https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80547
--- Comment #6 from Tom de Vries ---
The og7 test-case par-reduction-3.c fails with this ICE on trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85204
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 43848
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43848&action=edit
Tentative patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85202
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85217
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
Bug ID: 85222
Summary: [7/8 Regression] ABI breakage of __throw_ios_failure
by r244498
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ABI
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #0)
> A workaround is to use a libstdc++ built with --disable-libstdcxx-dual-abi
Or to catch std::exception&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85223
Bug ID: 85223
Summary: [nvptx] nvptx_single needs rewrite
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66145
--- Comment #35 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #34)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #33)
> > Probably impossible to fix without breaking the ABI again, but there should
> > have been two __throw_ios_f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85218
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.4.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85219
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85199
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #0)
> > A workaround is to use a libstdc++ built with --disable-libstdcxx-dual-abi
>
> Or to catch std::exception&
T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85223
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
> that minimized uses of head and tail,
Also, the use of the long-lived non-descriptive variable "before" needs to be
cleaned up.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85201
--- Comment #1 from Yibiao Yang ---
(In reply to Yibiao Yang from comment #0)
> $ gcc -v
> gcc -v
> Using built-in specs.
> COLLECT_GCC=gcc
> COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/8/lto-wrapper
> OFFLOAD_TARGET_NAMES=nvptx-none
> OFF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Do you know of any other exception type affected by the c++11 vs. old ABI issue
or does the entire I/O hierarchy only ever throw exactly ios_base::failure?
So a workaround would be to marshal these somehow
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85180
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> Actually, find_base_value is probably ok, it doesn't handle VALUEs and for
> PLUS/MINUS it just guesses one operand on which to recurse, rather than both.
find_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85180
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 43849
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43849&action=edit
patch
Patch I am testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Do you know of any other exception type affected by the c++11 vs. old ABI
> issue or does the entire I/O hierarchy only ever throw exactly
> ios_base::failure?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52571
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85204
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Thu Apr 5 08:36:37 2018
New Revision: 259125
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259125&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[nvptx] Fix neutering of bb with only cond jump
2018-04-05 Tom de Vries
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85204
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
Fixed on trunk.
Todo: revert r241652 on og7 and backport this patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85180
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If find_base_term always returned whatever first returned non-NULL up to the
ultimate caller, then I think the above would work fine. Sadly, that is the
case only in most of the spots, not all of them.
The P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 5 Apr 2018, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
>
> --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
cessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions.
$ g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 8.0.1 20180405 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2018 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copyin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85224
Bug ID: 85224
Summary: x86_64 missed optimisation opportunity for (-1 * !!x)
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85225
Bug ID: 85225
Summary: [GCOV] An array reference in the for(;;) loop will
lead the loop be marked as wrong execution times in
gcov
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85225
--- Comment #1 from Yibiao Yang ---
$ gcc -v
gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/8/lto-wrapper
OFFLOAD_TARGET_NAMES=nvptx-none
OFFLOAD_TARGET_DEFAULT=1
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80956
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85180
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 5 Apr 2018, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85180
>
> --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> If find_base_term always returned whatever fi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #5)
> On Thu, 5 Apr 2018, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
> >
> > --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80956
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini ---
In this specific case the broken surrogate std::initializer_list cannot be
completed because no definition is provided. Maybe something like the below
then (untested):
Index: call.c
=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84428
--- Comment #15 from Vojtech Fried ---
I am also getting this error. Our code is a big python extension. I run python3
and use LD_PRELOAD. In our code it throws an exception that would normally be
caught.
==23331==AddressSanitizer CHECK failed:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85225
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85213
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 5 Apr 2018, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
>
> --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85123
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |tnfchris at gcc dot
gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85180
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 43850
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43850&action=edit
alternative patch
The most simple hash_map variant is the attached. Comparing (-O0 optimized
cc1)
compile-ti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84428
--- Comment #16 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Vojtech Fried from comment #15)
> I am also getting this error. Our code is a big python extension. I run
> python3 and use LD_PRELOAD. In our code it throws an exception that would
> normally be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85180
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
So it looks like caching in cselib_val->rtx and unwinding that via a stack
might be the fastest variant (if we care)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #7)
> > It's not required to fix the simple case of a legacy binary using a new
> > libstdc++.so but it breaks other cases.
>
> None that are not broken right no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85180
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
True, but might eat more compile time memory.
Further, the question stands, is what find_base_term returns for a particular
VALUE cacheable for the whole duration between cselib_init and cselib_finish in
eac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84428
--- Comment #17 from Vojtech Fried ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #16)
> Is it public, so that I can reproduce that?
No, it is not public and it is also a large project, so it is not useful for
reproducing the issue. I am sorry.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85180
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 43851
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43851&action=edit
other alternative
Like this.
11.00user 0.01system 0:11.01elapsed 99%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata
43204maxresident)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80956
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|paolo.carlin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85226
Bug ID: 85226
Summary: system() gives pid 0 and doesn't launch the command
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85226
f-rog at hotmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #43852|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85226
f-rog at hotmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #43853|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85226
f-rog at hotmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #43854|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8)
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #7)
> > > It's not required to fix the simple case of a legacy binary using a new
> > > libstdc++.so but it breaks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85227
Bug ID: 85227
Summary: ICE with structured binding of a forward declared
variable
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85226
--- Comment #4 from f-rog at hotmail dot com ---
Please don't try to solve it as I try to fix it. It might not be g++ fault
after all.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83402
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Seems simpler to just define:
struct __dual_ios_failure {
__dual_ios_failure(std::string s, error_code e) : new_(s, e), old_(s) { }
ios::failure[abi:cxx11] new_;
ios::failure old_;
};
and make __th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85228
Bug ID: 85228
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE with constexpr lambda in template
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85226
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85208
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 43856
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43856&action=edit
gcc8-pr85208.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85205
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85226
--- Comment #6 from f-rog at hotmail dot com ---
Well my bad it's a bug that made it so i needed to wait at least around 20 ms
before restarting the daemon. It's weird tho because i could press the button
and get the log : Command executed : comma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85213
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> The problem is that twoval_comparison_p breaks appart SAVE_EXPR if their
> argument has no side effects.
> First, cp_build_binary_op calls save_expr on:
> (__bui
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85213
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
unshare_expr doesn't unshare the STATEMENT_LISTs embedded inside of it
(and wonder what would Alex' code do if we have two separate DEBUG_BEGIN_STMTs
for the same statement).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85212
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85216
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Timothy Pearson from comment #4)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> > This is 100% the equivalent code.
> >
> > jmp *(%r15) # opline.199_67->handler
> > Does two things:
> > lo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85224
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85229
Bug ID: 85229
Summary: .[concepts] ICE with local class in lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85209
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Outside of template we reject it properly:
error: cannot decompose lambda closure type ‘foo()::’
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85209
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36610
--- Comment #28 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #27 from Eric Gallager ---
[...]
> Did this fix it?
It seems so, both according to my own testing and gcc-testresults
postings.
Rainer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491
Bug 67491 depends on bug 85064, which changed state.
Bug 85064 Summary: [concepts] ICE with auto as template parameter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85064
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85064
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84979
--- Comment #5 from Volker Reichelt ---
*** Bug 85064 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85216
--- Comment #9 from Bill Schmidt ---
You mentioned you're on a POWER9 machine. It could be that you have firmware
with Spectre mitigations applied, which will affect all indirect branches. It
may be that you do not have Spectre mitigations appl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85209
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 43857
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43857&action=edit
gcc8-pr85209.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85230
Bug ID: 85230
Summary: asan: false positives in kernel on allocas
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: saniti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85231
Bug ID: 85231
Summary: [og7, openacc, nvptx] Too much shared memory claimed
for long vector length
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85230
--- Comment #1 from Dmitry Vyukov ---
I am also looking at kernel callback implementation, maybe they disagree with
compiler as to what's actually passed as arguments:
/* Emitted by compiler to poison alloca()ed objects. */
void __asan_alloca_p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85230
--- Comment #2 from Dmitry Vyukov ---
The runtime callbacks look correct to me, and the shadow they produce also
looks reasonable: 32-byte rezone before, 32 + (32 - object size) redzone after:
8800247b7180: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85230
--- Comment #3 from Dmitry Vyukov ---
Hummm, perhaps gcc expects that the left ASAN redzone will be within the
128-byte ABI redzone, but this becomes false with -mno-red-zone?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85228
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 5 Apr 2018, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
>
> --- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
> Seems simpler to just define:
>
> struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85232
Bug ID: 85232
Summary: gcc fails to vectorize a nested simd function call
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85210
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85233
Bug ID: 85233
Summary: Incorrect -Wmaybe-uninitialized with
-fpartial-inlining -finline-small-functions
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85200
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Apr 5 14:20:53 2018
New Revision: 259127
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259127&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/85200 - ICE with constexpr if in generic lambda.
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85200
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85228
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85210
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Confirmed.
On gcc-7-branch, with checking enabled, this is:
test.cc:5:8: internal compiler error: tree check: expected var_decl, have
parm_decl in cp_finish_decomp, at cp/decl.c:7354
7454 SET_DECL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85210
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 5 Apr 2018, rguenther at suse dot de wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
>
> --- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
> On Thu, 5 Apr 2018, redi at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85227
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85228
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84665
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85234
Bug ID: 85234
Summary: missed optimisation opportunity for (~x >> n) ? a : b
with n, a, b constants
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: mi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85136
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85228
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Apr 5 14:48:40 2018
New Revision: 259130
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259130&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/85228 - ICE with lambda in enumerator.
* pt.c (bt_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67486
--- Comment #7 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #6)
> I wonder if changing type of static array full_costs from int to long would
> help solve the problem.
>
> Adding vmakarov, who seems to be the author of mos
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85230
--- Comment #4 from Dmitry Vyukov ---
Removing these lines from runtime does not help unfortunately:
- kasan_poison_shadow(left_redzone, KASAN_ALLOCA_REDZONE_SIZE,
- KASAN_ALLOCA_LEFT);
The right redzone is also someho
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83402
--- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt ---
Conclusion is that we still need a fix to emmintrin.h along the lines of
Steve's original two comments. Additionally, we need to fix trunk to complain
about the out of range value, rather than quietly substi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85203
Thomas Preud'homme changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Known to fail|8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85228
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
1 - 100 of 177 matches
Mail list logo
