https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88711
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71066
--- Comment #11 from Thomas Koenig ---
Slightly different variant of z3.f90, with a different ICE:
program p
real :: a(2,2)[*]
data a /1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0/
end
Interner Compiler-Fehler: Speicherzugriffsfehler
0xe24dff crash_signal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88989
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89269
Pharos Team changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71066
--- Comment #12 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #11)
> Slightly different variant of z3.f90, with a different ICE:
>
> program p
>real :: a(2,2)[*]
>data a /1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0/
> end
>
> Interner Compiler-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89269
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89272
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sun Feb 10 10:46:43 2019
New Revision: 268742
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268742&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR lto/89272
* tree.c (fld_simplified_type_name): Also ke
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89272
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88677
--- Comment #12 from Jan Hubicka ---
I have posted patch which removes the problematic TYPE_NEEDS_CONSTRUCTION to
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-02/msg00584.html
It however does not fix the difference. I suppose it may be TBAA diverging
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89268
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sun Feb 10 11:06:58 2019
New Revision: 268743
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268743&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/89268
* tree-if-conv.c (version_loop_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89268
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89274
Bug ID: 89274
Summary: Inconsistent list directed output of INTEGER(16)
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89274
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88585
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
OK, I think this is frontend issue because at least in my understanding there
should be only one canonical type for the structure, while here we have two.
One canonical type is result of:
#0 0x7765f72
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88677
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenther at suse dot de
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81983
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86020
--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sun Feb 10 12:55:24 2019
New Revision: 268745
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268745&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2019-01-05 Jan Hubicka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86020
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89011
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Hangauer ---
Unfortunately this is the most recent version of gcc which is available in the
mingw-w64 / msys2 toolchain. I am only able to try with an *older* gcc: However
version 5.1.0 yields the same. Sorry if this i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89269
Pharos Team changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89269
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88711
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79966
Bug 79966 depends on bug 88711, which changed state.
Bug 88711 Summary: [9 Regression] scan-ipa-dump inline "Inlined tp_sum/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88711
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67696
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ccoutant at gmail dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86020
--- Comment #13 from Bill Schmidt ---
Thanks, Honza!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89269
Pharos Team changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #6 from Pharos Team ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88654
--- Comment #7 from Iain Buclaw ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #0)
>
> 2) if Curl fails to initialize, the test shouldn't get stuck
>
This part has been done in r268746.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89254
--- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw ---
I don't think you should be seeing a thread deadlock in std.net.curl after
r268746.
I've not been able to reproduce the never timing out part. The process has
always been killed after 600 seconds.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89269
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89269
--- Comment #7 from Pharos Team ---
Just an additional note to anyone who might have the same problem, I solved it
with:
/**/
/* Start of text and read-only data are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
--- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw ---
I'll use this PR as a reference to adding a compiler switch for building
modules in a "unittest runner" mode. This to allow making it possible to build
all modules using dg-runtest without getting linker error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89275
Bug ID: 89275
Summary: [9 Regression] Slowdown in mcperf on POEWR
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89275
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc64le
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67679
--- Comment #11 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Feb 10 15:38:19 2019
New Revision: 268747
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268747&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-02-10 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/67679
* gfortran.dg/war
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71237
--- Comment #12 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Feb 10 15:52:38 2019
New Revision: 268748
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268748&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-02-10 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/71237
* expr.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71723
--- Comment #13 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Feb 10 15:56:41 2019
New Revision: 268749
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268749&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-02-10 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/71723
* expr.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71723
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8/9 Regression] [F08]|[7/8 Regression] [F08] ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89079
--- Comment #7 from airplanemath ---
Thank you. I will follow the progress where you indicated.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51637
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56581
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
AFAIU "Unicode byte-order marker" is not part of the Fortran character set and
I think the test starting with it is invalid. No feedback, closing as INVALID.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56581
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61073
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87337
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83218
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51591
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Nay progress after more than two years?
No progress after more than three more years?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49565
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Any progress after two years and a half?
Any progress after two and a half more years? Shouldn't this PR be closed as
FIXED (AFAIU this is not a fortran bug).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53694
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71237
--- Comment #13 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Feb 10 18:30:01 2019
New Revision: 268750
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268750&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-02-10 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/71237
Backport
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71723
--- Comment #15 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Feb 10 18:41:03 2019
New Revision: 268751
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268751&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-02-10 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/71723
Backport
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71723
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49565
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49565
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> I'd like some informed feedback on this before closing.
Me too, but what be done when I don't get any feedback over years?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51591
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49565
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89276
Bug ID: 89276
Summary: DEC32_TRUE_MIN missing from
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89221
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.0 |10.0
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89077
--- Comment #14 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: anlauf
Date: Sun Feb 10 20:01:15 2019
New Revision: 268752
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268752&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-02-10 Harald Anlauf
Backport from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89077
--- Comment #15 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: anlauf
Date: Sun Feb 10 20:05:34 2019
New Revision: 268753
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268753&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-02-10 Harald Anlauf
Backport from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88127
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Patch at [1].
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-02/msg00120.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
Harald Anlauf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
--- Comment #4 from Harald Anlauf ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #1)
> Goes back a long time, at least to gcc 6.
>
> I also think that this is valid code, but if somebody can find
> language in the standard that says otherwise, plea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89277
Bug ID: 89277
Summary: [9 Regression] libgo memory hogs in libgo testsuite
(at least on s390x-linux-gnu)
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
--- Comment #5 from Harald Anlauf ---
Alternative versions to test case #2:
program test
implicit none
character(1), save :: z = transfer ([''], '*') ! ICE
! character(1), save :: z = transfer ([character(0) :: ''],
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71723
--- Comment #17 from Walter Spector ---
Thank you Thomas!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
--- Comment #6 from Harald Anlauf ---
The problem might be here:
check.c: gfc_calculate_transfer_sizes
5482 /* Calculate the size of the source. */
5483 *source_size = gfc_target_expr_size (source);
5484 if (*source_size == 0)
5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
--- Comment #7 from Harald Anlauf ---
(In reply to Harald Anlauf from comment #6)
> The problem might be here:
>
> check.c: gfc_calculate_transfer_sizes
>
> 5482 /* Calculate the size of the source. */
> 5483 *source_size = gfc_targe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71066
--- Comment #13 from Thomas Koenig ---
z1.f90 has been fixed with r267356.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81081
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81141
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
>
> What I meant to say is: See also bug 81141 for a related request (limited to
> strncpy). The patch submitted there issues a warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88780
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43361
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37759
--- Comment #8 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #7)
> AFAICT, it's still the case for powerpcspe target even on trunk (as of
> r259982). While gcc apparently doesn't generate SPE instructions for both
> attached tes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67093
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31351
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #2)
> (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #1)
> > This is a bug yes, but it won't get fixed unless someone that cares about it
> > steps up to fix it.
>
> I'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80936
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49194
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81081
--- Comment #11 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 45652
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45652&action=edit
Tentative patch
Patch proposed in comment #10, added ChangeLog and rationale, bootstrapped and
reg-tested.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71501
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.8.5, 4.9.4, 5.4.0, 6.4.0,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78678
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|other |middle-end
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86833
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78678
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also|https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84877
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37759
--- Comment #9 from Arseny Solokha ---
Yes, but AFAIK none of the PRs specific to powerpcspe have been closed so far.
And, personally, I'd like them to stay open for another release cycle in the
hope Andrew would actually revive the target this y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89278
Bug ID: 89278
Summary: ICE in gimplify_modify_expr, at gimplify.c:5821
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89279
Bug ID: 89279
Summary: `floorf` not in `std` despite -std=c++11
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89051
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #4)
> LangEnabledBy is used by optc-gen.awk to generate options.c with calls like
> those below. Other than that, I don't think GCC has an internal data
> structure to r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49194
--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka ---
Well, I am working on gradual improvements in the inlining decisions,
but since the PR is not very specific, we never will be perfect :)
function 'fx':
df3xie9n.c:13:1: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
13 | fx (void)
| ^~
0xd6f9bf crash_signal
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-9.0.0_alpha20190210/work/gcc-9-20190210/gcc/toplev.c:326
0xda85b4 is_gimple_reg_type
/var/tmp/portage/sys
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89281
Bug ID: 89281
Summary: [9 Regression] gcc/optabs.c:3901:30: runtime error:
shift exponent 32 is too large for 32-bit type 'int'
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89260
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89280
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89278
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
93 matches
Mail list logo
