https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67211
Bug ID: 67211
Summary: [5 Regression] ICE (insn does not satisfy its
constraints) on powerpc64le-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
I cannot reproduce this with:
gcc version 5.2.1 20150814 (GCC)
Please post the full output of -v invocation.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44348
--- Comment #9 from Vittorio Zecca ---
No, it is not valid, but gfortran should signal this with an error message.
Not with a crash.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62296
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67211
--- Comment #2 from Matthias Klose ---
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++
Target: powerpc64le-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Ubuntu 5.2.1-15ubuntu1'
--with-bugurl=file:///usr/share/doc/gcc-5/README.Bugs
--ena
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67212
Bug ID: 67212
Summary: Infinite recurtion in std::regex_match
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67002
--- Comment #27 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #26)
> Please open a new PR if there is another boostrapping issue.
I'm afraid that might actually be the case even though I'm not sure whether
it's a bug in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67211
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54572
--- Comment #16 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Patch proposed: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-08/msg00762.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67133
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67206
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
The memmove issue is because of
(compute_affine_dependence
stmt_a: _16 = *_15;
stmt_b: *_12 = _16;
) -> dependence analysis failed
/* Now check that if there is a dependence this dependence is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67133
--- Comment #17 from Marek Polacek ---
If maybe_remove_unused_call_args is only supposed to work when we redirect to
__builtin_unreachable or __cxa_pure_virtual, maybe we should remove all
attributes except noreturn/nothrow?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67213
Bug ID: 67213
Summary: When compiling for size with -Os loops can get bigger
after peeling
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67213
--- Comment #1 from Fredrik Hederstierna
---
Created attachment 36185
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36185&action=edit
Example files
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67002
--- Comment #28 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #27)
> What happens is that g++ seems to get stuck in stage3 when compiling
> src/gcc/c-family/c-common.c. After a while, the build daemon will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67213
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Btw, you can look at -fdump-tree-cunroll-details dump for why GCC thinks the
loop will get smaller in all cases.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67133
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67211
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67211
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
The question is if -mtune=power8 -mcpu=power7 if valid for powerpc64le.
I think the minimal CPU supported for little-endian is POWER8.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67213
--- Comment #3 from Fredrik Hederstierna
---
Created attachment 36186
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36186&action=edit
Dump from tree-ssa-loop-ivcanon.c
In the function iter_6 it seems like it will keep cost 5 when unrolli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67214
Bug ID: 67214
Summary: undefined behaviour in std::num_get::_M_extract_int()
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67198
--- Comment #6 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
I am working with our Docker team to provide a source change that will compile
with old and new gccgo.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67133
--- Comment #19 from Marek Polacek ---
I'm testing
--- a/gcc/gimple.c
+++ b/gcc/gimple.c
@@ -2949,6 +2949,8 @@ maybe_remove_unused_call_args (struct function *fn,
gimple stmt)
&& TREE_VALUE (TYPE_ARG_TYPES (TREE_TYPE (decl))) == void_type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67215
Bug ID: 67215
Summary: -fno-plt needs improvements for x86
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67133
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67216
Bug ID: 67216
Summary: false is still a null pointer constant
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67215
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67211
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67215
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Senkevich ---
-bash-4.2$ cat test.c
extern int proc2(int);
int proc( void)
{
int i = proc2( 3);
return i;
}
gcc test.c -S -pie -fpie -o test.1.S
gcc test.c -S -pie -fpie -fno-plt -o test.2.S
-bash-4.2$ cat test.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67215
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Andrew Senkevich from comment #2)
> -bash-4.2$ cat test.c
> extern int proc2(int);
>
> int proc( void)
> {
> int i = proc2( 3);
>
> return i;
> }
>
> gcc test.c -S -pie -fpie -o test.1.S
> gcc t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67216
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67133
--- Comment #21 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #20)
> The problem is that when inlining transformation sets fndecl of the
> call statement, it does not set the fntype (of the statement). Then
> infer_nonnull_range
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61441
--- Comment #6 from Sujoy ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #5)
> With -fno-signaling-nans we don't really care about the result value.
I am not sure about this. -fno-signaling-nans is default and the original issue
mentions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67133
--- Comment #22 from Marek Polacek ---
If infer_nonnull_range_by_attribute can't rely on gimple_call_fntype then we
indeed need to add a check there.
So like this?
--- a/gcc/gimple.c
+++ b/gcc/gimple.c
@@ -2694,10 +2694,13 @@ infer_nonnull_range
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67211
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67217
Bug ID: 67217
Summary: [concepts] Constraints are ignored when specializing
union templates
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67133
--- Comment #23 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #21)
> OTOH users like infer_nonnull_range_by_attribute cannot rely on
> gimple_call_fntype being "compatible" with the actual call (like in
> terms of number o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67133
--- Comment #24 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #23)
> And what would happen if the nonnull attribute refers to a different
> argument that still satisfies the check? For example, fntype may have more
> argum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48664
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67143
--- Comment #3 from mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mwahab
Date: Fri Aug 14 15:05:42 2015
New Revision: 226895
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226895&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
2015-08-14 Matthew Wahab
PR target/67143
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37845
Vincent Lefèvre changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67218
Bug ID: 67218
Summary: Combine incorrectly folds (double) (float) (unsigned)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67218
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67215
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Senkevich ---
-bash-4.2$ cat test.c
extern char* mem(int);
char* arr[32];
void proc(void)
{
int i;
for (i=0;i<32;i++)
arr[i] = mem(128);
}
gcc -pie -fpie -fno-plt -O2 -S test.c -o test_32.S -m32
gcc -pie -fp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67215
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67219
Bug ID: 67219
Summary: [6 Regression] Incorrect conversion warning
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61441
--- Comment #7 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015, ssaraswati at gmail dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #6 from Sujoy ---
> (In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #5)
>
> > With -fno-signaling-nans we don't real
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67133
--- Comment #25 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri Aug 14 16:29:38 2015
New Revision: 226896
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226896&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/67133
* gimple.c (infer_nonnull_range_by
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66857
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Aug 14 16:33:10 2015
New Revision: 226897
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226897&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/66857
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR c++/66857
* cvt.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66857
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67219
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
Tim Shen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||morandidodo at gmail dot com
--- Comment #15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66456
Tim Shen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67212
Tim Shen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
Tim Shen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||antialize at gmail dot com
--- Comment #16 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67212
--- Comment #2 from Tim Shen ---
This isn't an "infinite" recursion, but just a deep one. I haven't implement
heap allocation and manual recursion yet. In the mean time, you may compile
your code with -O2 (tail recursion elimination may help), se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67220
Bug ID: 67220
Summary: GCC fails to properly handle libcall symbol visibility
of built functions
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67221
Bug ID: 67221
Summary: ICE at -Os and above on x86_64-linux-gnu: Segmentation
fault (program cc1)
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67221
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67221
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67034
--- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Fri Aug 14 18:51:50 2015
New Revision: 226901
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226901&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR64164] Drop copyrename, use coalescible partition as base when optim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67000
--- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Fri Aug 14 18:51:50 2015
New Revision: 226901
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226901&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR64164] Drop copyrename, use coalescible partition as base when optim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66983
--- Comment #2 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Fri Aug 14 18:51:50 2015
New Revision: 226901
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226901&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR64164] Drop copyrename, use coalescible partition as base when optim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64164
--- Comment #50 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Fri Aug 14 18:51:50 2015
New Revision: 226901
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226901&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR64164] Drop copyrename, use coalescible partition as base when opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67035
--- Comment #2 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Fri Aug 14 18:51:50 2015
New Revision: 226901
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226901&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR64164] Drop copyrename, use coalescible partition as base when optim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66978
--- Comment #7 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Fri Aug 14 18:51:50 2015
New Revision: 226901
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226901&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR64164] Drop copyrename, use coalescible partition as base when optim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67216
Pravasi Meet changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pravasimeet999 at yahoo dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67220
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67221
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with r226850.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67222
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.4
Summary|ICE in gimple_c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67222
Bug ID: 67222
Summary: ICE in gimple_call_arg with bogus posix_memalign
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: mi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67222
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67223
Bug ID: 67223
Summary: Address misaligned for ldrexd
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67224
Bug ID: 67224
Summary: UTF-8 support for identifier names in GCC
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67224
--- Comment #1 from Eric ---
To check the installed version of iconv has C99 support type
$ iconv --list | grep "C99"
C99
$
which means that iconv is recent enough.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66326
--- Comment #3 from Eric ---
GCC version 5.2 has come around and the bug is still here.
In particular, compiling for 32-bit Intel or using -mfpmath=387 in 64-bit leads
to immediate floating point exceptions. The fix was to comment out the defin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66983
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64164
Bug 64164 depends on bug 66983, which changed state.
Bug 66983 Summary: [6 Regression] Many testsuite regressions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66983
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67035
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67034
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64164
Bug 64164 depends on bug 67034, which changed state.
Bug 67034 Summary: [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr39928-1.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67034
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64164
Bug 64164 depends on bug 66978, which changed state.
Bug 66978 Summary: [6 Regression] bootstrap failure with
--with-multilib-list=m32,m64,mx32
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66978
What|Removed |A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66978
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64164
Bug 64164 depends on bug 67000, which changed state.
Bug 67000 Summary: [6 Regression] ICE in split_complex_args, at function.c:2325
on ppc64le
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67000
What|Removed |A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67000
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64164
Bug 64164 depends on bug 67035, which changed state.
Bug 67035 Summary: [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr54713-3.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67035
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64164
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67224
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Related to bug 41374.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67224
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Have you tried -fextended-identifiers ?
89 matches
Mail list logo
