https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78221
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78221
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Luckily, it seems that the generated code is correct after all and the
imaginary part is in fact *not* discarded, as shown by this small test:
complex, parameter :: i = (0.,1.)
print *,i
print *,(i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78221
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77848
--- Comment #14 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On November 5, 2016 4:31:54 PM GMT+01:00, "wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77848
>
>--- Comment #13 from Bill Schmidt ---
>SPEC cpu2006 on power
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78221
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig ---
This looks promising:
Index: arith.c
===
--- arith.c (Revision 241747)
+++ arith.c (Arbeitskopie)
@@ -2369,10 +2369,10 @@ gfc_complex2r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78221
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Nov 6 12:27:51 2016
New Revision: 241884
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241884&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-11-06 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/78221
* arith.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78221
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #6)
> This looks promising:
Indeed! I can confirm that this fixes the bogus warning on comment 0 and 4 and
also in a larger code base, where I first observed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78206
Jack Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78221
--- Comment #9 from Thomas Koenig ---
Conversion is done during the matching phase, so this is
when we warn.
The problem here, as with PR 67219, was that these warning
may be issued, and then the statement may be rejected.
If that happens, we sh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78222
Bug ID: 78222
Summary: target-tilegx: Incorrect bundle: let addli in y pipe
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34475
Balint Reczey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||balint at balintreczey dot hu
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78156
--- Comment #3 from Pauli ---
Could __builtin_constant_p help to select different code for compile time and
runtime?
Something like:
string_view(const _CharT* __str) :
_M_len(/*null check*/__builtin_constant_p(__str /*or __str[0]?*/) ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70419
Balint Reczey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||balint at balintreczey dot hu
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78223
Bug ID: 78223
Summary: struct containing default member initializer fails
constexpr test in aggregate initialization
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70419
--- Comment #2 from Balint Reczey ---
(In reply to Balint Reczey from comment #1)
> Also please fix the error message emitted when trying to link a non-PIE
> non-PIC static library to a position independent executable:
>
> $ cat m.c
> #include
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77596
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70601
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50069
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lkrupp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
cilkrts
Thread model: posix
gcc version 7.0.0 20161106 (experimental) [trunk revision
ddd81c4:9ac4416:5055cc9834c33b5a7b9ec57194454c9b558dbf25] (GCC)
$ g++-trunk -c testcase6.cpp -O1
$ g++-trunk -c testcase6.cpp -O2
testcase6.cpp: In function 'void the_game(float)':
testcase6.cpp:35:6:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78225
Bug ID: 78225
Summary: [7 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/gomp/pr27573.c (internal
compiler error)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78226
Bug ID: 78226
Summary: Fill out location information everywhere
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71767
--- Comment #44 from Iain Sandoe ---
posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg00536.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg00537.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg00538.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-pa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57438
--- Comment #29 from Iain Sandoe ---
posted
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg00541.html
I have backports for 6.x and 5.x if wanted.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78178
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Nov 6 20:30:31 2016
New Revision: 241886
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241886&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-11-06 Thomas Koenig
Backport from trunk
PR fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69544
--- Comment #9 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Nov 6 20:30:31 2016
New Revision: 241886
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241886&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-11-06 Thomas Koenig
Backport from trunk
PR fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69544
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78227
Bug ID: 78227
Summary: ICE: unrecognizable insn: in extract_insn, at
recog.c:2311 with -mavx512bw
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78228
Bug ID: 78228
Summary: fstrict-overflow breaks code without overflow?
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78228
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Most likely
If (i>0) i=-i;
Is being turned into -abs (i). Which means it should be turned into uabs
instead.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78228
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78226
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Nov 6 21:27:32 2016
New Revision: 241887
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241887&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-11-06 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/78226
resolve.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67710
--- Comment #11 from Iain Sandoe ---
posted;
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg00545.html
I have backports for 6.x and 5.x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67710
--- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Could you please mail me the back ports?
Dominique
> Le 6 nov. 2016 à 22:35, iains at gcc dot gnu.org a
> écrit :
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67710
>
> --- Comment #11 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78227
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78227
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78229
Bug ID: 78229
Summary: [6/7 Regression] ICE in redirect_eh_edge_1, at
tree-eh.c:2305
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77538
--- Comment #16 from Dmitry Vyukov ---
> The stack size limit in my box is 8M. I have also checked /proc/limits.
So, is increasing stack size help?
Tsan increases stack consumption. 8MB is not that much provided that you have
1MB frames.
> By e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77848
--- Comment #15 from Bill Schmidt ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #14)
> On November 5, 2016 4:31:54 PM GMT+01:00, "wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org"
> wrote:
>
> >Notable degradations:
> > 403.gcc: -1.8%
> >
> >Other result
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77848
--- Comment #16 from Bill Schmidt ---
Created attachment 39975
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39975&action=edit
WIP patch for outer-loop vectorization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78230
Bug ID: 78230
Summary: Compile pr66178.c fail for mips64el-elf with N64 abi
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78230
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Most likely the testcase fails on all LP64 targets.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78230
--- Comment #2 from Kito Cheng ---
Ya, In fact I am working on RISV-V 64, and it's seem cause by
TRULY_NOOP_TRUNCATION (32, 64) == false.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78224
--- Comment #1 from Rimvydas (RJ) ---
Same ICE+segv is triggered at -O2 on:
gcc version 4.9.2 (Debian 4.9.2-10)
gcc version 4.8.5 (SUSE Linux)
Works fine at -O3 on:
$ CCVER=gcc47 g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/usr/libexec/gcc47/g++
Ta
ed from primal_bea_mpp of 429.mcf.
gcc version 7.0.0 20161106
snip from test.c.155t.ifcvt
;; basic block 30, loop depth 1, count 0, freq 407, maybe hot
;;prev block 29, next block 31, flags: (NEW, REACHABLE, VISITED)
;;pred: 28 [64.0%] (FALSE_VALUE,EXECUTABLE)
_96 = _67 == 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78210
--- Comment #6 from Christophe Lyon ---
I confirm the problem is now fixed.
45 matches
Mail list logo
