https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87050
--- Comment #2 from Janne Blomqvist ---
The validation script that runs upon committing a change and sends email likely
needs to change too. There is https://validator.github.io/validator/ that can
be run as a batch script (needs java), or one c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63155
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2014-09-03 00:00:00 |2018-8-22
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87055
Bug ID: 87055
Summary: Unoptimal address calculation
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54589
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
clang generates for x86_64:
movzbl (%rsi), %eax
shlq$4, %rax
movl16(%rdi,%rax), %eax
movl%eax, (%rdx)
retq
and for i?86:
movl8(%esp), %edx
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86947
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86953
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86957
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
I wonder if for assessing the quality of a profile it is somehow possible to
dump
all functions that got never executed during training? Because all those
functions will be optimized as cold by GCC AFAIK.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86960
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86837
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86964
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86969
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86970
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86945
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Aug 22 08:07:36 2018
New Revision: 263761
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263761&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-08-22 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/86945
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86971
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #2)
> I think the wording of the opening line can be made unambiguous, which is
> probably nice for translators. Can we change it to say e.g.:
>
> cc1plus: warnin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86973
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86945
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|fortran |tree-optimization
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86974
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Hmm, can't the thing be just marked constexpr?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86979
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-apple-darwin
Target Milestone|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86983
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
Status|UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86974
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
No because that also makes it const, i.e. immutable.
It's useful for non-const globals.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86984
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86985
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86986
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86971
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> ? Btw, is that true when I use -fabi-version=11 -Wabi?
That will give warnings.
-Wabi (with no =n value) is only useless without an explicit -fabi-version,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86519
--- Comment #20 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #19 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> which sparc machine was used to repeat the failure, and what's the configure
> and make options?
I just saw there are gcc210 and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86988
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86990
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86991
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86993
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86995
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87056
Bug ID: 87056
Summary: [9 Regression] GCC does not work when using -pipe
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87056
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86999
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|wrong-code |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77854
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87006
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87007
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target Milestone|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87008
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87056
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87008
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #1)
> struct A { double a, b; };
> struct B : A {};
> templatevoid cp(T&a,T const&b){a=b;}
> double f(B x){
> B y; cp(y,x);
> B z; cp(z,x);
> return y.a - z.a;
> }
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87009
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87011
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87012
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87057
Bug ID: 87057
Summary: in compilation error, gcc should note about deleted
copy-constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86947
--- Comment #3 from Vinay Kumar ---
Created attachment 44572
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44572&action=edit
Testcase t2.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86947
Vinay Kumar changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vinay.m.engg at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86947
--- Comment #4 from Vinay Kumar ---
Hi Richard,
Thanks for checking the bug.
Please find attached the testcase that would exit with message
"Should NOT BE here" on miscompilation.
The behavior is same with other targets as well.
We have checked
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87013
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87015
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87022
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4898
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> Dynamic exception specifications are no longer part of the C++ language
> anyway.
Well, in newer standards at least, but they were at one point in an older
stan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79695
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dodji at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87024
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87024
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87026
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87025
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43454
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org,
==+^M
| 8.2.1 20180822 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) in add_expr, at tree.c:7277 |^M
| Error detected around
/space/rguenther/src/svn/gcc-8-branch/gcc/testsuite/gnat.dg/slice7.adb:35:3|^M
| Please submit a bug report; see https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/ . |^M
| Use a subject line meaningful
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87031
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87033
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87034
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87038
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
I think even -Wall makes sense.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87039
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87041
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87042
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87043
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
In .original I see
if (world_rank == 0)
{
...
stat.0 = 0;
error_messages.data = (void * restrict) __builtin_malloc
(MAX_EXPR );
if (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87046
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86988
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Aug 22 11:01:58 2018
New Revision: 263762
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263762&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-08-22 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/86988
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87047
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87048
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||armeb
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87049
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87033
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64-linux-gnu-*, |powerpc*-*-*
|pow
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87054
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87046
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Fixed in r259840.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52795
--- Comment #10 from Iain Sandoe ---
Author: iains
Date: Wed Aug 22 11:37:02 2018
New Revision: 263763
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263763&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix FDE labels for Darwin
gcc/
PR bootstrap/81033
PR targ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81733
--- Comment #18 from Iain Sandoe ---
Author: iains
Date: Wed Aug 22 11:37:02 2018
New Revision: 263763
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263763&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix FDE labels for Darwin
gcc/
PR bootstrap/81033
PR targ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81033
--- Comment #45 from Iain Sandoe ---
Author: iains
Date: Wed Aug 22 11:37:02 2018
New Revision: 263763
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263763&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix FDE labels for Darwin
gcc/
PR bootstrap/81033
PR targ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87013
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87046
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85597
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||yates at cscs dot ch
--- Comment #9 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4898
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, but IMHO it would be a huge waste of time to add a ton of new machinery to
the compiler to check for "correct" usage of an obsolete feature. Most C++98
code didn't even use them, because they were not u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4898
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #2)
> I agree a new warning would be useful. For example, the following code should
> be diagnosed:
>
> struct S { S () throw () { throw 0; } };
This is still relevan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87055
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87056
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87059
Bug ID: 87059
Summary: internal compiler error: in set_value_range, at
tree-vrp.c:289
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87057
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Konstantin Kharlamov from comment #0)
> When, in a code, a copy-constructor deleted but used, GCC issues an
> absolutely unhelpful message that it couldn't convert the argument. "Why
> can't it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87057
--- Comment #2 from Konstantin Kharlamov ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> That would require a lot of special-casing just for std::variant.
Well, I think, in place of std::variant there could be any struct-wrapper; but
I get i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77854
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Aug 22 12:11:17 2018
New Revision: 263767
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263767&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/77854 document size_type for containers
PR libstdc+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87057
--- Comment #3 from Konstantin Kharlamov ---
(In reply to Konstantin Kharlamov from comment #2)
> Thanks, I prefer the `{x}` to just `x` because in the latter I'm being
*"in the former", sorry.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77854
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=704
--- Comment #15 from Iain Sandoe ---
Author: iains
Date: Wed Aug 22 12:12:46 2018
New Revision: 263768
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263768&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Make the gcc-ar,nm, strip tools respond correctly to --help and --version
whe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87043
--- Comment #2 from Peter Vitt ---
Oh, I see your point. But then still the question is why this warning is not
shown when compiling with -Og.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87049
--- Comment #2 from Richard Earnshaw ---
But won't that give problems for C++ because now you'll need to cast the
pointers?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87047
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> I suspect it is treating cost 0 as being free rather than unknown cost. And
> the x86 backend is returning 0 cost for the upper multiple.
There is no truncate RTX
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86964
--- Comment #2 from Joe Lorenz ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Confirmed. Debug info is now more complete. Note
> -feliminate-unused-debug-symbols is only implemented for STABS debugging,
> not for DWARF and from
> my reading
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87038
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86964
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 22 Aug 2018, znerol at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86964
>
> --- Comment #2 from Joe Lorenz ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86725
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Wed Aug 22 13:02:39 2018
New Revision: 263773
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263773&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[1/2] Fix bogus double reduction (PR 86725)
This patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86725
--- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Wed Aug 22 13:02:48 2018
New Revision: 263774
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263774&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[2/2] Fix bogus inner induction (PR 86725)
This patch i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86725
--- Comment #4 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Fixed on trunk so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87059
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
Compo
1 - 100 of 162 matches
Mail list logo
