https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86681
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
May I please ping that?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87196
Bug ID: 87196
Summary: ICE in vectorizable_load, at tree-vect-stmts.c:8043
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87196
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2018-9-3
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87197
Bug ID: 87197
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in is_gimple_reg_type at
gimple-expr.h:75 since r264021
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87197
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59521
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59521
--- Comment #20 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Mon Sep 3 07:51:56 2018
New Revision: 264050
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264050&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Make __builtin_expect effective in switch statements (PR middle-end/PR595
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84980
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Sep 3 07:57:33 2018
New Revision: 264051
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264051&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2018-09-03 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/84980
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83193
--- Comment #17 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Mon Sep 3 08:16:27 2018
New Revision: 264052
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264052&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Come up with TARGET_GET_VALID_OPTION_VALUES option hook (PR driver/83193)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87198
Bug ID: 87198
Summary: ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2304
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85859
--- Comment #7 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> So fixed on the trunk? Any plans to backport?
Will do, thanks for the ping.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87186
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse ---
In some sense, the bug is that .original is optimized at all, ideally it would
be the "original" unoptimized code. It is convenient to start optimizing single
expressions early, so we do it, but that's it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87169
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
There's two issues I think though fixing the first makes us no longer run into
the second. The first is that I again forgot to mark a destination block
executable after marking an edge so ... (doh).
The se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87178
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Ah yes, good point. So it's user error, but we could try to give a better
diagnostic.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87176
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87178
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Generally certainly can't, one can define the inline variable in one TU and the
non-inline for the same section in a different TU.
If both are in the same TU, we could, but we don't have any mapping between t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87177
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87193
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87182
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87193
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I'm not in a rush to fix this, because sane code should only be using those
values in preprocessor conditions. They have type long only because the
standard doesn't guarantee that type int can represent 6 d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87182
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|libfortran |libbacktrace
--- Comment #2 from Richar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87184
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87186
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87187
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||86549
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87194
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87199
Bug ID: 87199
Summary: Thread local storage dynamic initialization behaviour
differs Linux vs macOS
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87189
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87192
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87178
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
OK.
FWIW Clang seems to create two different sections called foo, one COMDAT and
one not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87197
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87189
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
This is a glibc bug, coming up with a set of weakref checks for gthr.h that
would satisfy static linking of glibc and all possible combinations of included
vs. non-included objects is impossible.
E.g. Fedora/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87178
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6)
> OK.
>
> FWIW Clang seems to create two different sections called foo, one COMDAT and
> one not.
Does it? That is I think impossible unless bypassing assemble
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85859
--- Comment #8 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Mon Sep 3 09:43:46 2018
New Revision: 264053
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264053&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
backport "[tail-merge] Fix side-effect test in stmt_local_def"
2018-09-03
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87200
Bug ID: 87200
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in set_ssa_val_to, at
tree-ssa-sccvn.c:3629
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87178
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Ah I misread it then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87201
Bug ID: 87201
Summary: [9 Regression] Segfault in GIMPLE pass: switchlower_O0
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87202
Bug ID: 87202
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in vn_reference_insert_pieces, at
tree-ssa-sccvn.c:2752
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85859
--- Comment #9 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Mon Sep 3 10:04:08 2018
New Revision: 264054
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264054&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
backport "[tail-merge] Fix side-effect test in stmt_local_def"
2018-09-03
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87201
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87050
--- Comment #11 from Janne Blomqvist ---
(In reply to Gerald Pfeifer from comment #10)
> (In reply to Janne Blomqvist from comment #0)
> > So apart from the headers, little work ought to be needed for the
> > conversion itself.
>
> Well, no. :-}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85859
--- Comment #10 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Mon Sep 3 10:14:52 2018
New Revision: 264055
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264055&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
backport "[tail-merge] Fix side-effect test in stmt_local_def"
2018-09-03
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85859
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87198
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87198
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
I think you also need:
diff --git a/gcc/common/config/i386/i386-common.c
b/gcc/common/config/i386/i386-common.c
index 70b3c3f2fc31..edb55e542451 100644
--- a/gcc/common/config/i386/i386-common.c
+++ b/gcc/comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87198
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #2)
> I think you also need:
>
> diff --git a/gcc/common/config/i386/i386-common.c
> b/gcc/common/config/i386/i386-common.c
> index 70b3c3f2fc31..edb55e542451 100644
> -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87176
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
The issue here is similar to that of PR87132 - this time we get at memory state
from the previous iteration by means of a virtual PHI that was value-numbered
to its backedge value.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87202
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87201
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87200
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87201
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78595
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|ville.voutilainen at gmail dot com |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
Targe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87203
Bug ID: 87203
Summary: Optimize x % constant ==/!= 0
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87201
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87198
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #2)
> > I think you also need:
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/common/config/i386/i386-common.c
> > b/gcc/common/config/i386/i386-co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87191
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
I believe it's nice example where ASAN can help:
$ cat pr87191.c
void bar(void *ptr)
{
__builtin_putchar (*(char *)ptr);
}
int main()
{
char a[10];
bar(&a+2);
}
$ =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87199
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87203
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
Dup of PR 82853 ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87203
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #13
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87200
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
The underlying issue is that match-and-simplify invoked via
vn_nary_build_or_lookup_1 valuezies captures according to availability.
But in the end we'd like to have a value-number back.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87184
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2018-09-03 5:20 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87184
>
> Richard Biener changed:
>
> What|Removed |Ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
http://duriansoftware.com/joe/Optimizing-is-multiple-checks-with-modular-arithmetic.html
Do we want to do this at GIMPLE time ignoring costs, or during expansion time?
Doing it later has the benefit that we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87194
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68737
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2016-01-29 00:00:00 |2018-08-16 0:00
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
For unsigned x % y == z if y is odd constant we can handle it for any constant
z, by computing m = mul_inv (y, 2^prec) and d = (2^prec / y) and using x * m -
(z * m) < d .
For even y, not sure if it can work
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87204
Bug ID: 87204
Summary: strtoflt128 produces different results for subnormals
with -m32 and -m64
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87169
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87197
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87169
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 3 13:28:25 2018
New Revision: 264057
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264057&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-09-03 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/87197
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87197
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 3 13:28:25 2018
New Revision: 264057
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264057&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-09-03 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/87197
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87201
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Mon Sep 3 13:35:35 2018
New Revision: 264058
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264058&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix thinko (PR tree-optimization/87201).
2018-09-03 Martin Liska
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87201
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87177
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||asolokha at gmx dot com
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87202
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87205
Bug ID: 87205
Summary: Inefficient code generation for switch
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87194
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Sep 3 14:25:25 2018
New Revision: 264060
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264060&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/87194 fix range insertion into maps and sets
Since C++11 ra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78595
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Sep 3 14:25:12 2018
New Revision: 264059
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264059&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/78595 implement insertion into maps in terms of emplace
C+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78595
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87200
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87200
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 3 14:29:00 2018
New Revision: 264062
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264062&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-09-03 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/87200
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78179
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78179
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Sep 3 14:54:28 2018
New Revision: 264063
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264063&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/78179 run long double tests separately
Split the long doubl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87194
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|ASSIG
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68737
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|2018-08-16 00:0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
--- Comment #18 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #17)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16)
> > For unsigned x % y == z if y is odd constant we can handle it for any
> > constant z, by computing m = mul_inv (y,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87189
--- Comment #4 from Paul Pluzhnikov ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> This is a glibc bug
I (obviously) disagree.
, coming up with a set of weakref checks for gthr.h that
> would satisfy static linking of glibc and all possible
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87189
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Paul Pluzhnikov from comment #4)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> > This is a glibc bug
>
> I (obviously) disagree.
>
> , coming up with a set of weakref checks for gthr.h that
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87193
--- Comment #3 from W E Brown ---
Sorry; hadn't seen or recalled the note cited by comment 1.
Agreed with comment 2 that this need not be a priority. My (admittedly
hostile) experimental code caught it, so I thought to note it for the record.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87189
--- Comment #6 from Paul Pluzhnikov ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Because it is very expensive.
One impractical solution is to require '-pthread' on the compile and link line,
and link a libgcc_mt that has non-weak reference
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87189
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
gthr.h is used heavily e.g. in libstdc++, so your solution doesn't really work
at all.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77691
--- Comment #24 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think this would make the tests pass, so you could remove the xfail
directives:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/experimental/memory_resource
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/experimental/memory_resource
@@ -421,7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87182
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Host libbacktrace would need to use GCC's host zlib and target
libbacktrace would need to use GCC's target zlib for the same target
multilib (which would require appropriate dependencies to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87191
--- Comment #4 from Rich Felker ---
Regarding ASan, absolutely, but this is a case that can be caught without heavy
memory tracking machinery, and that seems to be documented as being caught by
-fsanitize=object-size but isn't.
In my particular
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87204
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
There are lots of glibc strtod fixes that postdate the last merges of
strtod code to libquadmath. I don't know if any of them are relevant to
this issue, but merging in those fixes would s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68737
--- Comment #4 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2018-09-03 10:57 AM, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Could this be due to using alloca? The tests should not require a huge stack,
> so either alloca isn't usable or maybe there's a bug causi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87189
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu ---
Here is a very old proposal:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/generic-abi/K1lUiNsmM6c/Pl9-7ngPVXIJ
I am not sure if it will completely fix:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5784
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87206
Bug ID: 87206
Summary: Suboptimal code generation for
__atomic_compare_exchange_n followed by a comparison
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77609
--- Comment #7 from Gabriel Rauter ---
(In reply to Gabriel Rauter from comment #6)
> This change breaks the .noinit section on avr which now gets set to PROGBTIS
> because the section type is omitted. It should be NOBITS.
.noinit regression fix
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
