https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87894
Bug ID: 87894
Summary: ICE inslpeel_duplicate_current_defs_from_edges at
tree-vect-loop-manip.c:984 since r265812
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87583
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87894
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2018-11-6
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81878
--- Comment #44 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 6 Nov 2018, aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81878
>
> Alexandre Oliva changed:
>
>What|Removed |Adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18041
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Nov 6 08:09:03 2018
New Revision: 265829
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265829&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-11-06 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/18041
* si
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86946
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60497
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely ---
No, comment 9 still fails.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87893
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87895
Bug ID: 87895
Summary: ICE in purge_dead_edges, at cfgrtl.c:3246
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code, openmp
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87896
Bug ID: 87896
Summary: ICE in verify_flow_info failed
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81878
--- Comment #45 from Eric Botcazou ---
> native --disable-bootstrap build on x86_64-linux-gnu now fails on trunk:
> gnattools uses g++ -B../../ to link, which fails because g++ 8 does not
> understand the %@ specs. We really shouldn't be mixing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87896
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
Summary|ICE in verify_flow
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87891
--- Comment #9 from Douglas Mencken ---
(In reply to self from comment 8)
> I found that I can add to configure line
>
> AS_FOR_TARGET=as \
> AR_FOR_TARGET=ar \
> LD_FOR_TARGET=ld \
> NM_FOR_TARGET=nm \
> RANLIB_FOR_TARGET=ranlib \
> LIPO_FOR_TA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18041
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19466
Bug 19466 depends on bug 18041, which changed state.
Bug 18041 Summary: OR of two single-bit bitfields is inefficient
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18041
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81161
Bug 81161 depends on bug 18041, which changed state.
Bug 18041 Summary: OR of two single-bit bitfields is inefficient
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18041
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87897
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.2.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81878
--- Comment #46 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Nov 6 08:42:56 2018
New Revision: 265830
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265830&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ada/81878
Revert
2018-10-29 Tamar Christi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81878
--- Comment #47 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Nov 6 08:43:10 2018
New Revision: 265831
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265831&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ada/81878
Revert
2018-11-02 Tamar Christi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87897
Bug ID: 87897
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in maybe_constant_value, at
cp/constexpr.c:5255 since r265788
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87269
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87894
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87889
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87583
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P4 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87889
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81878
--- Comment #48 from Tamar Christina ---
But doesn't reverting everything will bring it back to the state it was before,
in that `--disable-bootstrap` is still broken.
So it seems we have two seemingly incompatible behaviors.
the fix for `--disa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87896
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
One another test-case:
$ cat generic.i
enum { a, b, c } d;
e;
static f(h) {
int count;
for (;;) {
int g = 0;
while (count--) {
if (e)
continue;
g = 1;
break;
}
sw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87886
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
I've long said that the FE using built-in annotated decls with improper
prototype is a bug...
That said, generic-match.c uses get_call_combined_fn which probably
should do what gimple_call_combined_fn does
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81878
--- Comment #49 from Eric Botcazou ---
> But doesn't reverting everything will bring it back to the state it was
> before, in that `--disable-bootstrap` is still broken.
No, --disable-bootstrap alone works fine, see the subject of the PR.
> A p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87889
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87886
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> I've long said that the FE using built-in annotated decls with improper
> prototype is a bug...
>
> That said, generic-match.c uses get_call_combined_fn which p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87895
--- Comment #1 from Arseny Solokha ---
And compiling the testcase w/ -O1 -fopenmp yeilds:
% x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc-9.0.0-alpha20181104 -O1 -fopenmp -c i5qefyvy.c
during GIMPLE pass: local-pure-const
i5qefyvy.c: In function 'vm.simdclone.0':
i5q
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87892
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82857
--- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 44962
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44962&action=edit
WIP patch, handles DW_FORM_GNU_strp_alt
With this patch, the test-case from comment 1 passes:
...
Non-stripped
1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87891
--- Comment #10 from Douglas Mencken ---
And this one is beyond my understanding
/bin/sh ../../../gcc-8.2.0/libgcc/../mkinstalldirs .
/Volumes/hfsplushd/Development/gcc-toolchain/_build/./gcc/xgcc
-B/Volumes/hfsplushd/Development/gcc-toolchain/_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87891
--- Comment #11 from Douglas Mencken ---
That’s what I did
sudo ln -s /usr/bin/as /usr/bin/powerpc64-unknown-darwin-as
sudo ln -s /usr/bin/ld /usr/bin/powerpc64-unknown-darwin-ld
sudo ln -s /usr/bin/ar /usr/bin/powerpc64-unknown-darwin-ar
sud
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87898
Bug ID: 87898
Summary: [8/9 Regression] ICE in
separate_decls_in_region_debug, at tree-parloops.c:961
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81878
--- Comment #50 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Do we want lang_requires="c c++" in ada's config-lang.in, then?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87896
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85787
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||asolokha at gmx dot com
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87895
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.4
Summary|ICE in purge_dea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83648
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||asolokha at gmx dot com
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81878
--- Comment #51 from Alexandre Oliva ---
for native builds, I mean. hmm, I wonder if we can test for a native build in
config-lang.in...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87874
--- Comment #4 from Alexandre Oliva ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-11/msg00332.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87898
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87885
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81878
--- Comment #52 from Eric Botcazou ---
> for native builds, I mean. hmm, I wonder if we can test for a native build
> in config-lang.in...
Yes, that would be ideal.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87885
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka ---
The patch makes sense to me. I am not sure why it was run after pass but before
cleanups originally... Seems like a bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87895
--- Comment #2 from Arseny Solokha ---
And another one, apparently:
#pragma omp declare simd
int
vm (int *ty, int oh)
{
if ((oh == 0) ? (*ty = 0) : *ty)
return 0;
}
% x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc-9.0.0-alpha20181104 -O1 -fopenmp -c logpnyyb.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87885
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
OK, I now recall. The intend was really to have three values
- profile before pass was run (which you can see from stats of previous
pass)
- profile after pass was run
- profile after cleanups
This is somew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87897
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
One more test-case:
$ cat ice.ii
struct c {
int b;
};
struct e : c {
constexpr e() : c{} {}
};
using d = e;
const int &a((2, d{}).b);
$ g++ ice.ii -c
ice.ii:8:24: internal compiler error: in build_target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85787
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87723
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Krebbel ---
Author: krebbel
Date: Tue Nov 6 10:22:05 2018
New Revision: 265832
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265832&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
S/390: Fix PR87723
gcc/ChangeLog:
2018-11-06 Andreas Krebbel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87889
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87889
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Nov 6 10:23:30 2018
New Revision: 265833
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265833&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-11-06 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/87889
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87881
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80953
--- Comment #8 from Rainer Orth ---
Author: ro
Date: Tue Nov 6 10:42:05 2018
New Revision: 265836
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265836&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Cherry-pick Solaris sanitizer fixes (PR sanitizer/80953)
PR sanitizer/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87899
Bug ID: 87899
Summary: [9 regression]r264897 cause mis-compiled native
arm-linux-gnueabihf toolchain
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80953
--- Comment #9 from Rainer Orth ---
Author: ro
Date: Tue Nov 6 10:49:34 2018
New Revision: 265837
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265837&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Enable libsanitizer on Solaris (PR sanitizer/80953)
gcc:
PR sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80953
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87899
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|8.0 |9.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53363
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87865
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #7 from Iain Buclaw ---
> It required removing all system includes from all dmd frontend sources, but I
> think this OK now. I have verified that gcc_assert() is being cal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87885
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87900
Bug ID: 87900
Summary: malloc + memse to calloc doesn't work for aggregate
initialization
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87901
Bug ID: 87901
Summary: partial DSE of memset doesn't work for other kind of
stores
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36602
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #27563|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37150
--- Comment #29 from Richard Biener ---
On the original testcase I now get
> ./f951 -quiet -Ofast t.f90 -march=core-avx2 -fopt-info-vec
t.f90:157:0: optimized: loop vectorized using 32 byte vectors
t.f90:158:0: optimized: basic block part vect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87892
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87892
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/google/s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87884
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2018-11-6
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86850
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87902
Bug ID: 87902
Summary: [9 Regression] Shrink-wrapping multiple conditions
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87903
Bug ID: 87903
Summary: Documentation for __builtin_cpu_supports and
__builtin_cpu_is is not complete
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: doc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87903
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #80 from Jan Hubicka ---
>
> flat perf profile:
>
> Samples: 510K of event 'instructions:p', Event count (approx.): 715615147320
>
> Overhead Samples Command Shared Object Symbol
>
>8.08%
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86850
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #81 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 6 Nov 2018, hubicka at ucw dot cz wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
>
> --- Comment #80 from Jan Hubicka ---
> >
> > flat perf profile:
> >
> > Samples: 510K
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87762
--- Comment #3 from iii at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: iii
Date: Tue Nov 6 13:20:21 2018
New Revision: 265844
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265844&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
S/390: Introduce relative_long attribute
In order to properly fix P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474
--- Comment #82 from Jan Hubicka ---
> > Yep, this is because they used to be arrays indexed by symbol UIDs which
> > Martin converted to hash tables. Inliner happily calls summary_get each
> > time it needs the summary. I have some patches to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87902
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87896
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|7.3.1 |
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
(I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87904
Bug ID: 87904
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in lookup_mark, at cp/tree.c:2322
since r265679
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87904
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.2.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87884
--- Comment #2 from Stas Sergeev ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> In general we have issues with warnings when sanitizers are used.
More than that.
You also have a compile-time errors now!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87892
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86850
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
> diff --git a/gcc/vec.h b/gcc/vec.h
> index f8c039754d2..407269c5ad3 100644
> --- a/gcc/vec.h
> +++ b/gcc/vec.h
> @@ -1688,7 +1688,7 @@ template
> inline void
> vec::splice (const vec &src)
> {
> - if (sr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87884
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> In general we have issues with warnings when sanitizers are used.
> Martin: What about notifying users that one should not combine sanitizers
> and warnings? It's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87905
Bug ID: 87905
Summary: structures in two different cpp source files with same
name get flagged by ODR warning
Product: gcc
Version: lto
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87892
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|WONTFIX
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87905
--- Comment #1 from Raymond Jennings ---
just do g++ -flto *.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87892
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87880
--- Comment #6 from Iain Sandoe ---
so I looked a little more at this.
As Rainer points out, the libsupc++ implementation does not provide
cxa_rethrow_primary_exception whereas the libc++-abi.dylib has it.
For the macOS implementations of libst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87892
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Hints from Jakub:
marxin: just look at libgomp sources, I have all kinds of stuff there
jakub: ok, then let me fix that
marxin: sysconf(_SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN) is a good fallback if the
affinity doesn't wor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87905
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87906
Bug ID: 87906
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in tree check: expected block, have
function_decl in block_ultimate_origin, at
tree.c:12326 since r264734
Product: gcc
V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87906
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2018-11-6
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87866
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw ---
> I backported a fix from the D sources so it should no longer segfault at
> least.
It doesn't indeed.
> From what I can see, it should pick up t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87902
--- Comment #1 from Ilya Leoshkevich ---
Bisect points to r265398: combine: Do not combine moves from hard
registers.
I wonder what would be the best place to fix this? I was thinking about
making shrink-wrapping try harder by not limiting the
1 - 100 of 147 matches
Mail list logo
