https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80775
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81262
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Jul 1 08:16:27 2017
New Revision: 249865
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249865&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/81262
* bb-reorder.c (fix_up_fall_thru_edges)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80330
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81262
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Jul 1 10:11:16 2017
New Revision: 249866
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249866&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/81262
* bb-reorder.c (fix_up_fall_thru_edges)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81214
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
At revision r249851 I see the following regression on darwin
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/mvc6.c (test for excess errors)
UNRESOLVED: gcc.target/i386/mvc6.c scan-assembler punpcklbw
UNRESOLVED: gcc.target/i3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81262
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81271
Bug ID: 81271
Summary: gcc/cp/lex.c:116: wrong condition ?
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81272
Bug ID: 81272
Summary: libdecnumber/decNumber.c:6032: wrong condition ?
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41244
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse ---
If we write &data[i] - &data[0] instead of &data[i] - data, we hit the special
case in fold_binary_loc /* Fold &a[i] - &a[j] to i-j. */ which leads to
fold_addr_of_array_ref_difference.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57301
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66970
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|jason at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80751
--- Comment #3 from Vittorio Zecca ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #1)
> > This issue is exposed by adding a gcc_assert at trans-stmt.c:455
>
> Could you please be more explicit about what you changed in trans-stmt.c and
> why
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80751
--- Comment #4 from Vittorio Zecca ---
I believe I answered your question.
The NULL pointer dereferencing is still in trunk 249961
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81273
Bug ID: 81273
Summary: Wrong code generated for ARM setting volatile struct
field with a literal
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81273
--- Comment #1 from LdB ---
In above code the ARMTIMER cases should be TIMER not related to bug just cut
and paste typo.
behavior is exhibited by *all* versions of GCC that support AVX targeting,
from at least 4.9.0 through the 8.0.0 (20170701).
The code compiles warning-free, of course.
See it live on Godbolt: https://godbolt.org/g/NDDgsA
Actual Disassembly:
---
foo:
16 matches
Mail list logo