https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91293
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91291
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91288
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91150
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jul 30 07:13:04 2019
New Revision: 273897
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273897&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/91150
* config/i386/i386-expand.c (expand_vec_pe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91287
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|wrong-code |missed-optimization
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91291
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Ah, we do not eliminate
# VUSE <.MEM_8>
reg.0_2 = reg;
because this is a hard-register load (we know reg.0_2 is constant 1). So
we end up making the constant 1 (value) available via the leader reg.0_2.
No
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91216
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jul 30 07:28:22 2019
New Revision: 273898
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273898&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/91216
* omp-low.c (global_nonaddressable_var
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91282
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jul 30 07:35:13 2019
New Revision: 273899
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273899&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/91282
* gcc.dg/type-convert-var.c: Add -fexc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91287
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Xiong Hu XS Luo from comment #1)
> Martin's commit 4ee64e30659a9125a47eeea882d8044e690ce334 will cause ICE.
>
> It's a REGRESSION not related to this current issue.
>
> ~/local/gcc_t/bin/gfortra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91150
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91282
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91216
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91297
Bug ID: 91297
Summary: ARM Cortex M0+ gets hard fault due to unexpected
pointer content
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91291
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jul 30 08:57:35 2019
New Revision: 273903
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273903&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-07-30 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/91291
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91287
--- Comment #4 from Xiong Hu XS Luo ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> (In reply to Xiong Hu XS Luo from comment #1)
> > Martin's commit 4ee64e30659a9125a47eeea882d8044e690ce334 will cause ICE.
> >
> > It's a REGRESSION not related
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91287
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019, luoxhu at cn dot ibm.com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91287
>
> --- Comment #4 from Xiong Hu XS Luo ---
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91298
Bug ID: 91298
Summary: Error: junk `(%rip)' after expression
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91297
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89330
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|marxin at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91297
Murat Ursavaş changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91201
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Untested patch to add the reduc_plus_scal_v{16,32,64}qi expanders.
Wonder if we don't need also reduc_plus_scal_v8qi expander for
TARGET_MMX_WITH_SSE.
--- gcc/config/i386/sse.md.jj 2019-07-28 17:29:41.4881
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91297
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WONTFIX |INVALID
--- Comment #3 from Richard E
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91201
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 46642
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46642&action=edit
gcc10-pr91201.patch
Full untested patch for the final reduction to scalar.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91292
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91292
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Oops, sorry, those mangled names are actually for this further reduced code:
template struct enable_if { };
template struct enable_if { using type = T; };
template
typename enable_if<(int)sizeof(T) >= -(1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91259
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Great, thanks both of you for confirming.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91270
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Tue Jul 30 11:00:35 2019
New Revision: 273906
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273906&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Mark 2nd argument of delete operator as needed (PR tree-optimization/91270
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91270
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91298
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91293
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91287
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Xiong Hu XS Luo from comment #4)
> /tmp/cctrpu2h.ltrans0.ltrans.o: In function `MAIN__':
> :(.text+0x114): undefined reference to `_gfortran_st_write'
> :(.text+0x12c): undefined reference to
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91293
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91257
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jul 30 12:13:01 2019
New Revision: 273907
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273907&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-07-30 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/91257
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91299
Bug ID: 91299
Summary: LTO inlines a weak definition in presence of a
non-weak definition from an ELF file
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91291
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91201
--- Comment #9 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> Untested patch to add the reduc_plus_scal_v{16,32,64}qi expanders.
> Wonder if we don't need also reduc_plus_scal_v8qi expander for
> TARGET_MMX_WITH_SSE.
I was ev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91258
--- Comment #8 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I printed lhs right at the start of that block and this is what I get:
unit-size
align:32 warn_if_not_align:0 symtab:0 alias-set 1 canonical-type
0x3fffb5c80738 precision:32 min
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91201
--- Comment #10 from Marc Glisse ---
For AVX512, I wonder if we could use vpsadbw to compute the sums for each
64-bit part, then vcompressb to collect them in the lower 64 bits, then vpsadbw
to conclude. Or whatever other faster variant (is Peter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91298
--- Comment #2 from claudio daffra ---
with -masm=intel, everything works without any other problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91201
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I'm not aware of vcompressb insn, only vcompressps and vcompresspd. Sure, one
could just emit whatever we emit for __builtin_shuffle with (__v64qi) { 0, 8,
16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 0, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91257
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Jul 30 14:16:24 2019
New Revision: 273909
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273909&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-07-30 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/91257
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91201
--- Comment #12 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
> I'm not aware of vcompressb insn, only vcompressps and vcompresspd.
Intel lists it under VBMI2, so icelake+.
> Sure,
> one could just emit whatever we emit for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91258
--- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor ---
Is this just before the warning is printed? (In my build the function is
called three times, each time with a slightly different tree node, but never
with an argument that sets is_char_store to true.)
>From
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91258
--- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor ---
The only interesting difference I see between your powerpc64-linux configure
options and mine is that yours has --with-cpu=power8 (it would be nice to add
it to test-summary). Let me try a build with that op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91298
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||assemble-failure
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91258
--- Comment #11 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The dump came from here:
/home/seurer/gcc/build/gcc-test2/gcc/testsuite/g++/../../lto1 -quiet -dumpdir
./ -dumpbase vla-1.exe.ltrans0 -mcpu=power8 -mcpu=power8 -auxbase-strip
/tmp/vla-1.exe.q5WG
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89330
--- Comment #21 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Tue Jul 30 14:52:29 2019
New Revision: 273910
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273910&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Use edge->indirect_unknown_callee in cgraph_edge::make_direct (PR ipa/893
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89330
--- Comment #22 from Martin Liška ---
Should be fixed now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91299
nsz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91299
--- Comment #2 from Peter Smith ---
Created attachment 46643
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46643&action=edit
All C reproducer without absolute symbols
Attaching a target independent C only reproducer for convenience.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91299
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Related to PR 91252.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91296
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91300
Bug ID: 91300
Summary: Wrong runtime error message with allocate and errmsg=
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91169
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86504
Joel Hutton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||joel.hutton at arm dot com
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91300
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91169
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou ---
Created attachment 46645
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46645&action=edit
Reduced testcase
To be compiled with -O for a 32-bit target.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91169
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ---
The compiler doesn't correct deal with index -1 in a CONSTRUCTOR after:
2019-07-12 Richard Biener
* fold-const.h (get_array_ctor_element_at_index): Adjust.
* fold-const.c (get_array_ctor_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91169
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ---
To be more precise, the compiler doesn't correctly deal with an array starting
at index -1 in a CONSTRUCTOR:
_4 = intarray.F[0]{lb: 4294967295 sz: 1};
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91258
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #12 from Martin Sebor --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91301
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91301
Bug ID: 91301
Summary: ICE in omp_add_variable on random access iterator
distribute parallel for private (iterator)
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91258
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91258
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #14
ree-ssa-sccvn.c
GNU C++14 (GCC) version 10.0.0 20190730 (experimental) [trunk revision 273908]
(
hppa-linux-gnu)
compiled by GNU C version 8.3.0, GMP version 6.1.2, MPFR version 4.0.2,
MPC version 1.1.0, isl version isl-0.18-GMP
GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=100 --param ggc-min-heapsize
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91258
--- Comment #15 from Martin Sebor ---
The warning only sees the four byte write at the end:
MEM[(int *)&D.3146 + 4B] = 24; <<< write past the end
I will disable it but my main concern was with the char array: is it valid to
transform a 1-el
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91302
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab ---
Fixed by r273910.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91302
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90786
--- Comment #11 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Jul 30 19:11:03 2019
New Revision: 273913
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273913&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-07-29 Thomas Koenig
Paul Thomas
Backport from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #34 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Jul 30 19:11:03 2019
New Revision: 273913
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273913&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-07-29 Thomas Koenig
Paul Thomas
Backport from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91258
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #15)
> The warning only sees the four byte write at the end:
>
> MEM[(int *)&D.3146 + 4B] = 24; <<< write past the end
That stmt has all the info that it is a sto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91296
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Tue Jul 30 20:02:27 2019
New Revision: 273914
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273914&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-07-30 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/91296
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91258
--- Comment #17 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Tue Jul 30 20:42:36 2019
New Revision: 273915
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273915&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR testsuite/91258 - g++.dg/ubsan/vla-1.C and gcc.dg/strlenopt-70.c fail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91258
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91296
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Tue Jul 30 21:38:48 2019
New Revision: 273916
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273916&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-07-30 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/91296
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91296
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: joel at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Building off the git master, powerpc gave this compile error:
(GCC) 10.0.0 20190730 (experimental)
I forgot to update yesterday and it was also broken with "(GCC) 10.0.0 201
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91304
Bug ID: 91304
Summary: maybe_unused attribute ignored on variable declared in
if declaration
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
{
~s() {}
~s() requires(std::is_same_v) = default;
};
static_assert(std::is_trivially_destructible_v>);
Outputs:
: In instantiation of 'struct s':
/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20190730/include/c++/10.0.0/type_traits:1410:12:
required from 'struct std::is_trivially_des
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67348
--- Comment #2 from David Stone ---
This started causing an ICE in 8.1. Prior versions accepted whichever candidate
was defined first as being the one true definition.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91287
--- Comment #7 from Xiong Hu XS Luo ---
Created attachment 46647
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46647&action=edit
fortran_lto_verbose log
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91287
--- Comment #8 from Xiong Hu XS Luo ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #6)
> (In reply to Xiong Hu XS Luo from comment #4)
>
> > /tmp/cctrpu2h.ltrans0.ltrans.o: In function `MAIN__':
> > :(.text+0x114): undefined reference to `_gfortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91303
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc-rtems5
Component|libgcc
84 matches
Mail list logo
