https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84840
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84839
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84830
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84833
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84811
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
> gcc version 8.0.1 20180310 (experimental) [trunk revision 258413] (GCC)
Just a nit, this revision mentioned above is actually from GCC 7 branch. Isn't
that the issue?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84833
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Just a note, as can be seen e.g. on
static volatile int a;
static int my_foo1 (void) { return 1; }
static int my_foo2 (void) { return 2; }
typedef int (*F) (void);
static F resolve_foo (void) { if (a) return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84786
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 13 08:03:28 2018
New Revision: 258475
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258475&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/84786
* config/i386/sse.md (sse2_loadhpd): Use Y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84828
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 13 08:04:54 2018
New Revision: 258476
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258476&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/84828
* reg-stack.c (change_stack): Change updat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84827
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 13 08:05:58 2018
New Revision: 258477
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258477&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/84827
* config/i386/i386.md (round2): For 387 fa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84786
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fixed for 8.1+ so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84827
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8 Regression] ICE in |[7 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84828
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fixed for 8.1+ so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84831
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 13 08:12:07 2018
New Revision: 258478
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258478&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/84831
* stmt.c (parse_output_constraint): If
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84831
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84834
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 13 08:12:59 2018
New Revision: 258479
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258479&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/84834
* match.pd ((A & C) != 0 ? D : 0): Use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84834
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8 Regression] ICE: tree |[7 Regression] ICE: tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83906
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So just add a gdb >= 8.1 version test in
libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/gdb-test.exp
and guard this test on effective target gdb_8_1?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84658
--- Comment #24 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Tue Mar 13 08:20:27 2018
New Revision: 258480
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258480&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PTA info in IPA ICF (PR ipa/84658).
2018-03-13 Martin Liska
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84658
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Known to fail|8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84215
--- Comment #10 from Christophe Lyon ---
Yesterday I noticed:
* on arm:
FAIL: libgo:database/sql
* on aarch64:
FAIL: libgo:runtime/pprof
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84841
Bug ID: 84841
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected ssa_name,
have real_cst in rewrite_expr_tree_parallel, at
tree-ssa-reassoc.c:4624
Product: gcc
Ver
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84842
Bug ID: 84842
Summary: ICE in verify_target_availability, at sel-sched.c:1569
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84841
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84841
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with r236564.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84843
Bug ID: 84843
Summary: [8 Regression] C++ ICE on builtin redefinition since
r258391
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84841
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.4
Summary|[8 Regression] IC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84841
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
At least latent on the GCC 7 branch and earlier.
/* We start expression rewriting from the top statements.
So, in this loop we create a full list of statements
we will work with. */
stmts[stm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84841
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84843
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84830
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84843
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84843
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P4 |P1
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83906
--- Comment #17 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Ideally I want the printer to still work for users with older versions of gdb.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83906
--- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wakely ---
But we can remove the [8 Regression] marker if it's messing with reports.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84521
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P3
Summary|[8 Regression] aar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84843
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
I think if we have a definition we need to use newdecl ...
Now consider
extern "C" int __atomic_compare_exchange (int x, int y);
void bar() { __atomic_compare_exchange (1, 2); }
extern "C" int __atomic_c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83906
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8 Regression] Random FAIL: |Random FAIL:
|libstdc+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84843
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
So, do we want to return newdecl unconditionally and scrap the olddecl
(builtin)
binding somehow? For -fpermissive, of course?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84833
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
> Another (though preexisting) bug is lack of optimization, if we have a call
> or reference of a target_clones dispatcher in a function with the same
> target_clones attribute (or maybe even just target attri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84833
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
I can confirm the issue, there's missing edge to foo->baz and thus the symbol
is removed. I'll fix that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84833
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Just a note, as can be seen e.g. on
> static volatile int a;
> static int my_foo1 (void) { return 1; }
> static int my_foo2 (void) { return 2; }
> typedef int (*F)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84676
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|mpolacek at gcc d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84843
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
return newdecl is something we never do, we either return error_mark_node (an
error), or NULL_TREE (the olddecl and newdecl are different thing) or olddecl
(after merging the two decls).
One way out of this w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82186
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|mpolacek at gcc d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #62 from Richard Bi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84844
Bug ID: 84844
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in extract_constrain_insn_cached,
at recog.c:2217 (error: insn does not satisfy its
constraints)
Product: gcc
Version: 8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968
--- Comment #63 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Are the remaining issues only related to .debug_macro, or other stuff too?
If only .debug_macro, does:
--- gcc/dwarf2out.c 2018-03-11 17:48:53.498068316 +0100
+++ gcc/dwarf2out.c 2018-03-13 10:58:03.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84805
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Mar 13 10:04:51 2018
New Revision: 258481
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258481&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR lto/84805
* ipa-devirt.c (odr_subtypes_equivalent_p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84805
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968
--- Comment #64 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Are the remaining issues only related to .debug_macro, or other stuff too?
The LTO testsuite is clean on SPARC/Solaris 10 for me (GNU as + Solaris ld) but
Rainer's testing exercises more combinations, in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71660
--- Comment #17 from Peter Cordes ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #16)
> But what we do care about is comment 2, i.e. _Atomic(T) and std::atomic
> should have the same alignment (both in an out of structs). Maybe that needs
> the C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84844
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|target
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80283
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84844
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84844
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The problem is that if a constraint returns NO_REGS before RA (i.e. in
non-strict mode) then that alternative is ignored, and e.g. get_attr_type used
by sched1 needs to compute alternative. As the instructio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84844
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uros at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59833
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65146
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i386-*-*
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58407
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Thanks! I can take care of the rest of the library, but for now this makes all
the deque tests pass:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_deque.h
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_deque.h
@@ -149,9 +149
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84845
Bug ID: 84845
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2304:
unrecognizable insn at -O2 and above at aarch64
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84845
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84846
Bug ID: 84846
Summary: GCOV intermediate format improvements
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: gcov-prof
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84846
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84844
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Or shall I got for ?*v instead, or ???*v, or !???*v ?
Or we can revert PR78090 fix and use preferred_for_speed attribute again. This
will allow the compiler to emi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84844
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #4)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> > Or shall I got for ?*v instead, or ???*v, or !???*v ?
>
> Or we can revert PR78090 fix and use preferred_for_speed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78090
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84215
--- Comment #11 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
Please include all the output from each failure, if possible. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78090
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Even with this patch reverted, I can't reproduce the #c0 difference, neither in
7.3.1 nor on the trunk. And even if we emit the direct inter-unit conversions
in cold sections, it is significantly smaller (4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84805
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #8)
> Thanks for the reduced testcase.
I thank you for the fast fix. I can confirm that libreoffice now builds fine.
Are you considering adding the reduced test-case to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84737
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84769
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84769
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Mar 13 13:24:36 2018
New Revision: 258482
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258482&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/84769 qualify std::get and std::get_if to avoid ADL
Backpor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84844
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> The problem is that if a constraint returns NO_REGS before RA (i.e. in
> non-strict mode) then that alternative is ignored, and e.g. get_attr_type
> used by sched1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84798
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |ice-on-invalid-code
Status|N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84844
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I'm afraid I don't see what sel-sched could do.
It asks the DFA about cost estimate, and that ICEs.
And it ICEs because to determine the estimated cost it needs to estimate which
alternative is going to be us
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84737
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Do I understand it correctly that you suspect that the new IPA-CP
clone that is created from r256888 on is harmful? In that case, you
want to test that by trying higher values of ipa-cp-eval-threshold,
somet
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84843
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84847
Bug ID: 84847
Summary: [8 Regression] Incompatibility between early LTO debug
and "-Wl,--gc-sections" leads to corrupt DWARF
debuginfo
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84848
Bug ID: 84848
Summary: [8 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/coarray/event_3.f08
-fcoarray=single -O2 -latomic execution test
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84215
--- Comment #12 from Christophe Lyon ---
It's not very informative.
On arm:
PASS: crypto/x509
timed out in gotest
/home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg-buildfarm/tcwg-apm_32-build/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libgo/testsuite/gotest:
line 624: 15642 K
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84847
--- Comment #1 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 13 Mar 2018, dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84847
>
> Bug ID: 84847
>Summary: [8 Regression] Incompatibility bet
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84737
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #7)
> Do I understand it correctly that you suspect that the new IPA-CP
> clone that is created from r256888 on is harmful? In that case, you
Yes.
> want to test that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84848
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://noblelift.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=e8aec7d772de62b3b6c40316a&id=a19c01d77e&e=7264378baa
https://noblelift.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=e8aec7d772de62b3b6c40316a&id=16fd5683a7&e=7264378baa
Noblelift is the #1
manufacturer of pallet
trucks worldwide!
More information
(http
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84840
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84005
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84005
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
This is from cross to powerpc64-linux,
-maltivec -mvsx -mno-allow-movmisalign -ftree-vectorize -fno-vect-cost-model
-fno-common -O2 bb-slp-1.c -nostdinc -fdump-tree-slp-details
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84847
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84847
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://sourceware.org/bugz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84847
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #0)
> The downstream bug report:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1543912
> describes a problem building systemd and systemd-bootchart with gcc 8, which
> turn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84847
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Note that back in time using gold made things work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84847
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84840
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84798
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
*** Bug 84840 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84847
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 13 Mar 2018, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84847
>
> --- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
> (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #0)
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84848
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84847
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu ---
Binutils 2.30 branch looks normal:
[hjl@gnu-cfl-1 rhbz-1543912]$ gcc -flto -g -Wl,--gc-sections
-Wl,--print-gc-sections build/bootchart.o build/log.o -o
build/systemd-bootchart -B./ -Wl,-v
collect2 ver
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84847
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 13 Mar 2018, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84847
>
> --- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu ---
> Binutils 2.30 branch looks normal:
I tried 2.30
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84847
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #6)
>
> make check-target-libstdc++-v3 RUNTESTFLAGS="prettyprinters.exp"
I tried:
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/libstdc++-prettyprinters/prettyprinters.exp
b/lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83392
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
To me it looks like a sanopt bug.
The -m32 version is missing 3 checks, lines 28/29/30, but those are all present
before the sanopt pass:
[ptr-overflow-sanitization-1.c:28:6] UBSAN_PTR
([ptr-overflow-sanit
1 - 100 of 206 matches
Mail list logo
