https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
--- Comment #13 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Jan 18 18:01:56 2019
New Revision: 268083
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268083&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: Fix *movsi_from_df (PR88892)
The memory store instructions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88877
--- Comment #13 from Kamlesh Kumar ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #12)
> I suspect that the patch in comment #1 will break libcalls in other
> situations, eg.
>
> void f1 (int y)
> {
> extern double d;
> d = y;
> }
Thanks Alan for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88877
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #14
Thread model: posix
gcc version 9.0.0 20190118 (experimental) (GCC)
Interestingly, -fno-isolate-erroneous-paths-dereference prevents the problem,
even though the UB is not dereference, but potential divide by zero.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80836
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88918
Bug ID: 88918
Summary: [meta-bug] x86 intrinsic issues
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83618
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80862
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88044
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek
_startproc
vpmovzxbd (%rdi), %ymm0
vcvtdq2ps %ymm0, %ymm0
ret
.cfi_endproc
.LFE5186:
.size load_bytes_to_m256, .-load_bytes_to_m256
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 9.0.0 20190118 (experimental)"
.section.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
[hjl@gnu-cfl-1 gcc]$
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88918
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88917
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88919
Bug ID: 88919
Summary: New test case gcc.dg/vect/pr88903-1.c in r268076 fails
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88920
Bug ID: 88920
Summary: [9 regression] GCC is not configured to support
amdgcn-unknown-amdhsa as offload target
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88911
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87326
--- Comment #2 from Nathan Weeks ---
I think that would be appropriate, especially since I submitted a patch that
attempts to address those two simultaneously:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2019-01/msg00131.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87939
--- Comment #2 from Nathan Weeks ---
The following patch attempts to address this issue & pr87326:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2019-01/msg00131.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88875
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Jan 18 20:35:57 2019
New Revision: 268085
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268085&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/88875 - error with explicit list constructor.
In my patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88875
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88871
--- Comment #13 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Is this ready to be submitted?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88918
Bug 88918 depends on bug 59071, which changed state.
Bug 59071 Summary: sse2 intrinsics and constant expressions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59071
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59071
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88560
--- Comment #5 from Vladimir Makarov ---
We have too many tests checking expected generated code. We should more focus
on overall effect of the change. SPEC would be a good criterium although it is
hard to check SPEC for each patch.
I've check
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88782
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Jan 18 21:28:48 2019
New Revision: 268086
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268086&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/88782 avoid ODR problems in std::make_shared
The old versio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87514
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Jan 18 21:28:48 2019
New Revision: 268086
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268086&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/88782 avoid ODR problems in std::make_shared
The old versio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87520
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Jan 18 21:28:48 2019
New Revision: 268086
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268086&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/88782 avoid ODR problems in std::make_shared
The old versi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87106
--- Comment #15 from Arthur O'Dwyer ---
@Marc, it only now occurs to me that if libstdc++ uses
`__is_trivially_relocatable` as its userspace type-trait name, then GCC won't
be able to use `__is_trivially_relocatable(T)` as the name of its compile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88921
Bug ID: 88921
Summary: inconsistent warning on a power-of-2 memcpy with
out-of-bounds offset
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88871
--- Comment #14 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #13)
> Is this ready to be submitted?
Already done - https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2019-01/msg00135.html .
I'll commit tomorrow unless somebody has furher to add.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88560
--- Comment #6 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #5)
> We have too many tests checking expected generated code. We should more
> focus on overall effect of the change. SPEC would be a good criterium
> although it is hard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88922
Bug ID: 88922
Summary: Merge identical constants with different modes
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79220
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443
Bug 88443 depends on bug 79220, which changed state.
Bug 79220 Summary: missing -Wstringop-overflow= on a memcpy overflow with a
small power-of-2 size
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79220
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88921
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87106
--- Comment #16 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Arthur O'Dwyer from comment #15)
> @Marc, it only now occurs to me that if libstdc++ uses
> `__is_trivially_relocatable` as its userspace type-trait name, then GCC
> won't be able to use `__is_tri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88920
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Have you configured gcc with --enable-offload-targets= that includes
amdgcn-unknown-amdhsa ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87106
--- Comment #17 from Arthur O'Dwyer ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #16)
> (In reply to Arthur O'Dwyer from comment #15)
> > @Marc, it only now occurs to me that if libstdc++ uses
> > `__is_trivially_relocatable` as its userspace type-t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88920
--- Comment #2 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The configure is pretty simple:
/home/seurer/gcc/gcc-test2/configure
--prefix=/home/seurer/gcc/install/gcc-test2 --enable-languages=c,fortran,c++
--with-cpu=power8 --disable-bootstrap
--with-as=/h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88920
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ams at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88897
--- Comment #3 from Rafael Avila de Espindola ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Some of the time, the uninitialized is due to using the object after the
> lifetime of the object has gone out of scope. I have not checked if that i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88293
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88923
Bug ID: 88923
Summary: abi::__cxa_demangle segfault on a specific string
Product: gcc
Version: 7.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88923
--- Comment #1 from Vasilii Babich ---
Created attachment 45466
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45466&action=edit
test.cpp to reproduce the segfault
This program crashes for me when compiled with "gcc test.cpp -lstdc++" on b
101 - 144 of 144 matches
Mail list logo
