https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85246
Bug ID: 85246
Summary: [og7, nvptx, openacc] gemm.f90 fails with
-mlong-vector-in-workers
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33699
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #26
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79185
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85096
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
Just to mention the testcase fails in the same way if you build and run it with
GCC 7 and libstdc++ from GCC 7 when that was configured with the gcc-4
compatible ABI by default. Just in case that wasn't ob
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85246
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
I went through a couple of cycles of minimizing the failure, seeing something
suspicious, modifying by hand or writing a tentative patch, but every time I
went back to the original non-minimized example I got
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85078
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85078
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #14
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83860
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse ---
GMP's expression templates, which are based on libstdc++ valarray, have the
same issue. I tried using values in GMP (
https://gmplib.org/list-archives/gmp-bugs/2014-January/003319.html ). I never
committed it f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85244
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85234
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85236
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85237
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85244
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
That said, it is get_ref_base_and_extent that for the variable index returns
offset 96 bits and size == maxsize == 32, identical to the [0] case.
Perhaps we shouldn't trust:
638 /* If maxsize is un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||cygwin, mingw
Status|UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85247
Bug ID: 85247
Summary: Filesystem filename() wrong result for host-like path
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85244
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85244
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Isn't non-NULL next fine in unions?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85244
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I.e. shouldn't it just be else seen_variable_array_ref = false; rather than if
(next) seen_variable_array_ref = false; ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85232
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85244
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
On the other side, this is done only if known_size_p (maxsize), don't we want
to reset it even if maxsize isn't known?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85180
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Apr 6 08:30:52 2018
New Revision: 259166
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259166&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-04-06 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/85180
* al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #13)
> I'm probably going to locally patch it to be consistent with the default ABI
> choice - that at least keeps programs working that do not explicitely choose
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14)
> For the in-place transformation in libsupc++ if something catches the old
> failure and a new failure is thrown, is it possible? The other way around,
> if w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85247
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85078
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85233
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85180
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #17 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
>
> --- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely ---
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60865
VdP changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||moltonel at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from VdP
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #18 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
>
> --- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85244
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85244
>
> --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> On the other side, this is done only if known
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85247
--- Comment #2 from Evgeniy Shcherbina ---
How is that incorrect? It is a pretty valid URI which I can change to this:
"ftp://blahblah.org"; and gcc will tell me that filename is "blahblah.org" which
is obviously wrong. Anyway, I will find where
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85233
--- Comment #2 from Erik Carstensen ---
I know nothing about GCC internals, but I did make some observations on the
warning's behaviour while minimizing the test case. An unqualified guess based
on this is that intraprocedural analysis is not don
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85232
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
if-conversion is attempted, but fails.
I can get it to work (as in, use the simd clones) if fun1 is
__attribute__((const)); and when using -ffast-math.
const attribute is needed to prove no side-effects.
Now
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83860
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Known to work|5.4.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85247
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I've already reported it as a potential defect in the standard, so it will get
addressed (either by fixing the standard or giving justification for leaving it
as is).
The Filesystem library is not meant to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85210
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85210
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84872
--- Comment #2 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
Nothing to do with sel-sched as is :) We're just asking to make loop
preheaders that will be fallthrough blocks. The loop has blocks 5 and 6 (6->5
is a loop latch), and the pred block is block 7 but th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85248
Bug ID: 85248
Summary: [6/7/8 Regression] Miscompilation when using error
function that returns
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wron
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85248
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85248
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I suspect this is because error is marked as noreturn in the header file and
not a gcc issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84762
--- Comment #13 from Franz Sirl ---
Yes, I can do a patch for GCC-9. Any idea for the option naming? Like
-msvr4-struct-return-msb? Or should I consolidate -maix-struct-return and
-msvr4-struct-return into -maggr-return-mode={aix,svr4,svr4gnu}?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85232
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85232
>
> --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> if-conversion is attempted, but fails.
> I ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018, ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85238
>
> Kai Tietz changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
> ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85214
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85249
Bug ID: 85249
Summary: [6/7/8 Regression] ICE with invalid default parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: error-recovery, ice-on-invalid-code
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85250
Bug ID: 85250
Summary: Builtin operator overload resolution fails to consider
user-defined conversion template
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
? , .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85251
Bug ID: 85251
Summary: Using declaration for base class constructor looses
explicit.
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85249
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85252
Bug ID: 85252
Summary: Segmentation fault with -g for static zero-length
array initialization
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85248
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83860
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
N.B. compiling with -fstack-reuse=none will prevent the optimizer from reusing
the stack space immediately, so the dangling references can still be used to
access the temporaries after their lifetime ends.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85248
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> I suspect this is because error is marked as noreturn in the header file and
> not a gcc issue.
No, it's not. It's properly distinguished:
extern void __error_al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84872
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84428
--- Comment #18 from Vojtech Fried ---
Created attachment 43866
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43866&action=edit
simple repro
I have added a simple way to reproduce it.
Unpack and run run.sh.
You need python3 installed (inc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83860
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85253
Bug ID: 85253
Summary: asan detects heap-buffer-overflow in matmul_r4.c
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85213
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Apr 6 11:24:36 2018
New Revision: 259167
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259167&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/85213
* fold-const.c (twoval_comparison_p): R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85213
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85248
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85252
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85252
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||5.5.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85244
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Apr 6 11:47:18 2018
New Revision: 259168
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259168&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-04-06 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/85244
* tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85244
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Summary|[6/7/8 Regressio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85006
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85253
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85252
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85252
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
As for warning/error, we do accept static char a[1] = "a"; without warning, and
emit a warning for static char a[1] = "ab";
warning: initializer-string for array of chars is too long
and similarly emit a warn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85254
Bug ID: 85254
Summary: boost::is_final does not work for template types
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85252
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85254
--- Comment #1 from andysem at mail dot ru ---
Created attachment 43869
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43869&action=edit
Compilable test case
/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-259161-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
gcc version 8.0.1 20180406 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85256
Bug ID: 85256
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE with capturing pointer to VLA
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85248
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
--with-ld=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-ld
--with-as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-259161-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
gcc version 8.0.1 20180406 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85258
Bug ID: 85258
Summary: [7/8 Regression] ICE with invalid range-based for-loop
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: error-recovery, ice-on-invalid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85242
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85222
--- Comment #19 from Richard Biener ---
Luckily both failure classes are immutable (via access limitations) so the
following issue with the __dual_ios_failure idea doesn't exist:
catch (old-ABI &e)
{
modify e in-place
throw;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85252
--- Comment #5 from Themos Tsikas ---
If you find a gcc version that doesn't ICE, make sure you try the options "-g
-O".
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|*-*-solaris2|x86-*-solaris2
Priority|P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81084
--- Comment #22 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Another gentle ping. As has been mentioned, powerpcspe also lacks
gcc-8/changes.html entry.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85123
--- Comment #7 from Tamar Christina ---
Patch has been reverted as r259169.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85123
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84947
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426
Bug 63426 depends on bug 84947, which changed state.
Bug 84947 Summary: UBSAN:
ipcp_bits_lattice::meet_with(generic_wide_int >,
generic_wide_int >, unsigned int)
../../gcc/ipa-cp.c:1058
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84947
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85254
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85258
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85257
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85214
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85256
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63217
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Bug 77660 also looks related
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85254
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Reduced a little further:
template struct remove_cv{ typedef T type; };
template struct is_final
{
static const bool value = __is_final(typename remove_cv::type);
};
struct final1 final {};
template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85177
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
*** Bug 85255 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85255
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85259
Bug ID: 85259
Summary: [8 Regression] Missing -Wstringop-overflow= since
r256683
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
1 - 100 of 180 matches
Mail list logo
