https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61659
--- Comment #29 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #28)
> (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #27)
> > Possible fix:
>
> Applied to trunk, thanks.
The fix isn't in trunk yet. Forgot to push?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63148
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63148
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63156
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #5 from Steven Bossche
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63148
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
The input to the vectorizer is already bogus:
_12 = i.0_5 + 536870911;
_13 = global_data.b[_12];
the issue seems to be that 'sizetype' is used to index the array:
*(double * const) &global_data.a[(s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559
--- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> Seems to me we want
>
> (bit_xor (bswap32 @0) (bswap32 @1)) -> (bswap32 (bit_xor @0 @1))
>
> in match-and-simplify speak.
Please note that there are some mor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559
>
> --- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63157
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61943
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61905
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61907
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61908
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61910
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61942
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
I can't reproduce this one.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61944
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62058
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61900
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63153
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559
--- Comment #11 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> Aren't these optimizations actually a pessimization for -mmovbe if the inner
> bswap is on a read from memory? Assuming the load and bswap instruction is
> cheap,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559
--- Comment #12 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #11)
> This one should be:
>
> (simplify
> (bswap (bitop (bswap @0) (bswap @1)))
> (bitop @0 @1))
Oh, we already have this. Please disregard this messag
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559
--- Comment #13 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> (for bitop in bit_xor bit_ior bit_and
> (for bswap in BUILT_IN_BSWAP16 BUILT_IN_BSWAP32 BUILT_IN_BSWAP64
> (simplify
> (bitop (bswap @0) (bswap @1))
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559
--- Comment #14 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559
>
> --- Comment #12 from Uroš Bizjak ---
> (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #11)
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63164
Bug ID: 63164
Summary: unnecessary calls to __dynamic_cast
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #14)
> On Thu, 4 Sep 2014, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61559
> >
> > --- Comment #12 from Uroš Bizjak ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61875
--- Comment #6 from Marat Zakirov ---
Created attachment 33446
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33446&action=edit
Proposed patch
According to https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg00061.html I think
this bug should be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60655
--- Comment #18 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Thu Sep 4 12:18:25 2014
New Revision: 214899
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214899&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/60655
* dwarf2out.c (mem_loc_descriptor ): Return NULL if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61659
--- Comment #30 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Sep 4 12:37:05 2014
New Revision: 214900
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214900&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/61659
* decl.c (duplicate_decls): Check DECL_DECLARED_INLI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61659
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jason at redhat dot com|
--- Comment #31 from Jason Merri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63165
Bug ID: 63165
Summary: [5 Regression] r214816 breaks Java build and
435.gromacs
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63165
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63165
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64le-unknown-linux-g |powerpc64*-unknown-linux-gn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63166
Bug ID: 63166
Summary: [5 Regression] ICE (LTO):
ipa_intraprocedural_devirtualization, at
ipa-prop.c:2611
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63166
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
Created attachment 33448
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33448&action=edit
Test file "two.ii"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63168
Bug ID: 63168
Summary: not vectorized: latch block not empty
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63168
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63166
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63169
Bug ID: 63169
Summary: ivopts rewrite_uses pessimizes debug info
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63169
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
IVOPTs depends on CSE to remove the effect of building its (sometimes gigantic)
GENERIC expressions figuring out IVs and inserting them multiple times.
Not sure if we even try to optimize the IV chosen to r
s
./gccgo --version
gccgo (GCC) 5.0.0 20140904 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2014 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
This error occurs during make check t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63171
Bug ID: 63171
Summary: Segfault in rs6000.c:rs6000_emit_move for multiple tls
tests starting with r214658
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61106
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.8/4.9/5 Regression] |[4.8/4.9] impliedness of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63165
--- Comment #2 from Pat Haugen ---
Created attachment 33449
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33449&action=edit
reduced testcase
Reduced testcase from 435.gromacs build failure.
[pthaugen@igoo delta]$ ~/install/gcc/trunk/bin/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63172
Bug ID: 63172
Summary: gccgo testcase cplx2.go execution provides incorrect
answers on trunk for powerpc64, powerpc64le
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63157
--- Comment #2 from haynberg at sig dot com ---
I recently read your old PR about placement new -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29286.
Is using placement new also a means to prevent strict-aliasing optimizations
here? I don’t thin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63170
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Probably dup of PR60406.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63156
--- Comment #6 from Carrot ---
(In reply to Steven Bosscher from comment #5)
> (In reply to Carrot from comment #4)
> > For a AUTOINC rtl expression, we create two refs, one def and one use, but
> > only the def gets the flag DF_REF_READ_WRITE, t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63170
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60406
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||boger at us dot ibm.com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63173
Bug ID: 63173
Summary: performance problem with simd intrinsics vld2_dup_* on
aarch64-none-elf
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62040
--- Comment #8 from carrot at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: carrot
Date: Thu Sep 4 16:06:13 2014
New Revision: 214905
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214905&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/62040
* config/aarch64/iterators.md (VQ_NO2E
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62662
--- Comment #6 from Andreas Krebbel ---
Created attachment 33450
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33450&action=edit
Experimental patch
I'm currently bootstrapping this patch with various combinations. It will take
some time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63173
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63174
Bug ID: 63174
Summary: ~!~F|BA:> watch USA vs UKRAINE Live Streaming Online
Fr33
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63175
Bug ID: 63175
Summary: [4.9/5 regression] FAIL:
gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-bb-slp-9a.c
scan-tree-dump-times slp2" basic block vectorized
using SLP" 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63176
Bug ID: 63176
Summary: std::generate_canonical::digits> generates 1.0
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63177
Bug ID: 63177
Summary: Power/Linux no-vfa-vect-depend-2.c and
no-vfa-vect-depend-3.c failures
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62040
--- Comment #9 from carrot at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: carrot
Date: Thu Sep 4 17:34:12 2014
New Revision: 214913
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214913&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/62040
* config/aarch64/iterators.md (VQ_NO2E
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62306
--- Comment #10 from Rafael Avila de Espindola ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> (In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #8)
> > I think I'm sympathetic to Rafael's argument that we should stick with the
> > 4.7 behavior since tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63178
Bug ID: 63178
Summary: Missed "incorrect-type-passed-to-function warning"
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63177
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc-linux-gnu |powerpc*-*-*
Status|U
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63178
--- Comment #1 from Dima Kogan ---
Created attachment 33451
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33451&action=edit
The source to show the issue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63178
--- Comment #2 from Dima Kogan ---
Created attachment 33452
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33452&action=edit
and the header
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63178
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63177
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63179
Bug ID: 63179
Summary: Does not work virtuality
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63171
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63178
--- Comment #4 from Dima Kogan ---
Hi. Thank you for looking at this. I'm not set up to make bleeding-edge gcc
builds, so let me wait until Debian catches up, and I'll report back. Currently
they're on r214759 (not what the bug report mentions, b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63180
Bug ID: 63180
Summary: Inconsistent replacement of printf by puts
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62208
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63180
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63179
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I don't think this is valid, the standard says it is OK to access the stored
value of the Child object through a union that has a Child member, or to access
it through Base, but not through a union that has
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
--- Comment #6 from R Copley ---
As I mentioned in the description, this request was indeed related to that bug.
The test-case no longer crashes with recent MinGW-W64 toolchains (GCC 4.9.1).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63165
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Thu Sep 4 22:53:01 2014
New Revision: 214924
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214924&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-09-04 Segher Boessenkool
PR target/63165
* config/r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63165
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63181
Bug ID: 63181
Summary: GCC should warn about "obvious" bugs in binding a
reference to temporary
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46219
Adam Warner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Version|4.6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63148
--- Comment #6 from Doug Gilmore ---
> The input to the vectorizer is already bogus:
>
> _12 = i.0_5 + 536870911;
> _13 = global_data.b[_12];
Note that gimple out generated by the front end
is already problematic:
Before r187042:
D.1747 =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54412
--- Comment #7 from Roland Schulz ---
For me the problem isn't fixed with gcc 4.9.1. I tried two build a)
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw-w64/files/Toolchains%20targetting%20Win32/Personal%20Builds/mingw-builds/installer/mingw-w64-install.e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61659
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63182
Bug ID: 63182
Summary: [5.0 Regression] libgcov-interface.c:136:33: error:
alias definitions not supported
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55701
--- Comment #6 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Fri Sep 5 03:45:57 2014
New Revision: 214937
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214937&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/55701
* config/arm/arm.md (setmem): New patte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63179
--- Comment #2 from Pavel ---
Sorry.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59335
--- Comment #29 from jye2 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jye2
Date: Fri Sep 5 06:52:17 2014
New Revision: 214938
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214938&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-09-05 Joey Ye
PR plugin/59335
* Makefile.in (PLU
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59335
Joey Ye changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
87 matches
Mail list logo
