https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78294
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(gdb) up
#2 0x76f8b00a in
__tsan::ScopedIgnoreInterceptors::ScopedIgnoreInterceptors (this=) at ../../../../gcc/libsanitizer/tsan/tsan_rtl.h:549
549 cur_thread()->ignore_interceptors++;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78294
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(gdb) up
#3 __tsan::Initialize (thr=thr@entry=0x76277780) at
../../../../gcc/libsanitizer/tsan/tsan_rtl.cc:331
331 ScopedIgnoreInterceptors ignore;
(gdb) disass
Dump of assembler code for fun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71575
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
We run into
#1 0x0175ce2f in translate_isl_ast_to_gimple::copy_cond_phi_nodes (
this=0x7fffd9a0, bb=,
new_bb=, iv_map=...)
at
/space/rguenther/src/svn/gcc-6-branch/gcc/graphite-isl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71575
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59859
Bug 59859 depends on bug 71380, which changed state.
Bug 71380 Summary: [7 Regression] internal compiler error: in
copy_cond_phi_nodes, at graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c:2498
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71380
What|R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71380
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71575
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
Testcase from the duplicate (ICEs on trunk)
int *a;
int b, c, d, e, g;
char f;
void fn1() {
for (; c;) {
b = 0;
for (; b <= 2; b++) {
unsigned **h = (unsigned **) &a[b];
*h = (g && (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71575
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78292
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78293
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78295
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78296
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78304
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78305
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Huh, didn't I fix that ... ah no, I only fixed sth related (negating of x).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77822
--- Comment #27 from Andreas Krebbel ---
Author: krebbel
Date: Fri Nov 11 08:48:29 2016
New Revision: 242066
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242066&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR77822: S/390: Add range checks for zero_extract operands.
Make sur
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78298
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78299
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78306
Bug ID: 78306
Summary: [CilkPlus] "inlining failed in call to always_inline
‘memset’: function not inlinable" with -fcilkplus
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.0
Status: UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78307
Bug ID: 78307
Summary: [7 Regression] missing symbols in libubsan without
changing the soname
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44348
--- Comment #15 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #14)
> > The test in comment 2 compiles without error at revision r242002
> > although I think it is invalid. It gives an ICE with r241962.
>
> This
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78264
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez ---
> As Solaris boxes with their header files are not readily available (at least
> to
I'm trying to change that (i.e. getting Solaris into the co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78308
Bug ID: 78308
Summary: Hiding of member function templates introduced by
using-decl
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44348
--- Comment #16 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Huh, I don't see how r241972 (which only deals with pointer assignments)
> could affect comment 2.
>
> I see it ICEing with r242047, as it did with previous releases: ...
I am just reporting what I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44348
--- Comment #17 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #16)
> > Huh, I don't see how r241972 (which only deals with pointer assignments)
> > could affect comment 2.
> >
> > I see it ICEing with r242047, as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78267
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44348
--- Comment #18 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> But your previous message seems to suggest that the ICE is gone on trunk.
> This I cannot confirm. And I cannot imagine how my commit would cause that ...
You missed:
[Book15] f90/bug% /opt/gcc/gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78270
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44348
--- Comment #19 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #18)
> I also see it with my latest build (r242058)
>
> [Book15] f90/bug% gfc -c pr44348_1.f90
> [Book15] f90/bug%
I cannot confirm that. I do see t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77822
--- Comment #28 from Andreas Krebbel ---
Author: krebbel
Date: Fri Nov 11 10:37:53 2016
New Revision: 242067
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242067&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
S/390: Add PR77822 testcase.
For real this time.
2016-11-11 Domini
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78200
--- Comment #14 from Venkataramanan ---
Between GCC 6.2.0 and GCC 7 (Nov/10/2016) I see three major differences in
gimple opts dump.
1. IPA inline is more aggressive in GCC 7. Looks like it is in-lining more in
hot function "primal_bea_mpp". Ho
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78200
--- Comment #15 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 11 Nov 2016, venkataramanan.kumar at amd dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78200
>
> --- Comment #14 from Venkataramanan ---
> Between GCC 6.2.0 and GCC 7 (N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74762
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
We really need fine grained TREE_NO_WARNING, will see if I manage to implement
something for stage3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78307
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ABI
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78309
Bug ID: 78309
Summary: ICE: in get_hash, at ipa-icf.c:2124
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77285
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78310
Bug ID: 78310
Summary: ICE: insn does not satisfy its constraints:
{*bmi2_rorxdi3_1} with -mbmi2
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78306
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78311
Bug ID: 78311
Summary: "register value used as expression" on i386 in inline
assembly statement with "o" constraint
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78309
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72774
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78120
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78312
Bug ID: 78312
Summary: [7 Regression] wrong code probably due to VRP of
multiplication
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78295
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 11 12:53:36 2016
New Revision: 242068
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242068&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-11-11 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/78295
* tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71575
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 11 12:54:25 2016
New Revision: 242069
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242069&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-11-11 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/71575
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78295
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71575
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.0
Summary|[6/7 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72774
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Ah, and I've fixed it already in r240148. I'll check the testcase in and
close.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78310
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78120
--- Comment #3 from Bernd Schmidt ---
Gah, that's obviously bogus and fails elsewhere. Still looking...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77346
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Nope, still can't reproduce. Can you run your compile line with -v and post
the results, to see if there are any other flags passed to cc1 that I am
unaware of?
powerpc-e300c3-linux-gnu-gcc-7.0.0-alpha2016
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78312
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78307
Maxim Ostapenko changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||m.ostapenko at samsung dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78307
--- Comment #2 from Matthias Klose ---
I can't tell. I was just looking at symbol difference in the library, like
using the abigail tools.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78312
--- Comment #2 from Zdenek Sojka ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Hmm.
>
> So [0, 1] * ~[1, 65534] gets
>
> MEET ([0, 1] * [0, 0] == [0, 0],
> [0, 1] * [65535, 65535] == ~[1, 65534]) == ~[1, 65534]
>
> that looks ok to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78120
--- Comment #4 from Bernd Schmidt ---
The other issue here seems to be simply that BRANCH_COST is 0 for predictable
branches on x86. Which makes the default implementation of the hook used here
if_info.max_seq_cost
= targetm.max_noce_ifcvt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78307
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Sure, it doesn't affect gcc emitted code unless somebody calls those directly,
but perhaps say llvm compiled code using the shared libubsan.so. In any case,
we shouldn't be making ABI incompatible changes in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78112
--- Comment #14 from Rainer Orth ---
Created attachment 40023
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40023&action=edit
i386-pc-solaris2.12 assembler output: pr78112.s
Unfortunately, the new testcase FAILs on both Solaris/SPARC and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78311
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78307
--- Comment #4 from Maxim Ostapenko ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Sure, it doesn't affect gcc emitted code unless somebody calls those
> directly, but perhaps say llvm compiled code using the shared libubsan.so.
But LLVM doe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72774
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Nov 11 13:39:06 2016
New Revision: 242070
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242070&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/72774
* g++.dg/parse/pr72774.C: New test.
Added:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78307
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Maxim Ostapenko from comment #4)
> But LLVM doesn't support shared UBSan runtime (the only one supported is
> ASan) and AFAIK there aren't any plans to support it there.
Yeah, it is a very weird
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72774
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78307
--- Comment #6 from Maxim Ostapenko ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> (In reply to Maxim Ostapenko from comment #4)
> > But LLVM doesn't support shared UBSan runtime (the only one supported is
> > ASan) and AFAIK there aren't any
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78313
Bug ID: 78313
Summary: [7 Regression] Misleading spelling suggestion
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78313
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78307
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Maxim Ostapenko from comment #6)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Maxim Ostapenko from comment #4)
> > > But LLVM doesn't support shared UBSan runtime (the only one
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78313
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Thanks. Has some similarities to PR 77922.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78114
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #6 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> But for tests:
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/fast-math-mgrid-resid.f -O scan-tree-dump-times
> pcom
> "Executing predictive commoning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78314
Bug ID: 78314
Summary: [aarch64] ieee_support_halting does not report
unsupported fpu traps correctly
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78267
--- Comment #25 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Confirmed provided I run genfixes in the fixincludes directory.
For the record, note that configuring gcc with --disable-libsanitizer replace
an ICE with accept-invalid in pr44348.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44348
--- Comment #20 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> I cannot confirm that. I do see the ICE on comment 2 at r242066.
OK. I have "recovered" the ICE with the patch at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg01045.html (pr78267). AFAICT the
ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78314
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
No wonder that one fails on thunderx.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78292
--- Comment #4 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Fri Nov 11 14:59:48 2016
New Revision: 242073
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242073&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite
PR testsuite/78292
* gcc.d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78112
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78112
--- Comment #16 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Also on arm/aarch64.
Also on x86_64-apple-darwin16.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78309
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 40024
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40024&action=edit
Un-tested patch
Can you please Markus test the attached patch?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78315
Bug ID: 78315
Summary: "Changes" don't explain what "LRA" is
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: web
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78314
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78309
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Yes, your patch seems to fix the issue. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78316
Bug ID: 78316
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/vrp7.c scan-ipa-dump-times cp
"Setting value range of param 0 \\[-10, 9\\]" 1
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78316
--- Comment #1 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The gcc is configured as:
configure --target=aarch64-none-elf --prefix=... --with-gmp=... --with-mpfr=...
--with-mpc=... --with-isl=... --with-pkgversion=unknown --disable-shared
--disable-nls --di
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78317
Bug ID: 78317
Summary: "if (x & constant) z |= constant" should not be
rendered with jumps and conditional moves
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78317
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78317
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Bug 9814 but that was marked as fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78120
James Greenhalgh changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78318
Bug ID: 78318
Summary: FAIL: g++.dg/pr78112.C scan-assembler-times
DW_AT_object_pointer 37
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78310
--- Comment #2 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Fri Nov 11 16:21:52 2016
New Revision: 242076
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242076&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/78310
* config/i386/i386.md (rotate to r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78319
Bug ID: 78319
Summary: PASS->FAIL: gcc.dg/uninit-pred-8_a.c bogus warning
(test for bogus messages, line 20)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78310
--- Comment #3 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Fri Nov 11 16:42:54 2016
New Revision: 242077
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242077&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/78310
* config/i386/i386.md (rotate to r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78316
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78310
--- Comment #4 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Fri Nov 11 17:04:18 2016
New Revision: 242124
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242124&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/78310
* config/i386/i386.md (rotate to r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78310
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56480
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25071
--- Comment #19 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Any opinions on this?
So far 2 for, 0 against. May be the patch can be committed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50438
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> The patch in comment 5 regtests cleanly. However, it only fixes comment 1
> but not comment 0.
Any progress?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78120
--- Comment #6 from Bernd Schmidt ---
Created attachment 40028
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40028&action=edit
Candidate patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78120
--- Comment #7 from Bernd Schmidt ---
Sorry James, I think these two got mixed up in my memory.
I've attached a candidate patch I'm testing. This tries to make a better effort
to calculate before/after costs for the speed case so we don't rely e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78120
--- Comment #8 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #0)
> typedef unsigned long u64;
>
> typedef struct {
> u64 hi, lo;
> } u128;
>
> static inline u128 add_u128 (u128 a, u128 b)
> {
> a.lo += b.lo;
> if (a.lo < b.l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77823
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 40029
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40029&action=edit
ubsan-pr77823.patch
Completely untested patch to allow libubsan handling vector types.
Though, not sure if it w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78294
--- Comment #5 from Dmitry Vyukov ---
Markus, how do you configure and build gcc? Is there anything special?
Our tls accesses should not go through __tls_get_addr because we use
initial-exec attribute. __tls_get_addr vs indirect access through g
1 - 100 of 143 matches
Mail list logo
