https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67476
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67955
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||alias, missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67945
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #8)
> Actually, the problem seems to be that we're oscillating
> between forms.
>
> The old fold-const.c folders converted sequences of sqrts
> and cbrts into
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67945
--- Comment #10 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #9)
> I wonder if we should have two "phases" of simplifications, first
> aggressively canonicalize and later apply the optimizations. We could
> key
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67961
Bug ID: 67961
Summary: Incorrect type of meber of struct in error message
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67920
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67909
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67962
Bug ID: 67962
Summary: Optimization opportunity with conditional swap
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67955
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 36507
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36507&action=edit
Tentative patch
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> (In reply to vries from comment #2)
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67962
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48997
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47469
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #1)
> On trunk (6.0 r228753) this has been changed to
>
> /* Functions returning pointers or allocatables need temporaries. */
> c = expr2->value.function.es
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67955
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #36507|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67963
Bug ID: 67963
Summary: -march=lakemont generates x87 instructions
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67963
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #0)
> We should issue an error if -march=lakemont is used without -miacmu.
We should issue an error if -march=lakemont is used without -mno-80387,
not without -miamcu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67815
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Oct 14 12:54:03 2015
New Revision: 228809
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228809&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/67815
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (attemp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67815
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67915
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Oct 14 12:59:15 2015
New Revision: 228810
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228810&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-10-14 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/67915
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67964
Bug ID: 67964
Summary: [4.9/5/6 Regression] Multiple attributes wrongly
accepted without commas
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: accepts-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67963
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #0)
> > We should issue an error if -march=lakemont is used without -miacmu.
>
> We should issue an error if -march=lakemont is used withou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67915
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67964
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67964
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67965
Bug ID: 67965
Summary: gcc (incorrectly) requires template keyword in
non-dependent expression
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67961
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The diagnostic is correct.
Trying to pass uint32_t to a function taking size_t causes a conversion,
creating a temporary (i.e. rvalue) size_t, but a non-const reference cannot
bind to a temporary.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67961
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to other+gcc from comment #0)
> where type of that rvalue variable is uint32_t not std::size_t.
There is no rvalue of type uint32_t. The type of the **lvalue** is uint32_t.
The rvalue is the tem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67476
--- Comment #16 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vries
Date: Wed Oct 14 14:30:19 2015
New Revision: 228815
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228815&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Handle original loop tree in expand_omp_for_generic
2015-10-14
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67476
--- Comment #17 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vries
Date: Wed Oct 14 14:30:41 2015
New Revision: 228817
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228817&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add param parloops-schedule
2015-10-14 Tom de Vries
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67476
--- Comment #15 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vries
Date: Wed Oct 14 14:30:05 2015
New Revision: 228814
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228814&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add missing phis in expand_omp_for_generic
2015-10-14 Tom de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67476
--- Comment #14 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vries
Date: Wed Oct 14 14:29:55 2015
New Revision: 228813
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228813&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Handle simple latch in expand_omp_for_generic
2015-10-14 Tom
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67955
--- Comment #6 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to vries from comment #4)
> For now, I'll do a bootstrap and reg-test to make sure it doesn't break
> anything.
Updated tentative patch passes bootstrap and reg-test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67963
--- Comment #3 from Yulia Koval ---
Patch posted at:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg01369.html
The same test with this patch:
objdump -d test.o
test.o: file format elf32-i386
Disassembly of section .text:
:
0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47469
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Tobias' version is prettier! Does it apply without regressions?
Obviously the patch in comment 0 no longer applies.
Now finding 'gfc_expr_attr (expr2).pointer' prettier than
'expr2->symtree->n.sym-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67443
Dominik Vogt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67959
--- Comment #1 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Thomas, in the future it'd be helpful to indicate an actual target
configuration for those not as intimately familiar with the ARM targets :-)
I went through 3 before I stumbled on on that would show this f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
mrs at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mrs at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67443
--- Comment #4 from Dominik Vogt ---
Now this is the result of my efforts of reducing the original large test
program to a minimum.
---
struct s_t
{
unsigned f1: 8;
unsigned f2: 24;
};
bool foo(int a, int **pp, s_t **pps, void *s, int *
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67443
--- Comment #5 from Dominik Vogt ---
Created attachment 36509
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36509&action=edit
test program and debug output
test program and debug output
-interface ../../gcc/ada/eval_fat.adb -o
ada/eval_fat.o
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 6.0.0 20151014 (experimental) (ia64-suse-linux) GCC error: |
| in convert_move, at expr.c:282 |
| Error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67959
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Wed Oct 14 17:04:04 2015
New Revision: 228819
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228819&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PATCH] [PR testsuite/67959]Minor cleanup for ssa-thread-13.c
PR t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67959
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
without-libi
conv-prefix --without-libintl-prefix --with-system-zlib --disable-werror
--witho
ut-cloog --without-isl --disable-__cxa_atexit --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20151014 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47469
--- Comment #4 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #3)
> > Tobias' version is prettier! Does it apply without regressions?
>
> Obviously the patch in comment 0 no longer applies.
>
> Now finding 'gfc_expr_attr (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67967
--- Comment #1 from tprince at computer dot org ---
Created attachment 36511
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36511&action=edit
include file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67967
--- Comment #2 from tprince at computer dot org ---
Created attachment 36512
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36512&action=edit
C source
According to ChangeLog, ktietz is the one who modified this since it was last
working (ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67383
renlin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||renlin at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67968
Bug ID: 67968
Summary: go1: internal compiler error: in
write_specific_type_functions, at
go/gofrontend/types.cc:1812
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67443
--- Comment #6 from wmi at google dot com ---
(In reply to Dominik Vogt from comment #3)
> I think the Rtl in comment 1 ist correct. Note that "i" is stored at
> 0x.xx00 and "j" is stored at 0x.00xx. That is the
> reason
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67696
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|2015-10-13
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67696
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
s/may/my/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67967
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Actually, gcc can now handle misaligned stack for x86_64 and it emits
{
rtx unspec = gen_rtx_UNSPEC (mode, gen_rtvec (1, reg), UNSPEC_STOREU);
insn = emit_insn (gen_rtx_SET (mem, unspec));
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53800
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67967
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67967
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
A totaly untested, bit kind of obvious patch:
--cut here--
Index: config/i386/winnt.c
===
--- config/i386/winnt.c (revision 228818)
+++ config/i3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48958
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67967
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67443
--- Comment #7 from Dominik Vogt ---
Almost. Note the strange bit numbering on s390. The highest order bit in any
operation always has the number 0, and the lowest order bit has the highest
number. So the 8-bit-move instruction "mvi" stores a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #13 from Jack Howarth ---
(In reply to m...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #12)
> Is this just a partial import from upstream? If so, I think we should just
> check it in and call the issue solved.
No, the patch shown is an ugly hack o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67967
--- Comment #6 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Wed Oct 14 21:18:19 2015
New Revision: 228826
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228826&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/67967
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_emit_sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67443
--- Comment #8 from Dominik Vogt ---
Snippet of the assembly code from the test program posted in comment 4:
good compiler:
==
# r1 is 0x**XX (XX = value to store in the f1 field)
# r3 is the target address (ps)
# r9 is 0x**
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67443
--- Comment #9 from Dominik Vogt ---
> or %r1,%r2 # 32-bit or r1 := r1 | r2 -> 0xXX00
This should be
or %r1,%r2 # 32-bit or r1 := r1 |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47469
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Well, this PR has been rotting for more than four years and a half. I was only
pointing to the fact that the initial patch no longer applies.
If you know what to do, please do so. If not, I don't see
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48958
Harald Anlauf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67969
Bug ID: 67969
Summary: [concepts] bug with overloaded function when using
constraints
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67967
--- Comment #7 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Wed Oct 14 22:30:04 2015
New Revision: 228830
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228830&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/67967
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_emit_sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67969
--- Comment #1 from ryan.burn at gmail dot com ---
Reduced further:
emplate
class NumericArray {};
template
constexpr bool match_numeric_array = false;
template
constexpr bool
match_numeric_array> =
true;
template
concept bool cp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67949
--- Comment #3 from Ishiura Lab Compiler Team ---
We are very sorry that somehow we failed to do final check with the latest
trunk before submitting the report.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67970
Bug ID: 67970
Summary: [concepts] variable template bug
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66534
HEMMI, Shigeru changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66534
--- Comment #6 from HEMMI, Shigeru ---
Thanks for the reply.
> Did you asked yellow dog linux for help?
No, YDL seems stopping maintenance/developing.
> IMO it would be more honest to close this PR as WONTFIX.
I closed this thread at your sugge
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67955
--- Comment #8 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 36515
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36515&action=edit
Reporting follow-up patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67955
--- Comment #7 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Care to adjust stmt_kills_ref_p accordingly and instrument it
> to see how many times during bootstrap this triggers?
I've done a bootstrap and reg-te
72 matches
Mail list logo
