https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Should it be fixed on gcc-5-branch too?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70362
Julien Margetts changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70482
Bug ID: 70482
Summary: Opimization opportunity to vectorize basic block for
-mavx target.
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70465
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
No objections to deferring this to gcc-7. Not surprisingly, my response when
this issue was raised on Red Hat's internal IRC was the same -- nobody cares
about x87 math anymore ;-) IMHO it's really just a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62254
--- Comment #17 from Julien Margetts ---
The following test case still fails with the patch applied (originally bug
70362)
arm-none-eabi-gcc -march=armv3m -c -o c_compat_x_tst.o
gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/scalar-by-value-4_x.c
The assert in th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69890
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Created attachment 38145 [details]
> patch
>
> Attached patch seems to work OK on Linux and removes all string.h includes
> from chkp-str* tests. I believe this should resolve all related issues
> o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70391
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Thu Mar 31 17:10:15 2016
New Revision: 234643
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234643&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
HSA: support alignment for hsa_symbols (PR hsa/70391)
PR hsa/7039
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70391
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Thu Mar 31 17:10:48 2016
New Revision: 234644
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234644&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
HSA: handle alignment of string builtins (PR hsa/70391)
PR hsa/70
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70481
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70481
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||brian.carpenter at gmail dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67394
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70483
Bug ID: 70483
Summary: string_view::compare and coparision operators are not
constexpr
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70399
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Thu Mar 31 17:28:29 2016
New Revision: 234647
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234647&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR hsa/70399
PR hsa/70399
* hsa-brig.c (hsa_op_immed:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70391
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70399
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70465
--- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #4)
> No objections to deferring this to gcc-7. Not surprisingly, my response
> when this issue was raised on Red Hat's internal IRC was the same -- nobody
> cares abou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70461
--- Comment #3 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Thu Mar 31 17:51:13 2016
New Revision: 234649
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234649&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-03-31 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/70461
rn void *malloc (__SIZE_TYPE__);
extern void abort (void);
int main()
{
void *volatile p = malloc(sizeof(long));
int *pi = p;
long *pl = p;
*pi = 1;
*pl = 0;
if (*(char *)pi != 0)
abort();
}
--
Tested on gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70461
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70436
--- Comment #11 from Patrick Palka ---
Should non-standard constructs be considered in this PR? I noticed that we also
don't warn on
if (a)
#pragma GCC ivdep
while (1)
if (b)
bar ();
else
baz ();
and
if (a)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70462
--- Comment #3 from Jörg Richter ---
Well, my real problem is related to coverage analysis. Function coverage will
show the base object constructor as not called. But my concrete test case is
more complex and involves virtual functions and inhe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65923
Richard Geary changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||richardg.work at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70403
--- Comment #9 from Hadula, Tomasz ---
Created attachment 38148
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38148&action=edit
Reduced testcase
I reduced the size of the testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70478
--- Comment #2 from Vladimir Makarov ---
The difference I see is that LRA chooses alternative "Q,0,Q" and reload chooses
"d,0,R".
For the "Q,O,Q" LRA reports:
2 Spill pseudo into memory: reject+=3
alt=11,overall=9,losers=1,r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70248
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor ---
Below is a test case (derived from a test discussed in the context of another
bug: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-03/msg01644.html) for another
example of a constexpr function whose use in a constexpr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70485
Bug ID: 70485
Summary: Duplicate typedef results in missing debug info
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70486
Bug ID: 70486
Summary: Constexpr array captured in lambda function (used via
std::function)
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70487
Bug ID: 70487
Summary: warn_unused_result attribute doesn't warn when return
type is class
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68566
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393
--- Comment #10 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Thu Mar 31 20:51:20 2016
New Revision: 234653
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234653&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/70393
* varasm.c (output_constructor_regular_fie
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70465
Vladimir Makarov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70393
--- Comment #11 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Applied to gcc-5 branch r234653.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70488
Bug ID: 70488
Summary: ICE in tree.c:7345 triggered by warning of placement
new too small
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70436
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
They should be.
if (x)
#pragma omp for
for (...)
if (y)
...
else
...
and #pragma omp simd and #pragma omp taskloop too.
For C++, perhaps we could just pass around if_p argument to a few more pa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70489
Bug ID: 70489
Summary: ICE in cxx_eval_increment_expression initializing a
VLA in a constexpr function
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70250
--- Comment #2 from brijesh singh ---
gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.9/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Ubuntu
4.9.2-0ub
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68566
--- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle ---
The following additional patchlet does the trick.
Still need to regression test.
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/array.c b/gcc/fortran/array.c
index 2fc9dfaf..8fef30ce 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/array.c
+++ b/gcc/fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59393
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #7 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70490
Bug ID: 70490
Summary: __atomic_load_n(const __int128 *, ...) generates
CMPXCHG16B with no warning
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70490
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |target
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70491
Bug ID: 70491
Summary: slow compilation initializing a VLA
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70491
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||compile-time-hog
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70492
Bug ID: 70492
Summary: Libiberty Demangler segfaults (2)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70492
--- Comment #1 from Marcel Böhme ---
This error was found during fuzzing with a more efficient version of AFL.
Patch and reviews available here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-04/msg0.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70490
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69564
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #26 f
101 - 146 of 146 matches
Mail list logo
