https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77542
--- Comment #2 from afenkart at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Do you have a full example which shows the issue?
> In your case does ReturnValue have a copy constructor?
> If so this is a dup of bug 38172. Note C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77542
--- Comment #3 from afenkart at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 39608
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39608&action=edit
excerpt of code showing problem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77563
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77511
--- Comment #3 from Evgenii Zheltonozhskii ---
The files are too big so here is link:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/dz1zeh5dgn3tmxw/AAAOcPmn59O166uqieYmLYMca?dl=0
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=C:\PROGRA~1\MINGW-~1\X86_64~1.0-P\mingw64\bin\gcc.e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77563
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Reduced:
struct A {
A(int) {}
A(unsigned) {} // Comment to make it work
explicit A(long) {} // Comment to make it work
};
void f(A) { }
int main() {
f(2);
f(3l);
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77475
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 13 08:45:36 2016
New Revision: 240107
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240107&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/77475
* opts.h (candidates_list_and_hint): D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77563
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77499
avieira at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kugan at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77554
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77575
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70557
--- Comment #7 from Andreas Schwab ---
When compiling for m68k the compiler already generates the latter.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77549
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77574
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
On 09/13/2016 12:30 AM, bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77574
>
> Bug ID: 77574
>Summary: Wrong if condition in predict.c
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77548
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77514
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77511
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
Component|lto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77522
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|5.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77538
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77542
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77544
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77548
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|5.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77544
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Started with r233216.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77550
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
The patch should at least work (loads are similarly affected). At some point
we want some infrastructure in the middle-end to chose a better fallback (as
Andrew says, if possible we can use the alias-set o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77554
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|5.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77574
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77568
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Note that all "bad" transforms can be done by users on the source level
already. So the _only_ proper solution is to handle the situation in the
passes that now refuse to do an important optimization (like
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77578
Bug ID: 77578
Summary: Compiler crashes with segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77578
--- Comment #1 from Tomas Oberhuber ---
Created attachment 39610
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39610&action=edit
main.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77541
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77578
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77578
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-invalid-code |ice-on-valid-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77568
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> Note that all "bad" transforms can be done by users on the source level
> already. So the _only_ proper solution is to handle the situation in the
> passes that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77574
--- Comment #2 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> Hello Bernd.
>
> Thanks for the PR, as well the suggested patch. The patch works for me,
> I'm going to test it and submit to mailing list. Please ping me if you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77568
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||FIXME
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77550
--- Comment #16 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #15)
> The patch should at least work (loads are similarly affected). At some
> point we want some infrastructure in the middle-end to chose a better
> fallback (as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77531
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I guess the question is
1) in which pass to do this (during expansion of calls?); for SSA_NAMEs it
could perhaps use get_range_info and warn if it would always overflow (i.e. if
the minimum of arg1's range *
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77579
Bug ID: 77579
Summary: Missed multiple add (int) for CSEd case
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77576
--- Comment #2 from likan_999.student at sina dot com ---
Andrew, do you how I can tell whether plugin has been picked by successfully?
Also, if I use ar, do I need to pass it some flag, e.g. --plugin=something, or
it will just work if it is used
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77579
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Just so there is no confussion on the testcase here it is without need the -D
option:
void f(int x, int y, int z, int *s)
{
int t = y * z;
s[0] = t + x;
s[1] = x - t;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77568
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note the integer testcase (-Dfloat=int) for the first testcase here has more
issues than the float case (since there is no fma opcode being defined for
aarch64) but that is being tracked as bug 77579.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77526
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77576
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to likan_999.student from comment #2)
> Andrew, do you how I can tell whether plugin has been picked by
> successfully? Also, if I use ar, do I need to pass it some flag, e.g.
> --plugin=something,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77580
Bug ID: 77580
Summary: Improve devirtualization
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77580
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77580
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Component|m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77531
--- Comment #2 from Cristian Rodríguez ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> I guess the question is
> 1) in which pass to do this (during expansion of calls?); for SSA_NAMEs it
> could perhaps use get_range_info and warn if it would
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77571
James Greenhalgh changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77427
--- Comment #11 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Sep 13 15:56:03 2016
New Revision: 240112
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240112&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Don't treat array as builtin type in set_underlying_type
2016-09-13 Jaso
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68212
--- Comment #2 from Pat Haugen ---
Author: pthaugen
Date: Tue Sep 13 15:58:52 2016
New Revision: 240113
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240113&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/77536
PR rtl-optimization/68212
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77536
--- Comment #1 from Pat Haugen ---
Author: pthaugen
Date: Tue Sep 13 15:58:52 2016
New Revision: 240113
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240113&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/77536
PR rtl-optimization/68212
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77427
--- Comment #12 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Sep 13 16:05:20 2016
New Revision: 240114
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240114&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
backport "Don't treat array as builtin type in set_underlying_type"
2016-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77427
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77511
--- Comment #5 from Evgenii Zheltonozhskii ---
So what should I do to get one?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77511
--- Comment #6 from Evgenii Zheltonozhskii ---
I've added I've added a build log in build_log.txt in the upper link. Maybe
it'll be useful
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77567
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77567
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 39611
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39611&action=edit
pr77567-1.patch
This (version for current compiler-rt, for gcc it needs a one-liner tweak in
the // See line -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77567
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 39612
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39612&action=edit
pr77567-2.patch
Slightly larger patch, which attempts to diagnose that, but fails to do so,
because asan_alloca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77420
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Tue Sep 13 17:00:29 2016
New Revision: 240118
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240118&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-09-13 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/77420
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77581
Bug ID: 77581
Summary: ICE: instantiate_template_1, cp/pt.c:17391
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77553
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 13 17:10:39 2016
New Revision: 240119
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240119&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/77553
* constexpr.c (cxx_fold_pointer_plus_expressi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67179
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67197
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Has this been fixed? if so please close it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67163
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 67162 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67162
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67165
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67128
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
You either need --with-pic or not do what you are trying to do.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63627
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77582
--- Comment #1 from Cong Wang ---
Created attachment 39614
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39614&action=edit
A possible patch
This patch improves it by using _S_empty_rep directly when
_GLIBCXX_FULLY_DYNAMIC_STRING is not en
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77582
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Patches goto gcc-patches@ and libstdc++@. Note !_GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI is most
likely not going to be used for 90% of applications. It is only needed if you
are linking between old binaries and using the ne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68260
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rogero at howzatt dot
demon.co.uk
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77582
Bug ID: 77582
Summary: Improve std::string::clear performace
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77582
--- Comment #3 from Cong Wang ---
Hi, Andrew
I just posted it:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2016-09/msg00051.html
Please review.
I caught this when using Google protobuf on Fedora 21, _M_mutate() is shown in
perf top profile, inlined into
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77532
Gerhard Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77583
Bug ID: 77583
Summary: ICE in pp_quoted_string, at pretty-print.c:966
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77583
--- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
With official releases (configured with --enable-checking=release) :
$ gfortran-6 z1.f90
z1.f90:3:20:
pure subroutine s
1
Error: internal procedure 's' at (1) conflicts with D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77454
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 13 19:19:33 2016
New Revision: 240120
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240120&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/77454
* tree-ssa-dom.c (optimize_stmt
Galacticus/Tools/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-trunk/configure --prefix=/home/abenson/Galacticus/Tools
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran --disable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 7.0.0 20160913 (experimental) (GCC)
$ g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70713
--- Comment #3 from dj at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dj
Date: Tue Sep 13 20:06:47 2016
New Revision: 240123
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240123&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-09-13 Joe Seymour
gcc/
PR target/70713
* config/msp430/msp43
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77583
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77581
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77567
--- Comment #6 from Kostya Serebryany ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Created attachment 39612 [details]
> pr77567-2.patch
>
> Slightly larger patch, which attempts to diagnose that, but fails to do so,
> because asan_allocator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77289
--- Comment #9 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Author: edlinger
Date: Tue Sep 13 21:25:04 2016
New Revision: 240124
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240124&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-09-13 Bernd Edlinger
PR rtl-optimization/77289
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67197
--- Comment #3 from David Edelsohn ---
The patch was reverted, but we don't know why it caused problems.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77585
Bug ID: 77585
Summary: g++ incorrectly decides that member function is called
without object in generic lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77499
--- Comment #13 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to avieira from comment #12)
> I heard Kugan was working on getting rid of superfluous zero_extends. Adding
> him to the watch list.
>
> @Kugan: Could your work help this case? And when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77532
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77532
--- Comment #7 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> $ cat zc1.f90
> module m
>type t
>contains
> procedure :: s
> generic :: write(unformatted) => s
>end type
> contains
>subroutine s(dtv, *)
> class(t), intent(ou
87 matches
Mail list logo
