https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82602
--- Comment #16 from David Brown ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #8)
> (In reply to David Brown from comment #7)
>
> > There is no intention to make "asm volatile" a barrier, as you get with a
> > memory clobber. The intention is to sto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60440
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Thanks for CC. Patches are currently under review.
About this PR: as 'b' is undeclared, the whole statement with the expression is
ignored and we have:
(gdb) p debug_function(cfun->decl, 0)
f (int a)
{
[0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67629
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
That's for CC. However as the warning is triggered early, we don't have
optimized IL:
(gdb) p debug_function(cfun->decl, 0)
foo (_Bool a)
{
int D.1836;
[0.00%] [count: INV]:
if (a != 0)
goto ; [IN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55189
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82612
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
But we are not even having an ARRAY_REF in the IL ...
So try
int g (int i)
{
int (*p)[2] = (int (*)[2])&i;
return (*p)[2];
}
where we also do not warn. Or the VLA variant:
int g (int i, int n)
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82610
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82534
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82568
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Oct 19 07:38:59 2017
New Revision: 253878
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253878&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/82568
* gfortran.h (gfc_resolve_do_iterator): A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82517
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Thu Oct 19 07:50:48 2017
New Revision: 253879
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253879&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Do not instrument use-after-scope for vars with large alignment (PR
saniti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82575
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #2)
> Created attachment 42397 [details]
> proposed patch
>
> I hadn't debugged past grepping for "debugobj" when I created the bugzilla.
> Now that I've looked further
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82613
Bug ID: 82613
Summary: Cannot access private definitions in base clause of
friend class template
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797
--- Comment #29 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
As suggested by Marc, I've removed the @ from include/Makefile.in, and removed
the leading - for lines with LN_S.
The result of "make -d --trace -j8 all-target-libstdc++-v3", in a build where
x86_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604
--- Comment #2 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> I suppose loop distribution inserted a version copy turning this into a
> non-perfect nest for outer loops and thus disabling autopar there.
>
> What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82580
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Oct 19 08:37:04 2017
New Revision: 253884
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253884&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/82580
* config/i386/i386.md (setcc + movzbl to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82517
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, amker at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604
>
> --- Comment #2 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71082
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70869
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||farmaazon at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71197
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82614
Bug ID: 82614
Summary: GCOV crashes while parsing gcda file
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: gcov-profi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82614
--- Comment #1 from Marco Castelluccio ---
Created attachment 42399
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42399&action=edit
GCNO file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79917
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82545
--- Comment #10 from Ivo Raisr ---
Thank you for the fix. Works on the full source file as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79689
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79711
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79781
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81024
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81742
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82614
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81942
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nsz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #18 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82023
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55189
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82615
Bug ID: 82615
Summary: [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2006 453.povray ~10%
performance deviation with trunk@248863
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82615
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2017-10-19
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82580
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81829
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Thu Oct 19 11:08:28 2017
New Revision: 253886
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253886&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Revert r238089 (PR driver/81829).
2017-10-19 Martin Liska
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81829
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82580
--- Comment #15 from Morwenn ---
That was insanely fast, thanks a lot! :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82616
Bug ID: 82616
Summary: ../bfd/.libs/libbfd.a(plugin.o): undefined reference
to symbol 'dlsym@@GLIBC_2.16'
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
URL: https://sourceware.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82614
--- Comment #3 from Marco Castelluccio ---
> Thanks for the report Marco. Looks it comes from Firefox, am I right?
Yes, that's correct. Actually, from a build of the JS shell.
> Which version of GCC have you been using?
The build was done with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82614
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Marco Castelluccio from comment #3)
> > Thanks for the report Marco. Looks it comes from Firefox, am I right?
>
> Yes, that's correct. Actually, from a build of the JS shell.
>
> > Which version
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81048
--- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Thu Oct 19 12:16:41 2017
New Revision: 253889
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253889&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-10-19 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/81048
* resolve.c (res
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81048
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81795
--- Comment #7 from Eric Gallager ---
Compiling with an older GCC makes me wonder: could the fix for this bug also be
backported to the other open branches?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82595
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Well, lsan_preinit.o shouldn't be linked into liblsan.so.*, either we should
> just ignore it completely, or install and link in like asan_preinit.o or
> tsan_pre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82575
--- Comment #5 from Alan Modra ---
> --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
> Hmm, but those symbols will prevail, enlarging the final symbol table?
> Or are weak + hidden symbols removed even for shared libaries?
Well, they are still undefined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82617
Bug ID: 82617
Summary: Internal compiler error in expand_expr_real_1 when
compiling the attached file
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82618
Bug ID: 82618
Summary: Inefficient double-word subtration on x86_64
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82618
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Or add a pattern for
(set (reg:DI 100)
(subreg:DI (minus:TI (reg/v:TI 90 [ x ])
(reg/v:TI 94 [ y ])) 8))
that combine would match and then reload that differently if not using SSE regs
and spl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48097
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37704
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fang at csl dot cornell.edu
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49582
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82445
--- Comment #6 from Richard Earnshaw ---
Author: rearnsha
Date: Thu Oct 19 13:10:42 2017
New Revision: 253890
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253890&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM] PR 82445 - suppress 32-bit aligned ldrd/strd peepholing with
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82575
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On October 19, 2017 2:33:17 PM GMT+02:00, amodra at gmail dot com
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82575
>
>--- Comment #5 from Alan Modra ---
>> --- Comment #4 from Richard B
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797
--- Comment #30 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Francois-Xavier Coudert from comment #29)
> The result of "make -d --trace -j8 all-target-libstdc++-v3", in a build
> where x86_64-apple-darwin17.0.0/libstdc++-v3 was entirely removed, can be
> fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82618
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Maybe a peephole2 pattern for sub_3 with:
"find_regno_note (peep2_next_insn (0), REG_UNUSED, operand[0])"
constraint that converts to equivalent compare would do the trick?
Hopefully, later passes (cprop_har
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82445
--- Comment #8 from Richard Earnshaw ---
Author: rearnsha
Date: Thu Oct 19 13:16:42 2017
New Revision: 253892
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253892&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM] PR 82445 - suppress 32-bit aligned ldrd/strd peepholing with
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82445
--- Comment #7 from Richard Earnshaw ---
Author: rearnsha
Date: Thu Oct 19 13:14:55 2017
New Revision: 253891
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253891&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[ARM] PR 82445 - suppress 32-bit aligned ldrd/strd peepholing with
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82595
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82445
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82595
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
BTW, why --without-pic? What you want to achieve by that?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82575
--- Comment #7 from Alan Modra ---
> --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
> OK. I suppose they are properly prevailed by any global symbol of the same
> name
> as well? Like a weak definition with default visibility? Or is there the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82130
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Heiko Eißfeldt from comment #1)
> This variant works for me with:
Yes, that's a simple workaround. Still, it would be nice to have support for
the stringification operator '#' in tradi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82618
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 42402
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42402&action=edit
Prototype patch
Attached patch compiles the test to:
movq%rsi, %r10
cmpq%rdx, %rdi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82618
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Comment on attachment 42402
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42402
Prototype patch
Nice, thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82509
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Thu Oct 19 13:50:10 2017
New Revision: 253893
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253893&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/82509
* dwarf2out.c (new_die_raw): New static
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82601
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> (does intent(out) mean it comes in uninitialized?)
Yes. To quote the Fortran 2008 standard (from section 5.3.10):
"The INTENT (OUT) attribute for a n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82509
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81591
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Sistek ---
Hello,
are there any news regarding this issue, please? Were you able to reproduce it?
Best wishes,
Jakub Sistek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82615
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |8.0
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82601
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Here is a variant of the example in comment 0, where the subroutine has been
substituted by a function:
program uninit
integer :: p,q
p = -1
q = f(p)
if (p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82615
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> The rev. was supposed to be a no-op?
I also guess so.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82434
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82610
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Sorry about the breakage.
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Hmm, include/ shouldn't include system headers directly :/ Of course they
> all do...
>
> is probably not too bad to include uncond
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82600
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Oct 19 14:24:39 2017
New Revision: 253899
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253899&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/82600
* typeck.c (check_return_expr): Don't call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82600
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82619
Bug ID: 82619
Summary: C++17 std::apply treated as in global namespace under
certain circumstances
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82619
--- Comment #1 from d25fe0be@ ---
If a `std::tuple` is passed in as `tuple`, isn't `std::apply` found by ADL?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82596
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Thu Oct 19 16:03:07 2017
New Revision: 253902
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253902&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/82596 - missing -Warray-bounds on an out-of-bounds
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82596
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 82596, which changed state.
Bug 82596 Summary: missing -Warray-bounds on an out-of-bounds index into string
literal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82596
What|Removed |Adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82620
Bug ID: 82620
Summary: [PDT] ICE: free_expr0(): Bad expr type (at
fortran/expr.c:497)
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82621
Bug ID: 82621
Summary: [6/7/8 Regression] wrong code with -Og -fgcse -fweb
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82622
Bug ID: 82622
Summary: [PDT] ICE in structure_alloc_comps, at
fortran/trans-array.c:8963
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82622
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||82173
--- Comment #1 from G. Steinmetz -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82619
--- Comment #2 from tower120 ---
> If a `std::tuple` is passed in as `tuple`, isn't `std::apply` found by ADL?
Maybe, I don't understand how and when ADL work :(
Visual Studio / clang compiler said nothing about it, so I thought ...
Are you su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797
--- Comment #31 from Misty De Meo ---
> If --disable-libstdcxx-pch works (does it?), and until someone can
> investigate more, I'd be tempted to consider it a mac bug and recommend that
> option in https://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html .
F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79543
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79543
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82395
--- Comment #5 from Alexander Monakov ---
Author: amonakov
Date: Thu Oct 19 16:48:34 2017
New Revision: 253904
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253904&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
ira-color: fix allocno_priority_compare_func for qsort (PR 82395)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82395
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82407
Bug 82407 depends on bug 82395, which changed state.
Bug 82395 Summary: [8 Regression] qsort comparator non-negative on sorted
output: 1 in color_allocnos
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82395
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82619
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82619
tower120 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82618
--- Comment #5 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Oct 19 17:35:39 2017
New Revision: 253905
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253905&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/82618
* config/i386/i386.md (sub to cmp)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82618
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82233
--- Comment #18 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Thu Oct 19 17:49:24 2017
New Revision: 253907
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253907&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-10-19 Thomas Koenig
Backport from trunk
PR lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82233
--- Comment #17 from Christophe Lyon ---
Thanks for your effort; I'm still seeing noise though.
Sorry, I'm not fluent in fortran: is there a way to call wait() from fortran?
I could try adding it at the end of the testcase, to see if it reliably
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82623
Bug ID: 82623
Summary: many omp tests failed for both C++ and Fortran,
gcc-6.4 on Redhat 7.3/64
Product: gcc
Version: 6.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
1 - 100 of 138 matches
Mail list logo
