https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64119
Adam Warner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64120
Bug ID: 64120
Summary: [F03] Wrong handling of allocatable character string
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64120
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64121
Bug ID: 64121
Summary: [5 Regression] ICE: SSA corruption with -O
-fsanitize=undefined
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64121
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64122
Bug ID: 64122
Summary: ICE: tree check: expected tree that contains 'decl
common' structure, have 'ssa_name' in
prepare_gimple_addressable, at gimplify.c:3228 with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63469
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63932
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64120
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63867
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64123
Bug ID: 64123
Summary: [5 Regression] Instrumented Firefox segfaults on start
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63667
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64124
Bug ID: 64124
Summary: [F95] Valid constant expr rejected
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64124
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64116
hete2 at gmx dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.9.0, 4.9.1
--- Comment #1 from he
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61763
--- Comment #9 from Douglas Mencken ---
>How do you actually compile with -O3?
../../flags_O2_to_O3.sh
sed -i '/ CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET=/{n;N;N;N;N;N;N;N;d}' ./configure.ac
sed -i '/ CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET=/{n;N;N;N;N;N;N;N;d}' ./configure.ac
sed -i 's/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64124
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I see the error from 4.4.7 up to trunk (5.0 r218188). The error goes away if I
replace
character(len=kind(1)) x
with
character(len=kind(1)), parameter :: x='abcd'
and gfortran compiles the fol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54483
Juisoo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||usack at math dot fu-berlin.de
--- Comment #6 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54483
--- Comment #7 from Juisoo ---
Created attachment 34148
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34148&action=edit
second test case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54483
--- Comment #8 from Juisoo ---
The described case seems to work in GCC 4.9.2 with the attached files and
g++ -c -fpic testicle.cc -std=c++11
g++ -shared -o libtesticle.so testicle.o
g++ -L/home/usack/entwicklung/tetris -Wall -o testicles main.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #85 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Created attachment 34135
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34135&action=edit
patch to add -mlra option
I'd like to apply the patch to add a transitional option -mlra
like ARM and the re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #87 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #86)
> (In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #85)
> > Created attachment 34135 [details]
> > patch to add -mlra option
> >
> > I'd like to apply the patch to add a transi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64111
--- Comment #15 from Thiago Macieira ---
Created attachment 34149
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34149&action=edit
Reduced testcase to minimum
This is the same testcase, now reduced to the minimum possible by creduce.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64120
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=64120
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Of course you'll get errors with 4.5.4 and 4.4.7. Support
> for deferred parameter type was added in 4.6.
If I am not mistaken, the problem with this PR is allocatable scalars and not
deferred para
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64111
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #16 from H.J. Lu ---
The smal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64125
Bug ID: 64125
Summary: Allocation of character strings
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63230
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fmartinez at gmv dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64125
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64126
Bug ID: 64126
Summary: [5.0 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/pr37289.c scan-tree-dump
original "-\\(long unsigned int\\) x"
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64126
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|hppa-unknown-linux-gnu |
Host|hppa-unknown-linux-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64127
Bug ID: 64127
Summary: [5.0 regression] ICE on invalid: tree check: expected
identifier_node, have template_id_expr in
cp_parser_diagnose_invalid_type_name, at
cp/p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64126
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64128
Bug ID: 64128
Summary: Let vector take advantage of malloc_usable_size for
malloc-using allocators
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64119
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64129
Bug ID: 64129
Summary: [5.0 regression] ICE on invalid: in grokfndecl, at
cp/decl.c:7658
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64130
Bug ID: 64130
Summary: vrp: handle non zero constant divided by range cannot
be zero.
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64068
--- Comment #2 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko ---
another testcase
$ /usr/local/gcc_current/bin/g++ -fpreprocessed -c -O2 x.ii
x.ii:46:19: internal compiler error: in remove_unreachable_nodes, at ipa.c:546
void fn4() { B(); }
^
0xb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64130
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
Uh? 100/1000==0, I don't understand your point.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64130
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
So this should be optimized to a > 100 instead.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64130
--- Comment #3 from Andi Kleen ---
You're right. I actually meant
x >= maxval(typeof(a)), x / a cannot be 0.
Corrected test case (assuming 64bit target):
#include
int fsigned(int a)
{
return 0x1fffL / a == 0;
}
int funsigned(u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60467
ak at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64119
Adam Warner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #5 from Adam Warner ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64131
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64131
Bug ID: 64131
Summary: libsanitizer fails to build for AARCH64 with the glibc
from the trunk
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64131
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I suspect the following glibc change introduced the bug into sanitizer:
commit 5c40c3bab2fddaca8cfe12d75944d1fef8adf1a4
Author: Alan Hayward
Date: Tue Nov 11 16:32:34 2014 +
[AArch64] Add ipc.h.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64128
--- Comment #1 from Eelis ---
Hmm, std::allocator::allocate calls ::operator new, which may be user-defined,
so maybe there is no practical way to detect whether it is really using malloc.
:(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #88 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
For the record, here is the sh-lra revisions.
218191: Merge from trunk revision 218173.
218192: Add legitimize_address_displacement target macto.
218193: Split QI/HImode displacement addressing load/store
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64132
Bug ID: 64132
Summary: [5.0 Regression] FAIL:
22_locale/numpunct/members/char/3.cc execution test
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64133
Bug ID: 64133
Summary: m68k-rtems-gcc generates invalid code.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64133
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64133
--- Comment #2 from Chris Johns ---
Thanks for the quick response. The clean trap instruction did confuse me.
I suppose my work around to move the code into another file stops gcc detecting
the access. Is this true ?
I am happy to build our cod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64133
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Chris Johns from comment #2)
> Thanks for the quick response. The clean trap instruction did confuse me.
>
> I suppose my work around to move the code into another file stops gcc
> detecting the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16107
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55180
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55180
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32685
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 32685, which changed state.
Bug 32685 Summary: Missed changing of sin into sinf (likewise for cos to cosf)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32685
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 32684, which changed state.
Bug 32684 Summary: Missed tail call with sin/cos and sincos pass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32684
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32684
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13876
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 13876, which changed state.
Bug 13876 Summary: loop not fully optimized
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13876
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64134
Bug ID: 64134
Summary: (vector float){0, 0, b, a} Uses stores when it does
need to
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64134
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
#define vector __attribute__((vector_size(16)))
float a; float b; float c; float d;
vector float fb(void) { return (vector float){ d,c,b,a};}
Is just as bad. We need to ins more in the aarch64 back-end.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19049
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
We now get (at least on aarch64):
t.f90:11:0: note: === vect_pattern_recog ===
t.f90:11:0: note: === vect_analyze_data_ref_accesses ===
t.f90:11:0: note: Detected single element interleaving *a_23(D)[_22] st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63738
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63986
--- Comment #12 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Mon Dec 1 06:50:06 2014
New Revision: 218200
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218200&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/63986
PR target/51244
* config/sh/sh.c (sh_unsp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51244
--- Comment #80 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Mon Dec 1 06:50:06 2014
New Revision: 218200
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218200&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/63986
PR target/51244
* config/sh/sh.c (sh_unsp
68 matches
Mail list logo
