https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69308
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69293
--- Comment #5 from ForEveR ---
Nice, thanks for fix and for defect report.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65076
--- Comment #62 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Well, to be fair one should compare -std=c++14 for all versions, else
you just measure the well known C++11 libstdc++ allocator overhead.
gcc-49(-std=c++14): 23.242 sec
gcc-5 (-std=c++14): 26.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69292
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[graphite] ICE with |[6 Regression][graphite]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64324
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61147
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69310
Bug ID: 69310
Summary: [6 Regression] Revision r232454 breaks bootstrap on
x86_64-apple-darwin15
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39230
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60795
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60593
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49630
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69311
Bug ID: 69311
Summary: [5 Regression] ICE (cc1 killed) on s390x-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39230
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|pault at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69292
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69310
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69311
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69311
--- Comment #2 from Matthias Klose ---
4.9 and 6 build within under a second, I didn't even look at the memory usage.
5 was killed automatically on a VM with 8G RAM + 6G swap; killed the cross
build manually when reaching 16GB.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69311
--- Comment #3 from Matthias Klose ---
sorry, that should be -O3:
s390x-linux-gnu-gcc -std=c99 -Wall -march=zEC12 -O3 -c tiny_psnr.i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69270
--- Comment #5 from Andreas Schwab ---
FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/tst_3.c scan-assembler tst\t(x|w)[0-9]*.*1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69312
Bug ID: 69312
Summary: [6 Regression] libstdc++ unconditionally refers to TM
symbols
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69312
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc-ibm-aix*
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69313
Bug ID: 69313
Summary: Compilation of gcc 5.3.0 has failed
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69312
--- Comment #2 from David Edelsohn ---
stage1 libstdc++ builds, but stage2 configure fails because conftest programs
cannot link and run due to missing ITM_xxx symbols.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69313
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
There have been a few reports of this error on the gcc-help mailing list. The
only person who reported solving it (as far as I know) said it was due to bad
values in the environment, see
https://gcc.gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69313
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66094
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig ---
Created attachment 37371
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37371&action=edit
Patch to handle matmul(a, transpose(b))
This very straightforward patch handles matmul(a, transpose(b)).
I won
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69314
Bug ID: 69314
Summary: Use of uninitialised value in libbacktrace/pecoff.c
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69299
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #37364|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69292
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
with an ICE in finish_function
with current GCC.
G++ gcc version 5.3.1 20160101 (Debian 5.3.1-5) works fine.
GNU C++11 (GCC) version 6.0.0 20160116 (experimental) (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
compiled by GNU C version 6.0.0 20160116 (experimental), GMP version
6.0.0, MPFR version 3.1.3-p5, MPC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69316
Bug ID: 69316
Summary: Implement CWG 393
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66094
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66094
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Additional comment. I hope Toon could test this on real world code and confirm.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69302
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69302
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at redhat dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69317
Bug ID: 69317
Summary: [6 regression] wrong ABI version in -Wabi warnings
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69302
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
C++14 changes parentheses slightly. In that it causes them to be a lvalue
still if it was a lvalue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69302
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|parentheses cause address |parentheses cause address
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69310
İsmail Dönmez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ismail at i10z dot com
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69318
Bug ID: 69318
Summary: [6 regression] ICE in symtab_node::verify with
-fabi-version=7 -Wabi=8 -m32
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69204
--- Comment #7 from bugzil...@reto-schneider.ch ---
I did some bisecting. r219770 is the commit which breaks my example.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69204
--- Comment #8 from bugzil...@reto-schneider.ch ---
(In reply to bugzillas from comment #7)
> I did some bisecting. r219770 is the commit which breaks my example.
...or just exposes an already existing failure.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69204
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to bugzillas from comment #8)
> (In reply to bugzillas from comment #7)
> > I did some bisecting. r219770 is the commit which breaks my example.
>
> ...or just exposes an already existing failure.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69204
--- Comment #10 from bugzil...@reto-schneider.ch ---
Which is a known limitation or something that can/will be fixed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68609
--- Comment #6 from David Edelsohn ---
Author: dje
Date: Sat Jan 16 20:04:33 2016
New Revision: 232468
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232468&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/68609
* gcc.target/powerpc/recip-6.c: Enable on A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69310
--- Comment #2 from torvald at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to İsmail Dönmez from comment #1)
> r232454 also breaks bootstrap for mingw-w64:
>
> libtool: compile: x86_64-w64-mingw32-c++
> -L/havana/mingw-w64-6.0.0/x86_64-w64-mingw32/lib
> -L/ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69310
--- Comment #3 from İsmail Dönmez ---
(In reply to torvald from comment #2)
> (In reply to İsmail Dönmez from comment #1)
> > r232454 also breaks bootstrap for mingw-w64:
> >
> > libtool: compile: x86_64-w64-mingw32-c++
> > -L/havana/mingw-w64-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69003
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69003
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
Looks like a pasto in rename_statics. I am testing:
Index: lto/lto-partition.c
===
--- lto/lto-partition.c (revision 232466)
+++ lto/lto-partitio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69319
Bug ID: 69319
Summary: Suspect compiler bug
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69319
--- Comment #1 from Frediano Ziglio ---
Created attachment 37375
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37375&action=edit
.i file of the single source program
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69319
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69319
--- Comment #3 from Frediano Ziglio ---
Created attachment 37376
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37376&action=edit
original file split into pure C + main
I don't know if may help (I hope so).
I split the file into a pure C (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69319
--- Comment #4 from Frediano Ziglio ---
-O0, -O1 or -fno-strict-aliasing all works.
But I don't understand how gcc can generate such code.
What am I missing?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61199
torvald at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61199
torvald at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69320
Bug ID: 69320
Summary: wrong code generation at -O2 and higher
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69320
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
Summary|wrong code genera
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69319
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69310
--- Comment #4 from torvald at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to İsmail Dönmez from comment #3)
> (In reply to torvald from comment #2)
> > (In reply to İsmail Dönmez from comment #1)
> > > r232454 also breaks bootstrap for mingw-w64:
> > >
> > >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69299
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 37378
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37378&action=edit
A followup patch to call constraint_satisfied_p to check memory operand
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69317
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69318
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69317
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor ---
Slightly tweaked patch posted for review:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg01206.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69321
Bug ID: 69321
Summary: Error on use of non-copyable type with any_cast
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20160116 (experimental) [trunk revision 232466] (GCC)
$:
$:
$: gcc-trunk small.c -O3 -m32 ; ./a.out
g_620=0
$: gcc-trunk small.c -O3 -m64 ; ./a.out
g_620=0
$: gcc-trunk small.c -O0 ; ./a.out
g_620=1
$:
$: cat small.c
int printf(const char*, ...);
int a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69194
--- Comment #6 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kugan
Date: Sun Jan 17 02:44:26 2016
New Revision: 232481
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232481&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-01-17 Kugan Vivekanandarajah
Backport from main
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69323
Bug ID: 69323
Summary: Segmentation fault when instantiating class template
with inner class which declares itself as a friend
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.4
Status: UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69323
--- Comment #1 from Brian Davis ---
Created attachment 37380
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37380&action=edit
Original source file
Please note line 7 of this file:
#define SHOW_GCC_BUG 1
If this line is commented out, the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69320
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69323
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69323
--- Comment #3 from Brian Davis ---
I just ran downstairs and used this to break g++ 4.9.2 running on Ubuntu 15.04
as well, using my original source file. Here's the compiler version string,
and I'll attach the preprocessed file:
$ g++ --versio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69323
--- Comment #4 from Brian Davis ---
Created attachment 37381
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37381&action=edit
Preprocessed file generated by g++ 4.9.2 on the same source file
Here's the preprocessed file used on 4.9.2; the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69324
Bug ID: 69324
Summary: non-constexpr function cannot be called in a constexpr
initializer even if the full-expression is a constexpr
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: U
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66038
--- Comment #35 from Joshua Kinard ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #34)
> On Thu, 14 Jan 2016, kumba at gentoo dot org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66038
> >
> > --- Comment #33 from Joshua Kinard -
: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20160116 (experimental) [trunk revision 232466] (GCC)
$:
$: gcc-trunk small.c -O3 -m32 ; ./a.out
$: gcc-trunk small.c -O3 -m64 ; ./a.out
$: gcc-trunk small.c -O2 -m32 ; ./a.out
$: gcc-trunk small.c -O2 -m64 ; ./a.out
$: gcc-trunk small.c -O0 -m64 ; ./a.out
g_302=4
$: cat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51960
W E Brown changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||webrown.cpp at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69320
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69320
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Ha! Got it.
On the path noted in the earlier comment we have the following:
:
pred_x ={v} {CLOBBER};
pred_y ={v} {CLOBBER};
_423 = s_46(D)->rd_total;
_424 = score[best_374];
_425 = (long int) _424;
_426 =
80 matches
Mail list logo
