built
as 64 bit executables.
It seems that a 32 bit gas does not produce 64 bit object files properly on
this platform, causing the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100949
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:269ca408e2839d7f3554a91515d73d4d95352f68
commit r12-2303-g269ca408e2839d7f3554a91515d73d4d95352f68
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101448
--- Comment #3 from Richard Earnshaw ---
What optimization level are you building with? The R_AARCH64_CALL26 relocation
has a branch range of +/-2^27 bytes, or 128MBytes, so that puts a limit on the
size of the code segment of a binary.
If you'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101446
--- Comment #8 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
I think this is a bug. Negative-size arrays are an unconditional error.
Zero-size arrays should be a pedwarn-if-pedantic, regardless of whether
the 0 is explicit or deduced from an initi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101361
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:96205c97294d5db94bd89cd731830058d9c49abd
commit r11-8741-g96205c97294d5db94bd89cd731830058d9c49abd
Author: Jonathan Wake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101411
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:df115674b39d4004252b7d5e41d9751f2b77b0d8
commit r11-8739-gdf115674b39d4004252b7d5e41d9751f2b77b0d8
Author: Jonathan Wake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101448
--- Comment #2 from Kevin Zhao ---
Hi Richard,
Thanks for your comments.
Since we have built this with some of the .so file with -fPIC, and
-mcmodel=large is incompatible with -fPIC, so rebuild with -mcmodel is hard to
achieve.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101452
Bug ID: 101452
Summary: [debug, dwarf-5] undefined static member removed by
-feliminate-unused-debug-symbols
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101451
Bug ID: 101451
Summary: Incorrect -Wstringop-truncation warning
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99728
--- Comment #19 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 51150
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51150&action=edit
patch
This is what I bootstrapped & tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. It causes
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Wparent
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93897
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu ---
Another testcase:
[hjl@gnu-cfl-1 tmp]$ cat x.c
extern int foo();
extern int bar();
typedef int (*func_t)(int);
struct test
{
func_t func1;
func_t func2;
};
void mainfunc (struct test *iface)
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101448
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64
Component|c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101450
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-14
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59314
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-14
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69494
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Note since 'dev' is an automatic variable which address doesn't escape there's
no way to observe the access thus GCC is correct in eliding it. We could
behave the same as we do for a volatile automatic vari
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101395
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cc11b924bfe7752edbba052ca71653f46a60887a
commit r12-2296-gcc11b924bfe7752edbba052ca71653f46a60887a
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Fri Jul 9 09
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101142
--- Comment #8 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #6)
> Not sure backport to GCC11, this patch only modifies the cost model of RA on
> the back end, no functional changes.
Backport to GCC11, along with r12-1800
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101185
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by hongtao Liu
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5bde7650caa84aa1dee979122834619a8cc748d4
commit r11-8738-g5bde7650caa84aa1dee979122834619a8cc748d4
Author: liuhongt
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101142
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by hongtao Liu
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c34da273aa1f3f2f5457c43dd815fd0ee8c3b627
commit r11-8737-gc34da273aa1f3f2f5457c43dd815fd0ee8c3b627
Author: liuhongt
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101450
Bug ID: 101450
Summary: GCC doesn't vectorize loop due to evolution of base is
not affine.
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101437
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99728
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener ---
OTOH we call is_really_empty_class which for not trivially empty classes ends
up
walking all non-FIELD_DECL fields as well:
for (field = TYPE_FIELDS (type); field; field = DECL_CHAIN (field))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101445
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101445
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1eee5fa556432fb6eab3a479c95609c5f3791ccb
commit r11-8736-g1eee5fa556432fb6eab3a479c95609c5f3791ccb
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101437
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
struct S { int : 1; };
void
bar (volatile struct S *p)
{
*p;
}
ICEs too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101437
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101449
Bug ID: 101449
Summary: [modules] internal compiler error: in
cxx_eval_call_expression
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101448
Bug ID: 101448
Summary: Use GCC 9.3.0 to build Ceph crimson-osd, linker failed
for "relocation truncated to fit" against symbol
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101437
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P4 |P1
Keywords|error-recovery,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101437
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-14
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101445
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a967a3efd39280fe3f5774e45490e991f8e99059
commit r12-2294-ga967a3efd39280fe3f5774e45490e991f8e99059
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101446
--- Comment #7 from İsmail Dönmez ---
Well, it's even more confusing, grepping through glibc build log:
../include/stdlib.h:297:8: warning: ISO C forbids zero-size array 'msg'
[-Wpedantic]
297 | char msg[0];
|^~~
../inet/netin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101443
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.5
Summary|internal compile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101443
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101447
--- Comment #2 from ashimida ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> Yes, they are declared and never defined.
>
> If you submit a patch to gcc-patches I imagine it will be approved easily.
Thanks,I will submit this patch later.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101446
--- Comment #6 from İsmail Dönmez ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> -Wpedantic was added as fix for PR44774 to make -Werror=pedantic work
> (as opposed to -Werror=edantic)
The problem is that it's inconsistent, here is a list o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101446
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-14
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101442
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Reduced:
bool destroyed = false;
struct A
{
A() {}
A(const A &) = delete;
A &operator=(const A &) = delete;
~A() {destroyed = true;}
};
struct B
{
const A &a;
struct string {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101442
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101446
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
-Wpedantic was added as fix for PR44774 to make -Werror=pedantic work
(as opposed to -Werror=edantic)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101446
--- Comment #3 from İsmail Dönmez ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> -Wpedantic is the same as -pedantic and that affects correctness of programs.
>
> @item -Wpedantic
> @itemx -pedantic
> @opindex pedantic
> @opindex Wpedantic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101446
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101442
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.6.4
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101447
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-14
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101446
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It's been that way since GCC 4.1 at least.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101447
Bug ID: 101447
Summary: Remove legacy external declarations in toplev.h
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101443
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101445
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Simplified testcase, fails at -O2 -ftree-loop-vectorize
int a[35] = {1, 1, 3};
void __attribute__((noipa))
foo ()
{
for (int b = 4; b >= 0; b--)
{
int tem = a[b * 5 + 3 + 1];
a[b * 5 + 3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
--- Comment #232 from John Buddery ---
The #undef MAKE_DECL_ONE_ONLY is only for older builds, it's not needed with
the gcc 11 patches.
It was an alternative single line fix which works for 4.7.2 and 4.9.4, which
you need to build if you're star
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101446
Bug ID: 101446
Summary: -Wpedantic causes an error with zero size array
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101407
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3be762c2ed79e36b9c8faaea2be04725c967a34e
commit r12-2293-g3be762c2ed79e36b9c8faaea2be04725c967a34e
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101384
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
E.g. p8, on gcc112.fsffrance.org, vanilla gcc configured with
../configure --enable-languages=all,obj-c++,lto,go,d
--enable-checking=yes,rtl,extra
with the https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July
100 matches
Mail list logo
