https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93312
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93318
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93322
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91753
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93327
Bug ID: 93327
Summary: Performance degradation of povray benchmark from gcc
8.3.1 to gcc 9.2.1
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93313
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93094
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Guenther :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9c4f0d311810eba3f4faab1295c47eb57e695fcc
commit r10-6083-g9c4f0d311810eba3f4faab1295c47eb57e695fcc
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93094
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93301
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020, ch3root at openwall dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93301
>
> --- Comment #2 from Alexander Cherepanov ---
> The problem is much more serious.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93263
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93159
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
SO, at which exact stage it is, can you attach preprocessed source + gcc
options if it is reproduceable with that?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93199
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
Summary|[8/9/10 Regress
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93263
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92763
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
So we're inlining A::omp declare reduction y~i(A::T&)operator()
(const struct ._anon_1 * const __closure) which has no abstract origin.
For the -fno-var-tracking-assignments case we are pruning the earl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93221
--- Comment #5 from Joel Hutton ---
There's some problem with inserting an OI before an OI, which requires an OI
before it etc.
18: r98:OI=r99:OI
REG_DEAD r97:V4SI
Inserting insn reload before:
19: r99:OI=r97:V4SI#0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93263
--- Comment #15 from Christophe Lyon ---
> Seen on arm too, both master and gcc-9
And aarch64 too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93297
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to fdlbxtqi from comment #3)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> > Thanks for the report. Can you please send us the command line used for the
> > compilation? Ideally output of -v option.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93326
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93199
--- Comment #25 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:92ce93c743b3c81f6911bc3d06056099369e9191
commit r10-6084-g92ce93c743b3c81f6911bc3d06056099369e9191
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92536
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paolo Carlini :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0757f0bbf3edf43a27ec3f7d2c33ab56f26eb15a
commit r10-6085-g0757f0bbf3edf43a27ec3f7d2c33ab56f26eb15a
Author: Paolo Carlini
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92763
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92955
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|WA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92536
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93314
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93328
Bug ID: 93328
Summary: missed optimization opportunity in deserialization
code
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92955
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
An even simpler test case. Changing the index in g() to unsigned avoids the
warning.
$ cat pr92955.c && gcc -O3 -S -Wall pr92955.c
typedef struct S { unsigned char n, a[4]; } S;
void f (S *s, const unsigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92816
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #2)
> It does not reproduce for me on bdver1 and also it does not seem to
> reproduce at skylake (with generic tuning)
> https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93329
Bug ID: 93329
Summary: ICE in omp_code_to_statement, at fortran/openmp.c:5902
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openacc, openmp
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93328
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93330
Bug ID: 93330
Summary: CHARACTER: Wrong kind=4 resolution + missing
string-length mismatch actual/dummy diagnostic
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93327
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92763
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
Summary|[8/9/10 Regress
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92763
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Guenther :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:991b91497fd50f6e70e5f2c0cfa96e1b74157bdc
commit r10-6087-g991b91497fd50f6e70e5f2c0cfa96e1b74157bdc
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93246
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Richard Guenther
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:20e9d78543493f2f6aeef19af4cea54696247fc8
commit r9-8147-g20e9d78543493f2f6aeef19af4cea54696247fc8
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93221
--- Comment #6 from Joel Hutton ---
The regression seems to be introduced by this commit:
commit 11b8091fb33c894cea20702d3e85389723987910
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date: Wed Dec 18 23:03:23 2019 +
* ira.c (ira): Use simple LRA algorithm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93279
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93319
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1a2b60b581c373e4ebcee9ee37c0ab2866f98950
commit r10-6090-g1a2b60b581c373e4ebcee9ee37c0ab2866f98950
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Mon Jan 20 05:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93329
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93322
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92372
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93316
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93317
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93315
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93309
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93305
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93263
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e82ba180d6641a1e2bad1ac327234fc1cda658ef
commit r10-6091-ge82ba180d6641a1e2bad1ac327234fc1cda658ef
Author: Mark Eggleston
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93304
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93301
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93293
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93296
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93159
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93263
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:42066149461d7e6951d61c341954b0ed77c08d34
commit r9-8148-g42066149461d7e6951d61c341954b0ed77c08d34
Author: Mark Eggleston
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92836
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64271
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93276
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93288
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93263
markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80005
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ad1a3914ae8d67c94b0d2428e3f9672e7db491a1
commit r10-6092-gad1a3914ae8d67c94b0d2428e3f9672e7db491a1
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93275
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93261
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80005
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93259
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93194
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a5d8a40617df40680cf7de6109925e4f1f1b9ae2
commit r10-6093-ga5d8a40617df40680cf7de6109925e4f1f1b9ae2
Author: Fangrui Song
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93256
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93275
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Reduced test-case:
$ cat pr93275.ii
template struct A { static constexpr int value = __v; };
template struct B;
template struct B { typedef _Tp type; };
template
using enable_if_t = typename B<_Cond, _Tp>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93251
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93224
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93160
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92829
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:414231ba78973dfcb11648a0a5287b989e0148bb
commit r10-6094-g414231ba78973dfcb11648a0a5287b989e0148bb
Author: Martin Sebor
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93172
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93073
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93073
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93331
Bug ID: 93331
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in build2, at tree.c:4792
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91753
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> If we had a way to generate XImode directly from 4 V16QI, and only generate
> one move statement, then the register allocator would act better.
That or split the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93242
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:45d06a4045bebc3dbaaf0b1c676f4e22b7c6aca1
commit r10-6095-g45d06a4045bebc3dbaaf0b1c676f4e22b7c6aca1
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93172
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
This isn't a regression, so I don't think we can handle it for GCC 10.
Anyway, with the simpler ~k instead of _knot_mask16(k) we don't optimize that
in combine either:
(set (reg:V16SF 88)
(vec_merge:V16S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93242
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93332
Bug ID: 93332
Summary: target-dependent inaccurate range info for some
expressions
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
Mail Quota: (99% Full)
The size limit of 4096 MB for mailbox gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
has been exceeded. Incoming mail is currently being rejected. To upgrade for
more Megabytes [MB].
Upgrade Email Quota
Note: This upgrade is required immediately after receiving this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92829
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93172
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Why should it be limited that way? simplify_rtx does not / should not care
about peculiarities of a certain architecture or microarchitecture.
A transform like this would be a good idea I think, and wo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93275
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92536
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Thanks. Like PR 92542, this one was also fixed by r278786 aka g:1a291106384cabc
refix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-20200120111030-92ce93c743b-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-riscv64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 10.0.1 20200120 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80028
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92721
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92721
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-unknown-linux
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92721
--- Comment #4 from Arseny Solokha ---
And also on Compiler Explorer[1], which means it's not (solely) my
misconfiguration.
[1] https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/A8b--q
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93334
Bug ID: 93334
Summary: -O3 generates useless code checking for overlapping
memset ?
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92721
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor
extra-aarch64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 10.0.1 20200120 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93336
Bug ID: 93336
Summary: BIND(C) and CHARACTER arguments
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic, wrong-code
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92906
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92906
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Yet another possibility is to create these in libsupc++ in assembly, but
> that would need to be macroized.
I was assuming we'd do that. It would be ugly, but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93309
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
--- Comment #1 from Tobias
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92906
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The safer variant:
--- gcc/cp/cp-tree.h.jj 2020-01-20 10:04:52.335091019 +0100
+++ gcc/cp/cp-tree.h2020-01-20 17:09:15.350260384 +0100
@@ -206,6 +206,10 @@ enum cp_tree_index
CPTI_SOURCE_LOCATION_IM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92906
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> > Yet another possibility is to create these in libsupc++ in assembly, but
> > that would need to be macroized.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92071
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou ---
> The ICE started with r10-2840-g70cdb21e579191fe9f0f1d45e328908e59c0179e
> but we generated silently wrong-code before that, I believe since
> r7-5812-ga271e415611a80f1e86e625fd61360e193d04474
> ldr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92071
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81886
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus ---
Related: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2020-01/msg01183.html (full thread)
Namely, AMD GCN has different ISA – and depending which are available in the
binary, the hardware could be chosen; having the w
1 - 100 of 140 matches
Mail list logo
