https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69866
--- Comment #4 from acrsofter at gmail dot com ---
someone here can deal with it?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33562
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P4 |P2
--- Comment #24 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26854
--- Comment #133 from Richard Biener ---
Thanks for the update - this PR (one of the testcases) is also tracked in
http://gcc.opensuse.org/c++bench-czerny/random/ (two testcases, pr26854.c is
"all.c" and pr26854-2.c is "_num.c").
note that our f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69907
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69909
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26854
--- Comment #134 from Richard Biener ---
We can see from _num.i detailled stats
df_chain_block pool df-problems.c:2398 (df_chain_alloc)
152 0: 0.0% 937593072 61860737: 90.1% 24
which shows an odd e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #69 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 22 Feb 2016, tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
>
> Thomas Koenig changed:
>
>What|Removed |Adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #70 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If you want to go this way, I'd at least key it off DECL_COMMON on the decl.
And instead of multiplying max_size by 2 perhaps just add BITS_PER_UNIT?
And only if it is equal to size?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69901
Piotr Nycz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |major
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28901
--- Comment #33 from Andreas Schwab ---
make[3]: Entering directory '/opt/gcc/test/Build/lto-plugin'
/bin/sh ./libtool --tag=CC --tag=disable-static --mode=compile
/opt/gcc/test/Build/./prev-gcc/xgcc -B/opt/gcc/test/Build/./prev-gcc/
-B/usr/aarc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67854
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
Sorry about that. I'll look into that this week.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28901
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69901
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67854
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
--- Comment #5 from Sudip ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #4)
> (In reply to Sudip from comment #3)
> > A gentle ping..
> > Any idea when this might get resolved.
> >
> > regards
> > sudip
>
> I thought I'd get to it this week,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67854
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek ---
Yeah, I know; I've already fixed the NULL case some time ago (though I'm not
sure if all the appropriate spots are fixed).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #71 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 23 Feb 2016, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
>
> --- Comment #70 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> If you want to go this way, I'd at least k
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69913
Bug ID: 69913
Summary: [6 Regression] ICE (segfault) in
check_global_declaration ../../gcc/cgraphunit.c:947
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69760
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||spop at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69913
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Target Milestone|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69913
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69911
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69296
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67451
--- Comment #14 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vehre
Date: Tue Feb 23 10:29:26 2016
New Revision: 233625
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233625&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-02-23 Andre Vehreschild
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69760
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Adjusted testcase that only needs 305MB virtual.
/* PR tree-optimization/69760 */
/* { dg-do run { target { { *-*-linux* *-*-gnu* } && mmap } } } */
/* { dg-options "-O2" } */
#include
#include
__attribu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69910
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69909
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
It looks that alias set is already wrong when expanding to RTL:
(insn 13 12 14 2 (parallel [
(set (reg/f:DI 113)
(plus:DI (reg/f:DI 20 frame)
(const_int -64 [0xf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69914
Bug ID: 69914
Summary: ICE in check_global_declaration, upon
-Wunused-variable of an array
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69909
--- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ---
And -fno-strict-aliasing "fixes" the problem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69909
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Indeed, the *.optimized dump looks good, the late gimple DCE just removed
really dead stmts.
Slightly cleaned up testcase:
typedef unsigned V __attribute__ ((vector_size (32)));
typedef __int128 T;
typedef __
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69666
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Feb 23 10:55:47 2016
New Revision: 233626
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233626&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[pr 69666] No SRA default_def replacements for unscalarizable regions
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26854
--- Comment #135 from Richard Biener ---
bitmap stats seem to be confused by 1) bitmap_obstack_release not releasing
overhead of bitmaps allocated from it, 2) the DF machinery using embedded
bitmap heads which for this testcase seems to explode d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69904
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana.radhakrishnan at arm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26854
--- Comment #136 from Richard Biener ---
Fixed bitmap stats look like
df-problems.c:4399 (df_md_alloc)4755456: 4.4% 4755456
1842233: 7.3% 235730 124030 heap
df-problems.c:4398 (df_md_alloc)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69915
Bug ID: 69915
Summary: [6 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV with -O -ftracer with
broken backtrace
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69915
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-pc-linux-gnu,|x86_64-pc-linux-gnu,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69879
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Gutson
---
Remind to consider all the overloads (throwing, nothrow, etc.) which will
require different names.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69789
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Markwalder ---
After further analysis we've discovered that the optimizer does not remove the
tests, it alters the comparison of (ec == enumerated value). If one replaces
the "ec" with "ec.value()" in the expressions,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69911
--- Comment #3 from Mark Wielaard ---
Author: mark
Date: Tue Feb 23 11:47:19 2016
New Revision: 233627
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233627&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/69911 Check main_input_filename and DECL_SOURCE_FILE are not NULL.
DE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69911
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69914
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69911
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sbergman at redhat dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #72 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 23 Feb 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Feb 2016, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
> >
> > --- Comment #70 from Jakub Jel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69916
Bug ID: 69916
Summary: [openacc] ICE in single_succ_edge called from
oacc_loop_xform_loop
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69916
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code, openacc
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69915
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69912
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69909
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||alias
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69907
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69909
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The wrong alias set appears in expr.c:10524
if (op0 == orig_op0)
op0 = copy_rtx (op0);
set_mem_attributes (op0, exp, 0); /// < HERE
if (REG_P (XEXP (op0, 0)))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28901
--- Comment #35 from Mark Wielaard ---
Note the followup patch needed for PR c/69911
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233627&root=gcc&view=rev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28901
Mark Wielaard changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69909
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69666
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Feb 23 12:54:44 2016
New Revision: 233629
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233629&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[pr 69666] No SRA default_def replacements for unscalarizable regions
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69907
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Ok, we create an epilogue loop because of the gaps in p2[n*2]
t2.c:4:5: note: Data access with gaps requires scalar epilogue loop
but then SLP vectorize that epilogue which has been fully unrolled.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69900
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Feb 23 12:57:32 2016
New Revision: 233630
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233630&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/69900
* common.opt (Wunreachable-code): Add Warning f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69902
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Feb 23 12:58:53 2016
New Revision: 233631
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233631&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/69902
* fold-const.c (fold_truth_not_expr): Propaga
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69902
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69900
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69909
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 23 Feb 2016, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69909
>
> --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> The wrong alias set appears in expr.c:10524
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69909
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #10)
> On Tue, 23 Feb 2016, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69909
> >
> > --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69904
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69666
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69909
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #37766|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #73 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Patch as posted passed bootstrap & regtest. Adjusted according to
> comments but not tested otherwise
The patch "fixes" the test in comment 45, but not the one in comment 61.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #74 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 23 Feb 2016, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
>
> --- Comment #73 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> > Patch as posted passed bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69910
epagone at email dot it changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||epagone at email dot it
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #75 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #74)
> On Tue, 23 Feb 2016, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
> >
> > --- Comment #73 from Dominique d'Hu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69917
Bug ID: 69917
Summary: gcc.target/i386/chkp-hidden-def.c FAILs
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69917
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #76 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> The #c61 testcase is with /COMMON/ too.
Well the test aborts for me on x86_64-apple-darwin15 (I still get 1025.0).
AFAIR some default sizes are larger on darwin than on linux.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69915
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69918
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69918
Bug ID: 69918
Summary: [6 regression] gcc.dg/torture/builtin-integral-1.c
FAILs
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69917
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i386-pc-solaris2.* |i386-pc-solaris2.*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69917
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Confirmed on x86_64-apple-darwin15.
I don't think so: in my x86_64-apple-darwin15.4.0 builds, the test fails
like this:
FAIL: gcc.targe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69764
dhowells at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dhowells at redhat dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69904
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #3)
> (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #2)
> > If you disallow this memory clobber from being copied (via the
> > cannot_copy_insn_p hook), do you then get
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69919
Bug ID: 69919
Summary: pool allocator and mem-stat race at program exit
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: mi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69920
Bug ID: 69920
Summary: [6 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr42704.C -O2
-flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none
(internal compiler error)
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69920
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69916
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69916
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69919
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mliska at suse dot cz
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69915
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #77 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #72)
>
> Patch as posted passed bootstrap & regtest. Adjusted according to
> comments but not tested otherwise - please somebody throw at
> unpatch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69736
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69915
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 37768
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37768&action=edit
gcc6-pr69915.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69920
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1)
> It may be caused by r233626.
What do you mean by "may be?" I have just double checked that if I
apply the patch to r233489 and run the test, it passes here on my
x86_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69919
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Or maybe simply making mem_alloc_description::~mem_alloc_description () empty.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69921
Bug ID: 69921
Summary: Switch OpenACC kernels number of gangs from "decide at
run time" to "decide at compile time"
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #78 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 23 Feb 2016, alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
>
> --- Comment #77 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> (In reply to rguent...@sus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69920
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i?86-*-*
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69920
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #79 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #78)
>
> That would pessimize it too much IMHO.
I'm not sure how to evaluate the pessimization, given it's thought to be a
widespread pseudo-FORTRAN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69922
Bug ID: 69922
Summary: Bogus -Wnonnull-compare for: ... ?
static_cast(this) : nullptr
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61156
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
With the patch in comment 6 the test gfortran.dg/include_6.f90 has to be
updated to
--- ../_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/include_6.f90 2012-08-02
01:26:03.0 +0200
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69922
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68963
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Hmm, I think it's rather discover_iteration_bound_by_body_walk that merges the
two estimates of 3 iterations from both arms even though those are not based
off the same IV. OTOH the estimates itself assume
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69881
--- Comment #23 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Author: edlinger
Date: Tue Feb 23 15:57:09 2016
New Revision: 233636
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233636&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-02-23 Bernd Edlinger
PR libstdc++/69881
* in
1 - 100 of 181 matches
Mail list logo
