https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39851
--- Comment #17 from Daniel Santos ---
Thanks for all your work on this Martin. I've put a script up on my github
account (https://github.com/daniel-santos/distccflags), updated the Gentoo
Distcc instructions and sent distcc a mail to notify the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63281
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #33503|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63281
--- Comment #8 from Alan Modra ---
Created attachment 42187
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42187&action=edit
[RS6000] Address cost
Somewhat related, costing constants properly also needs a proper cost to
loading from memory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82184
--- Comment #10 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
Dear Andrey,
Thanks for the confirmation that the fix did the trick.
Cheers
Paul
On 15 September 2017 at 14:55, andrey.y.guskov at intel dot com
wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82158
--- Comment #5 from Peter Cordes ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #4)
> It's a "feature" - if the function really doesn't return, then there is no
> real requirement to save and restore all callee-saved registers.
>
> A deliber
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60500
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81361
--- Comment #23 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Results with the patch posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2017-09/msg01338.html
Most (if not all) the eh failures seem fixed (compare to
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2017-07/m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82005
--- Comment #15 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Results posted at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2017-09/msg01338.html.
Hundreds of failures coming from this PR.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42607
--- Comment #15 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Related to pr82215. Submodules should probably also documented.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82215
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Related to pr42607.
About the question
> Also, the -fsyntax-only, etc. option in the first pass does not guarantee
> that
> generated modules will be identical to those created by the second pass.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82227
Bug ID: 82227
Summary: ARM thumb inefficient tailcall return sequence
(multiple pops)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimizat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81225
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82228
Bug ID: 82228
Summary: [8 Regression] 416.gamess in SPEC CPU 2006 failed to
build
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81733
--- Comment #1 from Iain Sandoe ---
Is this still current?
The ld64 assert is most likely triggered by a 0-length FDE. That could be
caused by confusion over the partitioning.
I don't see this on 10.11.6 with my bootstrap setup, what version o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82143
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Could we close this PR as WONTFIX?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81996
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71725
Peter Cordes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||peter at cordes dot ca
--- Comment #1 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82228
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82005
--- Comment #16 from Iain Sandoe ---
So.. trying to understand what we need to do to get this working on Darwin.
in the original .s we have ...
.section __GNU_DWARF_LTO,__debug_info,regular,debug
Lsection__debug_info_lto:
Ldebug_info0:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82143
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #8 from janus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81733
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81361
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|ada |target
--- Comment #24 from Eric Botcazo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82005
--- Comment #17 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On September 16, 2017 2:37:02 PM GMT+02:00, "iains at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82005
>
>--- Comment #16 from Iain Sandoe ---
>So.. trying to understa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82143
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> And to repeat it: Yes, I think there is an issue here to be fixed.
> Essentially what I'm looking for is an equivalent to ifort's "-real-size 128"
> option. I don't think that exists at the moment.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81325
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fixed for 7.3+. Tried to backport this to 6.x, but the testcase fails with
-fcompare-debug failure even with the patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81875
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Sat Sep 16 13:11:43 2017
New Revision: 252873
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=252873&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix condition folding in c_parser_omp_for_loop
2017-09-16 Tom de Vries
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82221
--- Comment #17 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Josh Poimboeuf from comment #7)
> Putting "sp" in the clobbers list is something that was suggested to me on
> the GCC mailing list a while back. And, other than this rare bug, it seems
> to do exact
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81978
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81849
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82143
--- Comment #10 from Steve Kargl ---
On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 12:39:12PM +, janus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> Please don't. I currently don't have much time to look into this issue, but I
> plan to do so in the future.
>
> And to repeat it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82143
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #9)
> I don't know what fort is doing, but what is wrong with -freal-4-real-16?
It is simply not equivalent to ifort's -real-size 128 / -r16, in the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82229
Bug ID: 82229
Summary: GCC7's LTO underperforms compared to GCC6
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82143
--- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #10)
> Please don't add a new -fdefault-* option. All of the current
> -fdefault-* options should be deprecated in favor of the -freal-*,
> -finteger-*, etc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82229
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you show the command lines being used to compile each file in gcc 7?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58052
Rustam Abdullaev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rustamabd at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82005
--- Comment #18 from Iain Sandoe ---
So .. just some notes on thoughts so far, not much conclusion yet.
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #17)
> On September 16, 2017 2:37:02 PM GMT+02:00, "iains at gcc dot gnu.org"
> wrote:
> >https
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82228
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82228
--- Comment #1 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
I think the problem is that I put the calculation too early. It should be
after the !STMT_VINFO_RELEVANT_P check instead.
The loop we're trying to vectorise is:
[0.93%] [count: INV]:
#
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65294
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #2)
> Could you please attach a testcase that fails without your patch, and passes
> after your patch is applied? Marking as WAITING until there is a clearer
> recipe t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82229
--- Comment #2 from krzysio.kurek at wp dot pl ---
I'm using CMake to generate a Makefile.
The Release build adds -O3 and -DNDEBUG by default to compile options.
I modify the config so that it also adds -flto.
Should I attach make verbose output?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66970
felix changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||felix.von.s at posteo dot de
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66970
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81154
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Sep 16 18:31:58 2017
New Revision: 252878
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=252878&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-06-21 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80984
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Sep 16 18:33:01 2017
New Revision: 252879
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=252879&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-06-13 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65757
--- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Sep 16 18:33:53 2017
New Revision: 252880
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=252880&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libquadmath/65757
* math/roundq.c: Cherry-pick upstrea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81766
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Sep 16 18:35:03 2017
New Revision: 252881
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=252881&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-08-08 Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79499
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Sep 16 18:35:03 2017
New Revision: 252881
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=252881&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-08-08 Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45784
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Sep 16 18:36:03 2017
New Revision: 252882
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=252882&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-07-27 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81052
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Sep 16 18:37:09 2017
New Revision: 252883
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=252883&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-08-03 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81621
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Sep 16 18:38:01 2017
New Revision: 252884
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=252884&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-08-03 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81687
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Sep 16 18:38:53 2017
New Revision: 252885
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=252885&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-08-09 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82112
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Sep 16 18:39:47 2017
New Revision: 252886
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=252886&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-09-12 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82112
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Sep 16 18:40:37 2017
New Revision: 252887
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=252887&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-09-12 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81224
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Also fails on 5.x branch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80984
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68686
Bug 68686 depends on bug 65757, which changed state.
Bug 65757 Summary: gfortran gives incorrect result for anint with real*16
argument
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65757
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65757
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79499
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81766
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79499
Bug 79499 depends on bug 81766, which changed state.
Bug 81766 Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in maybe_add_or_update_dep_1, at
sched-deps.c:924 caused by r250815
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81766
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45784
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81052
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81621
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81687
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82112
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82226
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This is a dup of another PR I can't find right now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82228
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Sat Sep 16 20:39:01 2017
New Revision: 252888
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=252888&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR82228: Move ncopies calculation in vectorizable_live_o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82228
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52869
Vittorio Romeo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vittorio.romeo at outlook dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37820
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40960
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29931
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45033
ensadc at mailnesia dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ensadc at mailnesia dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80920
ensadc at mailnesia dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ensadc at mailnesia dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80920
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31357
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31350
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i686-pc-linux-gnu |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79794
--- Comment #6 from Jim Wilson ---
Fixed. Patch and testcase committed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79794
Jim Wilson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81996
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|__builtin_return_address(0) |powerpc
|does not work on
80 matches
Mail list logo