https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69633
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization, ra
Target Milesto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69634
Bug ID: 69634
Summary: -fcompare-debug failure (length) with -O2 -fno-dce
-fschedule-insns -fno-tree-vrp @ i686
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69634
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64152
Renlin Li changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||renlin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69296
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #5 from ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69635
Bug ID: 69635
Summary: 4x increase of build time [4.9 -> 6.0]
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69634
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69635
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Did you build gcc6 with --enable-checking=release ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69568
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69423
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas ---
Dear Anthony,
In reply to your email message, this one is high on my list of PRs to fix. A
workaround, which could be permanent, is:
program tester
character(LEN=:), allocatable :: S
S= test(2)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69612
--- Comment #2 from Roar Lauritzsen ---
Thanks a lot for the quick analysis. Now that I know what it is I can fix my
program, and the -fsanitize=undefined will come in handy for localizing problem
areas. For future googlers, I am planning to fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69635
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69514
--- Comment #2 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
Test case from comment 0 can be reduced to e.g.
$ cat z3.f90
program p
real, parameter :: w(2) = [real :: 0, 3.0*[real :: 2]]
print *, w
end program
$ gfortran-6 -c z3.f90
f951: internal compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69624
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69636
Bug ID: 69636
Summary: ICE(s) on using option -fmodule-private
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69637
Bug ID: 69637
Summary: ICE on an invalid bit-field with template name for
width
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69612
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69611
--- Comment #3 from Michael Meissner ---
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 11:35:35PM +, joseph at codesourcery dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69611
>
> --- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com dot com> ---
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69611
--- Comment #4 from David Edelsohn ---
Joseph, is the patch proposed in the original description okay as fix for stage
4 or you want a __NO_FPRS__ addressed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69638
Bug ID: 69638
Summary: array out of bounds access accepted in constexpr
function invocation
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69634
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69639
Bug ID: 69639
Summary: [6 Regression] FAIL:
gcc.c-torture/compile/limits-exprparen.c
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67609
--- Comment #44 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #43)
> FWIW, the proposed patch for PR69577 fixes this testcase
> with the aarch64_cannot_change_mode_class change reverted.
> The code quality looks slightly bet
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69640
Bug ID: 69640
Summary: ~SomeClass() = default; incorrectly considered a
"user-declared destructor"
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69639
--- Comment #1 from John David Anglin ---
(gdb) r
Starting program: /test/gnu/gcc/objdir/stage1-gcc/cc1 -fpreprocessed
limits-exprparen.i -quiet -dumpbase limits-exprparen.c -auxbase-strip
limits-exprparen.o -O0 -w -version -fdiagnostics-color=ne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69570
--- Comment #13 from Bernd Schmidt ---
Or, you know, operate on integers. Skip the / 255.0 step where it is
unnecessary.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69570
--- Comment #14 from Tom Hughes ---
Yes upstream took my fix to avoid the equality
(https://github.com/mapnik/node-mapnik/pull/589) but have also now noticed that
most of the FP can be one away with completely.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69635
--- Comment #3 from h2+bugs at fsfe dot org ---
Thank you for the quick replies!
> Did you build gcc6 with --enable-checking=release ?
I am using the pre-built FreeBSD packages, I have checked, and it seems it is
not the case. That likely explai
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69635
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to h2+bugs from comment #3)
> Thank you for the quick replies!
>
> > Did you build gcc6 with --enable-checking=release ?
>
> I am using the pre-built FreeBSD packages, I have checked, and it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55522
Craig Smith changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||spathiwa at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55522
--- Comment #6 from Orion Poplawski ---
(In reply to Craig Smith from comment #5)
> For example, on RHEL 7, liblzma.so.5 is linked with -Ofast, which also
> triggers crtfastmath.o to be used, corrupting the mxcsr register at library
> load time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55522
--- Comment #7 from Craig Smith ---
(In reply to Orion Poplawski from comment #6)
> (In reply to Craig Smith from comment #5)
> > For example, on RHEL 7, liblzma.so.5 is linked with -Ofast, which also
> > triggers crtfastmath.o to be used, corrup
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69241
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69640
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55522
--- Comment #8 from Orion Poplawski ---
That version does not exist in RHEL7. Looks like it was a Mandriva thing:
https://www.rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/mandriva/devel/cooker/x86_64/media/main/release/xz-5.1.2-0.alpha.1.x86_64.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55522
Andy Lutomirski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|enhancement |major
--- Comment #9 from Andy Lutomir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69241
--- Comment #12 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #11)
> More reduced test case, that does not depend on -ipa-icf:
>
> struct R
> {
> R (const R&) { }
> };
>
> __attribute__ ((noreturn)) R f ();
>
> R
> c ()
> {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69611
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
I think it's OK for stage 4 - the t-hardfp point is that you'd get a
smaller, faster libgcc on FreeBSD that way, by not compiling soft-fp at
all for non-float128 hard float.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69641
Bug ID: 69641
Summary: invalid int32 comparison
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69641
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69577
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69642
Bug ID: 69642
Summary: command-line spell check should know about "no-"
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55522
--- Comment #10 from Craig Smith ---
(In reply to Orion Poplawski from comment #8)
> That version does not exist in RHEL7. Looks like it was a Mandriva thing:
> https://www.rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/mandriva/devel/cooker/x86_64/media/main/
> release
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63805
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #8 from Bill Schmidt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63805
--- Comment #9 from Bill Schmidt ---
Same question for Markus. Sorry for conflating the two of you. :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69453
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69642
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63805
--- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor ---
Since the manual says that "... The four non-arithmetic functions (load, store,
exchange, and compare_exchange) all have a generic version as well. This
generic version works on any data type." I believe the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69641
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69643
Bug ID: 69643
Summary: Address space discarded inside statement expression
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69241
--- Comment #13 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #12)
> (In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #11)
> > More reduced test case, that does not depend on -ipa-icf:
> >
> > struct R
> > {
> > R (const R&) { }
> > };
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63805
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67282
--- Comment #3 from Arseny Solokha ---
Are gcc 5 and 6 in your setup linked against different versions of ISL? In my
case, it was 0.15 for all installed gcc versions back in December and 0.16, for
all of them as well, as for now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69404
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2016-2-2
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67032
--- Comment #18 from Josh Kelley ---
Thank you.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49244
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69644
Bug ID: 69644
Summary: ICE with -O on __sync_bool_compare_and_swap with short
in extract_insn, at recog.c:2286
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69644
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc64le-*-linux-*
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69645
Bug ID: 69645
Summary: powerpc -ffixed- ignored when saving and
restoring regs
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69643
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Address space discarded |Address space discarded
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30811
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2016-2-2
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69102
--- Comment #5 from Richard Henderson ---
(In reply to Andrey Belevantsev from comment #4)
> Created attachment 37550 [details]
> proposed patch
>
> The problem here is readonly dependence contexts in selective scheduler.
> We're trying to cach
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69461
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org |vmakarov at gcc dot
gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69184
Sujoy changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ssaraswati at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69646
Bug ID: 69646
Summary: multiple warnings with -Wintrinsics-std
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69647
Bug ID: 69647
Summary: gcc build for avr-unknown-elf
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69647
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69644
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69648
Bug ID: 69648
Summary: wrong code with -O -mtune=winchip-c6 -fPIC
-fexpensive-optimizations -msse4 @ i686
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords
101 - 169 of 169 matches
Mail list logo
