https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84811
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Sorry, my fault, forgot about -da, can you repeat with that option as well?
Your optimized dump is identical to my, so if there is a difference (and there
must be, because the function in question isn't call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84811
--- Comment #20 from Zhendong Su ---
Created attachment 43695
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43695&action=edit
output from "gcctk -O3 -S -da small.c"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79929
--- Comment #29 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Mar 18 09:20:37 2018
New Revision: 258630
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258630&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-03-18 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/79929
* gfortra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84913
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Sun Mar 18 10:25:29 2018
New Revision: 258631
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258631&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Don't try to vectorise COND_EXPR reduction chains (PR 84
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84913
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84811
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #21 from Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84811
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79929
--- Comment #30 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Fixed by revision r256284?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53281
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53281
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #6)
[...]
> We should also underline the param, or the "const" token.
(actually, if the member function or param is 'const', it's not a problem, I
think. -ENOCOFFEE)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84890
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
A similar sentiment to comment #1:
https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/84op5c/usability_improvements_in_gcc_8/dvu7n5e/
> I find that "did you forget to '#include" is kind of personal message
> and it's quit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77680
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71066
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84930
Bug ID: 84930
Summary: Brace-closed initialization of cstring
(i.e."abcdefghi") to coresponding aggregate types
fails in certain situation
Product: gcc
Version: u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79685
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79929
--- Comment #31 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #30)
> Fixed by revision r256284?
r256284 is OK, r256283 fails.
We cannot backport r256284 because this is the ABI change for
long string lengths.
So, this i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65453
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Sun Mar 18 16:33:55 2018
New Revision: 258632
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258632&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-03-18 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/65453
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66310
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84931
Bug ID: 84931
Summary: Expansion of array constructor with constant
implied-do-object goes sideways
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79929
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84931
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66310
--- Comment #26 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> I concur. Closing accordingly.
I disagree: if there is a limit, gfortran should emit an error.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77414
--- Comment #7 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Sun Mar 18 17:51:57 2018
New Revision: 258633
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258633&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-03-18 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/77414
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84932
Bug ID: 84932
Summary: i386/cpuinfo.h:293: 4 * bad bitshifts ?
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84931
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Confirmed from 4.3.1 up to trunk (8.0).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84932
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jkoval at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66310
--- Comment #27 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #26)
> > I concur. Closing accordingly.
>
> I disagree: if there is a limit, gfortran should emit an error.
Well you are hitting on an OS limit, we could put
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84933
Bug ID: 84933
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in set_value_range, at
tree-vrp.c:288 since r257852
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84933
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84933
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84932
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84929
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84926
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84811
--- Comment #23 from Martin Liška ---
Isn't that caused by a undefined behavior in compiler?
Can you please run it in valgrind:
valgrind --leak-check=yes --trace-children=yes ...
Can you please test it with compiler that is built w/o optimizatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84926
--- Comment #2 from Дилян Палаузов ---
make -C src all
make[1]: Entering directory '/git/postgresql/src'
make -C common all
make[2]: Entering directory '/git/postgresql/src/common'
make -C ../backend submake-errcodes
make[3]: Entering directory '
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84048
--- Comment #5 from John David Anglin ---
With binutils-2.29,test passes:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22978
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84902
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 84902, which changed state.
Bug 84902 Summary: [8 Regression] 549.fotonik3d_r from SPEC2017 fails
verification with -Ofast -march=native on Zen since r258518
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84902
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84926
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84635
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Sun Mar 18 20:17:10 2018
New Revision: 258634
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258634&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix UBSAN in regrename.c (PR rtl-optimization/84635).
2018-03-18 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84635
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84934
Bug ID: 84934
Summary: Installing the lto plugin where binutils will look for
it
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84934
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think it is up to the distro/installer themselves to install the plugin in
the correct location. Binutils might be installed in a fully differently
directory structure as gcc is.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84934
--- Comment #2 from Дилян Палаузов ---
Builind a linux from scratch system, doing everywhere "./configure && make
install" shall work, taking all defaults into account. For gcc+LTO+binutils
this does not work. While distros can adjust the exact
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84935
Bug ID: 84935
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr84512.c scan-tree-dump
optimized "return 285;"
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84936
Bug ID: 84936
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE with unexpanded parameter pack
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84931
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84937
Bug ID: 84937
Summary: [7/8 Regression] ICE with class template argument
deduction and auto
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-val
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84931
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82992
--- Comment #5 from Harald Anlauf ---
Adding 'implicit none' after the use statements:
subroutine sub (c_int)
use iso_c_binding, only: c_int
implicit none ! makes no difference
end
-> still no error message
module pr82992
integer :: x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84938
Bug ID: 84938
Summary: internal compiler error: in gen_reg_rtx, at
emit-rtl.c:1187
(gen_reg_rtx()/maybe_legitimize_operand())
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71485
Vegard Nossum changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vegard.nossum at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84939
Bug ID: 84939
Summary: internal compiler error: in gimplify_expr, at
gimplify.c:12382
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84940
Bug ID: 84940
Summary: internal compiler error: in build_value_init_noctor,
at cp/init.c:465
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84941
Bug ID: 84941
Summary: internal compiler error: in reg_overlap_mentioned_p,
at rtlanal.c:1870
(reg_overlap_mentioned_p()/match_asm_constraints_1())
Product: gcc
V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84942
Bug ID: 84942
Summary: internal compiler error: in
fold_convert_const_int_from_real, at fold-const.c:2011
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84943
Bug ID: 84943
Summary: internal compiler error: in build_call_a, at
cp/call.c:374
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
57 matches
Mail list logo
