https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88262
--- Comment #11 from Stephen Kim ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> (In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #8)
> > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, stephen.kim at oracle dot com wrote:
> >
> > > The glibc commit that triggered this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88262
--- Comment #12 from Stephen Kim ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #8)
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, stephen.kim at oracle dot com wrote:
>
> > The glibc commit that triggered this bug is:
> > bfff8b1becd7d01c074177df7196ab327cd8c8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88262
--- Comment #13 from Stephen Kim ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #7)
> If you think you have found a bug in glibc, then this is not the right place
> to report it.
I believe that this is NOT a glibc bug. It is TRIGGERED by a glibc p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88262
--- Comment #14 from Stephen Kim ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #7)
> If you think you have found a bug in glibc, then this is not the right place
> to report it.
I believe that this is NOT a glibc bug. It is TRIGGERED by a glibc p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88291
Bug ID: 88291
Summary: [9 Regression] asan ICE in asan_clear_shadow
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: saniti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88289
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88292
Bug ID: 88292
Summary: Static initialization problem with thread_local and
templates
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88291
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30929
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|-pedantic-error and -Werror |-pedantic-errors doesn't
/gcc/gcc-trunk/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/9.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-source-trunk/configure --enable-languages=c,c++,lto
--prefix=/home/su/software/tmp/gcc/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
gcc version 9.0.0 20181201 (experimental
/gcc-trunk/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/9.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-source-trunk/configure --enable-languages=c,c++,lto
--prefix=/home/su/software/tmp/gcc/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
gcc version 9.0.0 20181201 (experimental) [trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88293
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88294
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Status|U
arget: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-source-trunk/configure --enable-languages=c,c++,lto
--prefix=/home/su/software/tmp/gcc/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
gcc version 9.0.0 20181201 (experimental) [trunk revision 266708] (GCC)
$
$ g++tk -c tmp.cpp
tmp.cp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83856
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88294
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
PR87844 ICEs in the same place.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88296
Bug ID: 88296
Summary: [9 Regression] Infinite loop in lra_split_hard_reg_for
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: memory-hog, ra
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85668
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88295
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88292
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67823
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
I can no longer reproduce, I just see many errors.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83856
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68518
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79385
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83856
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88297
Bug ID: 88297
Summary: [9 Regression] Assembler Error: symbol
`_Z41__static_initialization_and_destruction_0ii.const
prop.0' is already defined
Product: gcc
Versi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79629
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81718
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84813
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88298
Bug ID: 88298
Summary: Bogus conversion warning for CSHIFT with
-fno-range-check -m64
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88146
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87814
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
Fixing this one will probably also fix bug 88146.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87714
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87770
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||development at jordi dot
vilar.cat
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87770
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87523
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87768
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88299
Bug ID: 88299
Summary: [9 Regression] COMMON in a legacy module produces
bogus warnings in dependent code
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88064
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88300
Bug ID: 88300
Summary: [9 Regression] Bogus 'Labeled DO statement' for a
labeled CONTINUE
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88064
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #0)
> Something I've discovered by code inspection:
>
> int a[64], b[64], c[64];
>
> void
> foo ()
> {
> int i;
> for (i = 0; i < 64; i++)
> {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88248
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88300
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88248
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87378
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88301
Bug ID: 88301
Summary: Optimization regression with undefined unsigned
overflow
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88301
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Unsigned addition never overflows. It wraps.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88301
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
In the EVRP dump, I see:
_2: unsigned int [0, 1]
_3: _Bool [0, 1]
[...]
_1 = REALPART_EXPR <_6>;
# RANGE [0, 1] NONZERO 1
_2 = IMAGPART_EXPR <_6>;
# RANGE [0, 0] NONZERO 0
_3 = (_BoolD.1896) _2;
N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83856
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
namespace std {
template _Tp declval();
template class initializer_list {
_E *_M_len;
public:
unsigned long size;
_E begin();
};
template struct array { void operator[](long); };
} // namespace std
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88301
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #2)
> Not sure where this [0, 0] range is coming from...
Well, I guess it is EVRP trying to encode __builtin_unreachable for _3!=0 in
the range information of _3, but not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88190
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Created attachment 45135
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45135&action=edit
WIP patch
> My next step will be to check that replacing GFC_STD_LEGACY with
> GFC_STD_GNU restores the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83856
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Sat Dec 1 21:09:31 2018
New Revision: 266711
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266711&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/83856
* g++.dg/cpp1y/lambda-generic-83856.C: New
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83856
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79629
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Sat Dec 1 21:32:16 2018
New Revision: 266712
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266712&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/79629
* g++.dg/other/error35.C: New test.
Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79629
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87523
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Sat Dec 1 21:53:07 2018
New Revision: 266714
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266714&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/87523
* g++.dg/cpp1y/lambda-generic-87523.C: New
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87523
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88190
--- Comment #9 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #8)
>
> Comments welcomed!
>
What problem are you trying to solve?
By default, gfortran tries to compile anything that
is given to her. Removing G
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88280
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88262
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski ---
Let's start over. crt1.o in glibc should support calling main that is located
in the shared library.
If it does not then there is a bug there.
Can you explain why you think crt1.o is broken that it can't b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88297
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||assemble-failure
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88297
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you try to reduce this failure?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81519
--- Comment #11 from Daniel Santos ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #9)
> (In reply to Daniel Santos from comment #7)
> > (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4)
> > > Ok, so I've briefly investigated source code and providing such
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37916
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26241
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13756
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24729
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13756
--- Comment #16 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #15)
> (In reply to Joseph S. Myers from comment #8)
> > tree-ssa documentation still missing after the mainline merge:
> >
> > The autoconf and automake versions for
68 matches
Mail list logo
