https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91078
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91063
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jul 4 07:25:28 2019
New Revision: 273041
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273041&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/91063
* tree-vect-stmts.c (vect_init_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91030
--- Comment #28 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #27)
> (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #26)
> > Jerry, you are working on a Linux box, right? What does
> >
> > stat -f -c %b .
> >
> > tell you?
>
> 13429
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91063
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91074
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90756
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91082
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91077
ygal klein changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ygalklein at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91006
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91083
Bug ID: 91083
Summary: inconsistent -Wsign-compare warnings
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90899
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Thu Jul 4 09:03:40 2019
New Revision: 273073
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273073&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r272992
2019-07-04 Martin Liska
Backport from mainli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90892
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Thu Jul 4 09:03:56 2019
New Revision: 273074
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273074&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r272993
2019-07-04 Martin Liska
Backport from mainli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90892
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88233
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Currently full lower_subreg runs only after the first splitter pass.
This is much too late to be effective for this testcase. Running it
before combine (I put it immediately after loop2) works, for all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91084
Bug ID: 91084
Summary: download_prerequisites fails on OpenBSD
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90899
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Thu Jul 4 09:24:32 2019
New Revision: 273075
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273075&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r272992
2019-07-04 Martin Liska
Backport from mainli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90899
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
Bug ID: 91085
Summary: fixincludes breaks
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assignee: una
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90756
--- Comment #14 from Mike Hommey ---
If I apply the patch on 6.4, I'm getting a different ICE:
internal compiler error: in emit_block_move_hints, at expr.c:1099
[task 2019-07-04T09:48:09.107Z] 09:48:09 INFO - static void
exec_ops(const Op*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91073
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91074
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90756
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
6.x isn't supported, you are on your own.
That said, possible related changes that I remember include e.g. PR90139 and
PR78643.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91084
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host||openbsd
--- Comment #1 from Richard Bie
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91084
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I already suggested that on the cfarm list. Thomas, it would be helpful if you
could try that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91078
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Thu Jul 4 11:38:28 2019
New Revision: 273077
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273077&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix loading of lto_section on strict alignment targets (PR lto/91078).
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91078
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91050
--- Comment #8 from Alan Modra ---
Created attachment 46555
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46555&action=edit
assembler command line fixes
I'll happily handle the assembler command line problems. Here's a lightly
tested pat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91050
--- Comment #9 from Alan Modra ---
Created attachment 46556
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46556&action=edit
more assembler command line fixes
Another one for targets that default to altivec.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89330
--- Comment #11 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #10)
> Created attachment 46544 [details]
> WIP patch
>
> I have written another patch that removes the edges from the vector at
> the time speculation is resolved rat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
--- Comment #32 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2019-07-03 9:08 p.m., elowe at elowe dot com wrote:
> This macro only seems to control whether you use ltoffx or ltoff.
>
> I can confirm I am using bash, and #define HAVE_AS_LTOFFX_LDXMOV_RE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91077
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The failure of the test in comment 4 is a different issue, likely
caused/exposed by revision r269962.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90756
--- Comment #16 from Mike Hommey ---
Similar ICE with 7.3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 90911, which changed state.
Bug 90911 Summary: [10 Regression] 456.hmmer regression with r272239
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90911
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90911
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90911
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jul 4 13:55:15 2019
New Revision: 273082
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273082&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-07-04 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/90911
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91062
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jul 4 13:56:12 2019
New Revision: 273083
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273083&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-07-04 Richard Biener
PR ipa/91062
* tree-pass.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91062
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91086
Bug ID: 91086
Summary: std namespace symbols can get their visibility
degraded
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91030
--- Comment #29 from David Edelsohn ---
> For formatted files, chose the value that the user supplied
> via an environment variable. If the user supplied nothing, then
>
> - query the recommended block size via calling fstat and evaluating
> s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90883
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #14 from Wi
On Thu, Jul 04, 2019 at 02:44:05PM +0800, Jim Wilson wrote:
>On 7/3/19 8:02 PM, Tara Hamilton wrote:
>>I’ve just been looking at your website and I came across this webpage:
>>...
>>
>>Unfortunately, when I click the link ‘...’ it redirects me to a payday
>>loan site.
Every time these links show u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91030
--- Comment #30 from Thomas Koenig ---
> Why are you opposed to the larger 65536 or 131072 as a default?
Please look at Jerry's numbers from comment #24.
They show a severe regression (for his system) for blocksizes > 32768.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91030
--- Comment #31 from David Edelsohn ---
What is the PAGESIZE on the Ryzen system? On the POWER systems, the PAGESIZE
is 64K. Maybe the optimal buffer size (write size) allows the filesystem to
perform double-buffering at the PAGESIZE.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91050
--- Comment #10 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #8)
> Created attachment 46555 [details]
> assembler command line fixes
>
> I'll happily handle the assembler command line problems. Here's a lightly
> tested patch.
T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91030
--- Comment #32 from David Edelsohn ---
If the performance measured by Jerry is hitting limits of the 4 x 32KiB L1
D-Cache of the Ryzen 2500U, then the system has bigger problems than FORTRAN
I/O buffer size.
What is the target audience / market
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91030
--- Comment #33 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Well, I am not opposed to it. What we do not want is to pessimize older smaller
machines where it does matter a lot. However if Thomas strategy above is
adjusted from 32768 to 65536 then out of the box it wi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78884
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78884
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
We should accept it, but of course it is completely fine to force not to
vectorize it (i.e. force safelen(1)), there is no hope that we'd actually
vectorize it at least in the not too distant future.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91027
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka ---
Hi,
the reason is that type "struct C264" has DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME (TYPE_NAME
(type))
set to
which makes LTO to consider this type to be C++ type conforming ODR
rule.
I am not really fluent with d. Does d ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91086
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91027
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
Hi,
this patch triggers another confusion in ipa-devirt.
It tries to build type inheritnace graph but since D frotnend produces
only functions with DECL_VIRTUAL but no BINFOs and other things it
segfaults event
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91050
--- Comment #11 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Such a rewrite function would be great I think. I don't want the -mdejagnu-cpu
thing to need any deeper code changes, but this attacks the one problem the
simple -mcpu override did not: specs.
(I cann
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91050
--- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Ah, common/config/aarch64/aarch64-common.c .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91084
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig ---
~/trunk $ svn diff contrib/
Index: contrib/download_prerequisites
===
--- contrib/download_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91084
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig ---
~/trunk $ svn diff contrib/
Index: contrib/download_prerequisites
===
--- contrib/download_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91084
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This is not a BSD problem, it's just a case of writing a portable shell script.
This should work:
--- a/contrib/download_prerequisites
+++ b/contrib/download_prerequisites
@@ -241,9 +241,15 @@ unset ar
f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91084
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Or without the overlong line:
--- a/contrib/download_prerequisites
+++ b/contrib/download_prerequisites
@@ -241,9 +241,15 @@ unset ar
for ar in $(echo_archives)
do
package="${ar%.tar*}"
+decompr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91084
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Or you could always just download the packages and untar them by hand. The
script isn't mandatory, it's just a convenience.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78884
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91087
Bug ID: 91087
Summary: g++.dg/gcov/pr16855.C fails everywhere on Darwin.
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
On 04.07.2019 12:21, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91084
>
> Richard Biener changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
>Host|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91087
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ABI
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91087
--- Comment #1 from Iain Sandoe ---
sorry about the typos.
a) I meant to say that priorities would work in the case of single TU or LTO,
because that does the same thing.
b) the SysV spec says:
"Termination functions specified by users via the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
--- Comment #33 from EML ---
Could the problem be with "AS"?
Maybe that assembler is technically ok, but AS is generating bad machine code?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
--- Comment #34 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2019-07-04 4:43 p.m., elowe at elowe dot com wrote:
> Could the problem be with "AS"?
>
> Maybe that assembler is technically ok, but AS is generating bad machine code?
That's easy to check.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91030
--- Comment #34 from Thomas Koenig ---
There is another point to consider.
I suppose not very many people use big-endian data formats
these days. Little-endian dominates these days, and people
who require that conversion on a regular basis (why
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78884
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jul 4 21:41:49 2019
New Revision: 273096
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273096&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/78884
* gimplify.c (struct gimplify_omp_ctx)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91030
--- Comment #35 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #34)
> There is another point to consider.
>
> I suppose not very many people use big-endian data formats
> these days. Little-endian dominates these days, and people
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90756
--- Comment #17 from Mike Hommey ---
(In reply to Mike Hommey from comment #16)
> Similar ICE with 7.3.
And 7.4 (and to be clear, this is similar ICE as comment 14)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78747
Jan Engelhardt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91086
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, I think G++ used to not to this, and it was changed to the current
behaviour to avoid such problems.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91086
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> Yes, I think G++ used to not to this, and it was changed to the current
> behaviour to avoid such problems.
Just to be clear, my "yes" was intended to mean I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
Jim Wilson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilson at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #35 f
On 7/4/19 11:08 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Jul 04, 2019 at 02:44:05PM +0800, Jim Wilson wrote:
On 7/3/19 8:02 PM, Tara Hamilton wrote:
Every time these links show up in an email message they get archived and
amplified for posterity. I wonder if that wasn't the actual intent of
the O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
--- Comment #36 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2019-07-03 6:06 p.m., elowe at elowe dot com wrote:
> The non-working .s file does this:
>
> .LC0:
> stringz "Hellos World"
>
>
>
> movl r36 = @gprel(.LC0)
> ;;
>
On 7/5/19 9:24 AM, Jim Wilson wrote:
On 7/4/19 11:08 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Jul 04, 2019 at 02:44:05PM +0800, Jim Wilson wrote:
Yes, I mentioned in another thread that this might be an SEO attempt,
and that the right solution is to report them as bad actors to the
search engines
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
--- Comment #37 from EML ---
I wonder if is this patch is related:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg02193.html
"Before the patch generated code uses .GOT entry:
addl r14 = @ltoffx(a#), r1
ld8.mov r14 = [r14], a#
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91088
Bug ID: 91088
Summary: IPA-cp cost evaluation is too conservative for "if
(f(param) cmp const_val)" condition
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89976
--- Comment #1 from Eric Gallager ---
could you be a bit more specific about which lines exactly you're expecting the
warnings to go on?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91089
Bug ID: 91089
Summary: IPA-cp does setup proper cost model for switch default
case in function versioning
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
--- Comment #38 from The Written Word
---
I rebuilt 8.3.0 with minimal patches and am seeing the same failure as before.
From /ia64-hp-hpux11.31/libstdc++-v3/config.log:
configure:7964: checking for ANSI C header files
configure:7984: /opt/build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
--- Comment #39 from The Written Word
---
(In reply to EML from comment #25)
> I have applied the patch and tried your other suggestions, still the stage1
> compiler has the same problems generating executables.
>
> In analyzing the intermediat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91090
Bug ID: 91090
Summary: A suspicious code in tree-ssa-dom.c
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91091
Bug ID: 91091
Summary: [missed optimization] Missing aliasing optimization
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91088
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
I am surprised we don't have a match.pd transformation for v * 2 < 6 with
undefined overflow. But that's only a side remark, not important for your
report.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10980
Alejandro Colomar changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||colomar.6.4.3 at gmail dot com
--- C
86 matches
Mail list logo
