https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89091
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89091
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Aug 30 12:08:04 2019
New Revision: 275117
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275117&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2019-02-20 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89091
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.3.1
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89091
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Apr 30 20:29:44 2019
New Revision: 270713
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270713&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2019-02-20 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89091
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> Well, for the decode_field_reference, I think it is essential not to change
> *exp_ if returning NULL, because the caller uses lr_arg/rr_arg without
> checking w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89091
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fixed for 9+ so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89091
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Feb 20 23:01:41 2019
New Revision: 269056
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269056&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/89091
* fold-const.c (decode_field_reference
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89091
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Comment on attachment 45774
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45774
Patch
Well, for the decode_field_reference, I think it is essential not to change
*exp_ if returning NULL, because the c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89091
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 45774
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45774&action=edit
Patch
I came up with this patch; it survives bootstrap®rtesting, but am not sure
if it's correct.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89091
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|dmalcolm at gcc d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89091
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89091
--- Comment #4 from Arseny Solokha ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #3)
> for gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr89037.c, valgrind says:
That's where I've minimized my testcase from.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89091
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman ---
for gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr89037.c, valgrind says:
./gcc.dg/pr89037.c:9:9: warning: missing braces around initializer
[-Wmissing-braces]
9 | T a[] = { 1, 1, 0x12345, 0xff01, 1ULL << 63, (__int1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89091
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Any update on this David?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89091
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89091
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
16 matches
Mail list logo