https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80345
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80345
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.5
Version|6.3.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
--- Comment #18 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 7 Apr 2017, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
>
> --- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Has somebody the benchmark around to retry
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80341
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Apr 7 08:20:24 2017
New Revision: 246756
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246756&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-07 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/80341
* tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80350
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80349
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80348
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80166
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80345
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80348
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80349
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80344
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80341
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80345
--- Comment #7 from Денис Крыськов ---
Created attachment 41149
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41149&action=edit
gcc5.4 -v stderr/stdout
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80345
--- Comment #8 from Денис Крыськов ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #4)
> 6.3 branch works fine.
> Only 5.4.1 is affected. So it looks like a missing backport.
Microarch is Haswell.
I failed to reproduce ICE with gcc 6.3. If th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80345
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
Fixed on trunk (in between 5-base and 6-base) by r233269.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80334
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Apr 7 08:47:43 2017
New Revision: 246757
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246757&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-07 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/80334
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80345
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Which makes it a dup of PR68021.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80345
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker.cheng at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80350
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
--- Comment #19 from vincenzo Innocente ---
Could you please have a look also to c++ and lto: this is what I get on my
skylake:
for c++ or lto -fno-split-paths pessimizes
[innocent@vinavx3 scimark2TMP]$ gcc -march=native -Wall -Ofast *.c -lm ;
./
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80348
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80352
Bug ID: 80352
Summary: Improper reload of operands with equiv pseudo
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ra
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80350
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
I've got patch that I'm going to submit to mailing list soon.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80353
Bug ID: 80353
Summary: AVX512: _mm512_slli_epi32, the last argument must be
an 8-bit immediate
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80155
--- Comment #21 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #20)
> (In reply to Thomas Preud'homme from comment #19)
> > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #18)
> > > (In reply to Thomas Preud'homme from comment #17
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80155
--- Comment #22 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
(In reply to Thomas Preud'homme from comment #21)
>
> I can see this behavior for Cortex-M0+ indeed but the results are different
> for Cortex-M7 for me:
>
>
> % arm-none-linux-gnueabi-gcc -S ~/corte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80354
Bug ID: 80354
Summary: Poor support to silence -Wformat-truncation=1
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80353
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80212
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri Apr 7 10:36:21 2017
New Revision: 246759
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246759&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add function part to a same comdat group (PR ipa/80212).
2017-04-07 Mart
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80344
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Created attachment 41150
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41150&action=edit
orig.ii.gz
This is the original .ii file.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80155
--- Comment #23 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 7 Apr 2017, thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80155
>
> --- Comment #22 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
> (In reply to Thomas Preud'homme fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80344
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
I believe this is exposed by inlining
this_14(D)->http_ver = Http::ProtocolVersion (); [return slot optimization]
as
D.148385 ={v} {CLOBBER};
MEM[(struct &)this_14(D) + 4] = D.148385;
this_14(D)-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80345
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=79889
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri Apr 7 11:20:01 2017
New Revision: 246760
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246760&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Error message on target attribute on aarch64 target (PR target/79889).
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80212
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79889
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80344
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80353
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80155
--- Comment #24 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #23)
> On Fri, 7 Apr 2017, thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80155
> >
> > --- Comment #22 from Thomas P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80155
--- Comment #25 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 7 Apr 2017, thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80155
>
> --- Comment #24 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80155
--- Comment #26 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #25)
> On Fri, 7 Apr 2017, thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80155
> >
> > --- Comment #24 from Thomas P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80155
--- Comment #27 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 7 Apr 2017, thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80155
>
> --- Comment #26 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
> Yes true.
>
> By the way, your fir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80155
--- Comment #28 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #27)
> On Fri, 7 Apr 2017, thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80155
> >
> > --- Comment #26 from Thomas P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71607
--- Comment #10 from Christophe Monat ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #9)
Hello Ramana,
Is there a plan to have this patch delivered upstream at some point in the near
future ?
Best regards,
--C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80349
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80349
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.4
Summary|UBSAN: compile ti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80265
Pedro Alves changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||palves at redhat dot com
--- Comment #4 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80350
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71607
Tejas Belagod changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||belagod at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80343
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80354
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70478
--- Comment #8 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Fri Apr 7 16:01:50 2017
New Revision: 246764
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246764&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-07 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/70478
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70703
--- Comment #15 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Fri Apr 7 16:06:28 2017
New Revision: 246765
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246765&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-07 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/70703
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68569
--- Comment #4 from Nicolas Koenig ---
And here is a fix for the first test case (z2a.f90), already regression tested
on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu:
Index: resolve.c
===
--- resolve.c (r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80344
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78002
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri Apr 7 16:26:52 2017
New Revision: 246767
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246767&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2017-04-05 Eric Botcazou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78002
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80355
Bug ID: 80355
Summary: Improve __builtin_shuffle on AVX512F
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
st case from PR79294 doesn't ICE anymore, but the unreduced test
case still does. Here's a new reduction.
Seen with trunk 20170407.
$ cat python.ii
template struct a;
template a < b
$ g++ -c -std=c++11 python.ii
python.ii:2:35: internal compiler error: in convert_nontype_argum
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: doko at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
seen on trunk 20170407 on powerpc64le-linux-gnu, fails with -O3, works with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80356
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, Richard, any thoughts on what can be done split paths to avoid this?
ocessed source
seen with trunk 20170407 on powerpc64le-linux-gnu while building glib with -O3.
With -O2 the build succeeds almost immediately, with -O3 it eats up all
available memory.
$ gcc -c -g -O3 gkeyfilesettingsbackend.i
#0 0x10259e1c in ggc_internal_alloc (size=24, f=0x0, s=0, n=1)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80356
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(gdb) p debug_tree(type)
unit size
align 32 symtab 0 alias set -1 canonical type 0x770b55e8
precision 32 min max
pointer_to_this >
type_6 QI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80291
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80291
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Here is a slightly further reduced version of the test case:
module test
implicit none
type cell_t
contains
procedure :: get_mask
end type
contains
elemental logical
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68829
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Polyhedron 11 test_fpu2 currently segfaults on Fedora 25 due to this problem:
[uros@localhost source]$ /ssd/uros/gcc-build/gcc/xgcc -B
/ssd/uros/gcc-build/gcc -S -Ofast -funroll-loops test_fpu2.f90
[uros@loca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80346
Paolo Bonzini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bonzini at gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80346
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
My very quick analysis from the IRC chat yesterday was that the first testcase
has a path that should have been detected as unexecutable. I'd work from the
full testcase rather than the reduced one.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79553
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||compile-time-hog,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60932
Patrick Pelissier changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||patrick.pelissier at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80358
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80348
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri Apr 7 17:51:55 2017
New Revision: 246770
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246770&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/80348
* typeck.c (cp_build_binary_op): Con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80348
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6/7 Regression] UBSAN: |[6 Regression] UBSAN:
/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../trunk/configure --prefix=/home/dcb/gcc/results.246752
--disable-bootstrap --disable-multilib --disable-werror
--enable-checking=df,extra,fold,rtl,yes --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran
Thread model: posix
gcc version 7.0.1 20170407 (experimental
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80095
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri Apr 7 18:09:55 2017
New Revision: 246772
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246772&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/80095
* call.c (build_over_call): Don't check cx
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80095
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6/7 Regression] ICE with |[5/6 Regression] ICE with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
--- Comment #21 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On April 7, 2017 6:57:13 PM GMT+02:00, "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
>
>--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek ---
>So, Richard, any thoughts
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80346
--- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor ---
The reduced test case from comment #4 doesn't trigger a warning because in it
the value of n is unknown. The original test case does trigger it because in
it n's range is known. This is evident from the VRP
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80321
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80346
--- Comment #7 from Dr. David Alan Gilbert ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #6)
> The reduced test case from comment #4 doesn't trigger a warning because in
> it the value of n is unknown. The original test case does trigger it
> becau
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80359
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
Reduced file is this:
FFT(_Complex *X, int length) {
unsigned i, j;
for (; i < length; i++) {
X[i] = 0;
for (j = 0; j < length; j++)
X[i] = X[i] / length;
}
}
Interestingly, it seems t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80346
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Bonzini ---
g_assertion_message_cmpnum is not declared anymore as noreturn since glib 2.38.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=692125 :-O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80346
--- Comment #9 from Dr. David Alan Gilbert ---
(In reply to Paolo Bonzini from comment #8)
> g_assertion_message_cmpnum is not declared anymore as noreturn since glib
> 2.38.
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=692125 :-O
!!!? Oh in th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80346
--- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor ---
108 /* compute the table entries in rsdt */
109 tables_nr = (rsdt_table->length - sizeof(AcpiRsdtDescriptorRev1)) /
110 sizeof(uint32_t);
111 g_assert_cmpint(tables_nr, >, 0);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80326
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Apr 7 19:22:00 2017
New Revision: 246774
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246774&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/80322
PR target/80323
PR target/80325
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80323
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Apr 7 19:22:00 2017
New Revision: 246774
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246774&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/80322
PR target/80323
PR target/80325
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80322
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Apr 7 19:22:00 2017
New Revision: 246774
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246774&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/80322
PR target/80323
PR target/80325
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80325
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Apr 7 19:22:00 2017
New Revision: 246774
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246774&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/80322
PR target/80323
PR target/80325
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80359
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
This bug seems to have been introduced between revision 245052
and 245800 i.e. sometime during February 2017.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68569
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Nicolas Koenig from comment #4)
>
> + if (e->ts.type == BT_CHARACTER && e->ts.u.cl->length
> +&& e->ts.u.cl->length->expr_type == EXPR_VARIABLE)
> +gfc_error("Nonconstant length c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80356
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80360
Bug ID: 80360
Summary: internal compiler error: in int_mode_for_mode, at
stor-layout.c:405
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80356
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Anyway, what is happening is that we have convert_from_reference applied in a
spot where either we do not expect it, or where we should look through the
reference type.
In particular, coerce_template_parms ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78715
Casey Carter changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Casey at Carter dot net
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80361
Bug ID: 80361
Summary: [7.0.1. regression] severe regression recursive call
to nonrecursive procedure
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80267
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80361
--- Comment #1 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Bug only appears when using the flags -fbacktrace -ggdb -fcheck=all.
With default flags -O2 -g it doesn't occur.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80361
--- Comment #2 from Jürgen Reuter ---
The problem doesn't appear with our strict flags
-O0 -fbacktrace -fcheck=array-temps,bounds,do,mem,pointer
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
