https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80978
Bug ID: 80978
Summary: [8 Regression] LTO/PGO bootstrap broken by r248863
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80970
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80971
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80972
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80974
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80974
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
Ah good, a testcase, thanks. Maybe we'll understand what was breaking spec now.
Transformation happens during PRE.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80970
--- Comment #2 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> Can't download source files:
> You don't have permission to access /~glaubitz/cc2Vfl4Z.out.gz on this
> server.
Oops, sorry. That should be fixed now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80974
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
According to the previous dump (crited1):
# RANGE [1, 9] NONZERO 15
h_11 = h_43 + 1;
but when we call get_nonzero_bits on h_11 in PRE, we get 7 ???
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80919
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8 Regression] ICE: |[7 Regression] ICE:
|S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80970
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80979
Bug ID: 80979
Summary: ice in lookup_mark, at cp/tree.c:2298
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80978
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80974
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
During iteration 1 on some loop, we get
Setting value number of i_10 to h_11 (changed)
which becomes
Setting value number of i_10 to i_10 (changed)
in later iterations.
But the call to set_ssa_val_to(i_10,h_11)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80979
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
Reduced C++ source code:
namespace a class address {
friend bool operator==(const address &, const address &}
bool operator==(const address &, const address &;
}
class b {
a::address ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80974
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse ---
scc_vn_restore_ssa_info is called at the end of PRE, but we would need some
form of restoration after any iteration cycle at least (or maybe we shouldn't
have modified the information for h_11, I don't know).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80766
--- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Mon Jun 5 09:31:32 2017
New Revision: 248873
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248873&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-06-05 Janus Weil
Backport from trunk
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80766
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80474
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou ---
Created attachment 41471
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41471&action=edit
Tentative fix for 6 branch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80980
Bug ID: 80980
Summary: -Os generates larger code than -O1 because loop is not
removed
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80974
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse ---
The conditions and location are probably not right, but at least the testcase
passes, so this gives an idea of where the problem is.
--- tree-ssa-sccvn.c(revision 248859)
+++ tree-ssa-sccvn.c(working c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80947
--- Comment #1 from Vlad Zolotarov ---
Created attachment 41472
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41472&action=edit
an ii value generated by g++-6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80803
--- Comment #25 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to boger from comment #17)
> I run these tests after a build by first editing the
> src/libgo/testsuite/gotest to set keep=true and trace=true. Then I go to my
> bld directory:
>
> cd bld/powerpc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80981
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80981
Bug ID: 80981
Summary: [7/8 Regression] couldn't deduce template parameter
for an obvious case
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80981
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80981
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 41473
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41473&action=edit
Original test-case
Attaching original test-case, where I get:
../../v8/src/objects-body-descriptors.h: In stati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80981
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80981
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80981
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Thanks for the patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80981
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> Clang and older versions of GCC do accept that.
view-source:https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-7/porting_to.html#hypothetical-instantiation
The error is entirely correct,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35339
--- Comment #12 from Nicolas Koenig ---
Author: koenigni
Date: Mon Jun 5 12:35:11 2017
New Revision: 248877
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248877&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-06-05 Nicolas Koenig
PR fortran/35339
* fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80945
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig ---
If this patch is fixed, please remember to remove the extra
check in frontend-passes.c (traverse_io_block). Just grep
for 80945.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556
--- Comment #36 from simon at pushface dot org ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #35)
> The workaround is to filter out -static-libgcc in configure.ac on Darwin but
> to leave -static-libstdc++, so why is it still looking for the shared
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556
--- Comment #37 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Created attachment 41474
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41474&action=edit
Patch to top-level configure.ac, configure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80717
Anatol changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anatol.pomozov at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80932
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Better testcase (C and C++):
int x = 1;
long int
foo (void)
{
return ((long) (13801962912760474560ULL * x) - (long)
(15334142073106273231ULL * x)) * -6;
}
int
main ()
{
foo ();
return 0;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80932
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70601
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Mon Jun 5 14:43:01 2017
New Revision: 248878
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248878&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-06-05 Janus Weil
PR fortran/70601
* tr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32415
Dan Ibanez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daibane at sandia dot gov
--- Comment #15 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80925
--- Comment #12 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hmmm, they don't all fail on power6/7 (costmodel-pr37194.c for instance). I
attached a dump from -fdump-tree-vect-details for one that does (power6).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80925
--- Comment #13 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 41475
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41475&action=edit
Dump from -fdump-tree-vect-details for test case
gcc.dg/vect/vect-33-big-array.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80925
--- Comment #14 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
spawn -ignore SIGHUP /home/seurer/gcc/build/gcc-test/gcc/xgcc
-B/home/seurer/gcc/build/gcc-test/gcc/
/home/seurer/gcc/gcc-test/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-33-big-array.c
-fno-diagnostics-show-c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80982
Bug ID: 80982
Summary: gcc.target/powerpc/builtins-3-runnable.c fails
starting with its introduction in r248846
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80982
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80983
Bug ID: 80983
Summary: [ F03] memory leak when calling procedure-pointer
component with allocatable result
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80983
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70601
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The ICE has been fixed on (8-)trunk. Backports pending.
(In reply to janus from comment #7)
> However, we probably still need to deal with PPCs that have allocatable
> function results.
This is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80983
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80939
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Jun 5 16:49:04 2017
New Revision: 248881
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248881&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/80939 Remove unmeetable constexpr specifiers
PR lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80803
--- Comment #26 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
This should let you run the test binary:
cd TARGET/libgo
make GOTESTFLAGS=--keep net/check
cd gotest*/test
LD_LIBRARY_PATH=../../.libs ./a.out -test.short
The test binary is simply a.out in the gotestNN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62170
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Candidate patch posted for review:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-06/msg00242.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80925
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski ---
These started to fail on aarch64-*-* at the same time as powerpc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62207
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking
Last reconfirmed|2014-1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79056
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery
Last reconfirmed|2017
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80984
Bug ID: 80984
Summary: [5/6/7/8 Regression] ICE with label/variable ambiguity
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80894
--- Comment #8 from Marc Glisse ---
Hopefully the issue is the same as in PR 80974, which does have a testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80897
--- Comment #2 from Anatoly Pugachev ---
...
make[7]: Entering directory '/1/mator/gcc8/gcc/ada/rts'
make[7]: 'a-assert.o' is up to date.
/1/mator/gcc8/./gcc/xgcc -B/1/mator/gcc8/./gcc/ -B/1/gcc/sparc64-linux-gnu/bin/
-B/1/gcc/sparc64-linux-gnu/l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556
--- Comment #38 from Eric Botcazou ---
> I’ve worked out a patch and bootstrapped (see attachment). The patch is
> against the gcc-8-20170558 snapshot, would that be OK?
I'm no Darwin specialist so I cannot really comment, but my understanding
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80897
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
--- Comment #10 from Daniel Black ---
FYI I have tested from the gcc master (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-g++ (GCC) 8.0.0
20170605 (experimental)) and it doesn't identify the the following bit of
rocksdb code as a warning where previously it did. So fixed for me on master.
./db/write_thread.h:227:78:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80985
Bug ID: 80985
Summary: -Wnoexcept-type should not produce a warning for
inlined template functions
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80984
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80986
Bug ID: 80986
Summary: auto keyword variable lost its attributes
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
63 matches
Mail list logo
