https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84625
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6/7/8 Regression] ICE with |[6/7 Regression] ICE with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84603
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83790
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Fri Mar 2 08:40:04 2018
New Revision: 258127
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258127&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[nvptx] Add support for CUDA 9
Backport trunk r256891:
gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83790
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Author: tschwinge
Date: Fri Mar 2 08:39:31 2018
New Revision: 258126
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258126&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[nvptx] Add support for CUDA 9
Backport trunk r256891:
gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84661
Bug ID: 84661
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
(strip_array_types())
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invali
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83790
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84219
--- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Fri Mar 2 08:51:06 2018
New Revision: 258128
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258128&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-03-02 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/84219
* gfortran.dg/co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84662
Bug ID: 84662
Summary: internal compiler error: tree check: expected class
'type', have 'exceptional' (error_mark) in
is_bitfield_expr_with_lowered_type, at
cp/type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84663
Bug ID: 84663
Summary: internal compiler error: tree check: expected
array_type, have error_mark in cp_complete_array_type,
at cp/decl.c:8334
Product: gcc
Version
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84614
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Mar 2 09:16:50 2018
New Revision: 258129
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258129&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/84614
* rtl.h (prev_real_nondebug_insn, next_rea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84486
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 43540
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43540&action=edit
candidate patch
Can you check whether this patch works for you (on the unreduced testcase which
likely exists)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84664
Bug ID: 84664
Summary: internal compiler error: in
cp_perform_integral_promotions, at cp/typeck.c:2172
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84640
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84634
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Fri Mar 2 09:46:43 2018
New Revision: 258131
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258131&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Avoid &LOOP_VINFO_MASKS for bb vectorisation (PR 84634)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84665
Bug ID: 84665
Summary: internal compiler error: in build_value_init, at
cp/init.c:343
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84634
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84590
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri Mar 2 09:48:41 2018
New Revision: 258132
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258132&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/84590
* cp-gimplify.c (cp_fully_fold): Unwrap TA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84590
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84666
Bug ID: 84666
Summary: ostringstream prints floats 2x slower than snprintf,
when precision>=37
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83983
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri Mar 2 09:57:43 2018
New Revision: 258133
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258133&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/83983
* ipa-devirt.c (odr_subtypes_equivalent_p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84667
Bug ID: 84667
Summary: unreasonable refusal to use assignment operator method
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84620
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84620
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I meant to say:
The char * GTY ((tag ("dw_val_class_symview"))) val_symbolic_view; line should
come at the and of the union, not before the other classes.
The FIXMEs don't really look helpful, we are not goin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84665
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84664
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84614
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84661
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70359
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84661
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.5
Summary|internal compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84663
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84662
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81827
--- Comment #17 from Paul Thomas ---
> There are two ways to fix this:
> (i) Generate incomplete vtables, with the pointers to copy and finalise set
> to null, for module derived types. This has the disadvantage that class
> objects, such as the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70359
--- Comment #23 from Aldy Hernandez ---
For the curious, on x86 with -ftree-forwprop we get an additional jump:
inttostr:
.LFB0:
.cfi_startproc
movl%edi, %eax
movslq %edx, %rdx
movl$-858993459, %r9d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84668
Bug ID: 84668
Summary: c++filt: out of memory allocating 18446744071696285694
bytes after a total of 135168 bytes
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70359
--- Comment #24 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
> OTOH, the following changes things quite a bit on arm:
>
> < p_22 = p_19 + 4294967295;
> < *p_22 = 45;
> ---
> > p_22 = p_8 + 4294967294;
> > MEM[(char *)p_19 + 4294967295B] = 45;
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81827
--- Comment #18 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, pault at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81827
>
> --- Comment #17 from Paul Thomas ---
>
> > There are two ways to fix this:
> > (i)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84663
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84663
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84219
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8 Regression] ICE: Invalid |Failure to generate error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84661
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
ICEs starting with r208426, before that we rejected it with:
pr84661.C:3:36: error: expected primary-expression before ‘auto’
void foo (decltype(((a = 0) || ((auto);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84661
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84662
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Started with r230365.
Before it got rejected with
pr84662.C:2:3: error: expected constructor, destructor, or type conversion
before ‘(’ token
a (__attribute__((c(0 && int() - ([] {} && b) || auto;
^
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84662
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84603
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> Note this is an option having IPA effect so it doesn't make sense to specify
> it on a per-function level. Thus INVALID.
>
> That is, the effect is setting some
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84664
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84669
Bug ID: 84669
Summary: Error displaying in wrong file for unclosed scopes in
headers
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70359
--- Comment #25 from Richard Biener ---
So we indeed have p_20 and p_9 live as p_9 is used after the loop. Originally
this wasn't the case but fold_stmt in the first forwprop pass does this
by means of following use-def chains.
As I usually say
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84662
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70359
--- Comment #26 from Richard Biener ---
So I suggest to look at insert_backedge_copies () to see whether replacing
out-of-loop pre-inc uses with the post-inc value is possible.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84668
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84665
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
We don't ICE with
struct S { int s; } a[1];
but do ICE with e.g.
struct S { constexpr S () {} } a[1];
build_value_init has:
341 /* The AGGR_INIT_EXPR tweaking below breaks in templates. */
342 g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17426
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30082
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33915
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84658
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19347
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36381
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44803
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36503
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30974
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19073
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30082
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2007-08-28 10:58:39 |2018-3-2
Assignee|rguenth at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=951
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||deferred
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84658
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Seems the inliner immediately undoes what ICF did and both get inlined into
main as well.
The aD.2373 array becomes an alias of aD.2363.
And the real bug is introduced in ccp2:
Folding predicate __for_begin_5
unk-258129-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
gcc version 8.0.1 20180302 (experimental) (GCC)
This is a recent regression:
r258129 - FAIL
r258075 - OK
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19347
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2006-02-16 21:28:32 |2018-3-2
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84657
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84657
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78651
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikezackles at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84658
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=704
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78651
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84658
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 43546
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43546&action=edit
Problematic CCP2 dump file
Jakub do you understand why is the folding happens? I'm not skilled in CCP.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84658
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Seems the inliner immediately undoes what ICF did and both get inlined into
> main as well.
It's not undoing the decision because the symbol (Bar) is global. So i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84671
Bug ID: 84671
Summary: Chrono literals don't accept apostrophe as separator
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84670
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84670
Franz Sirl changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sirl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84658
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Tried to look at the ccp2-uid-details dump and can't make any sense from that,
so I think we need Richi on this.
A guess would be that something somewhere looks through the alais at one point
and not the oth
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84658
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> > Seems the inliner immediately undoes what ICF did and both get inlined into
> > main as well.
>
> It's not undoing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84671
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Known to work|4.9.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84671
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Presumably started with my commit r210513
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6737
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84671
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jwakely.gcc at gmail dot com |
Host|Linux x86 6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28364
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84530
--- Comment #4 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Mar 2 13:05:18 2018
New Revision: 258134
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258134&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386: Update -mfunction-return= for return with pop
When -mfunctio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84658
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||alias
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84039
--- Comment #4 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Mar 2 13:09:55 2018
New Revision: 258135
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258135&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386: Add TARGET_INDIRECT_BRANCH_REGISTER
For
---
struct C {
vi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19753
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84667
Elmar Stellnberger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #43542|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84658
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If ICF needs to adjust all points-to if it makes any variable aliases, perhaps
it should as well adjust the code to use the variables rather than their
aliases.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84658
--- Comment #11 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> If ICF needs to adjust all points-to if it makes any variable aliases,
> perhaps it should as well adjust the code to use the variables rather than
> their alias
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84672
Bug ID: 84672
Summary: -fcheck=bounds gives runtime error on allocation on
assignment with implicit type conversion
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84669
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28364
--- Comment #30 from Zack Weinberg ---
It's been a very long time and I don't know exactly what changed, but GCC 7.3
generates essentially the same code for both of the functions in the "C test
case" and I would not describe that code as "bad".
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84632
--- Comment #7 from Paolo Carlini ---
In fact, not considering error-recovery issues a la c++/72825, we have another
rather serious issue here: for the already mentioned init/array testcases we
shouldn't give first an error message about the init
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84667
--- Comment #2 from Elmar Stellnberger ---
Princess17b29a just found out that the problem can be resolved by adding the
const keyword to the constructor in line 233:
inline xstrbuf( const xstrbuf& s ) ...
... as neither "xstrbuf( base_str_const s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84673
Bug ID: 84673
Summary: Overcomplicated code generation for a chain of
mutually exclusive conditions
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84657
--- Comment #3 from Zachary Michaels ---
Interesting, thanks for the quick follow-up!
1 - 100 of 214 matches
Mail list logo
