https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97962
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80780
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The values of __builtin_LINE and __builtin_FUNCTION do the right thing for
NSDMIs, but I don't know what they do to make that work.
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> If there is a user define
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84655
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97966
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-11-30
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97966
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Reduced (but invalid?):
// PR c++/97966
template
struct S {
__attribute__((used)) S() noexcept(noexcept(this->foo()));
void foo();
};
void
g ()
{
S<1> s;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98071
Bug ID: 98071
Summary: no_unique_address and reusing tail padding
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97993
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80780
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 49654
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49654&action=edit
gcc11-pr80780.patch
Full untested patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98071
--- Comment #1 from Barry Revzin ---
On further discussion, since the ABI disallows reusing the tail padding of
PODs, sizeof(B) cannot be 8. This is more likely a clang bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98034
Thomas Rodgers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97993
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97187
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86769
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98041
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Ian Lance Taylor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:eafb46ce90c23efd22c61d941face060bb9f11f3
commit r11-5591-geafb46ce90c23efd22c61d941face060bb9f11f3
Author: Ian Lance Taylor
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98041
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka ---
> I'm not sure I understand correctly what you mean by "avoiding the attribute
> for VLA types would likely also be good (are those handled in any reasonable
> way?)" As I explain in the thread at the link ab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97090
--- Comment #9 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I saw
FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/malloc-vs-local-1b.c (test for bogus messages, line 170)
on a make check for 66dde7bc64b75d4a338266333c9c490b12d49825, r11-5583 just
moments ago on a powerpc64 BE box
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98023
--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The patch in comment#1 does not work for me on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
In decl.c:
6242cleanup:
6243 if (saved_kind_expr)
6244gfc_free_expr (saved_kind_expr);
6245 if (type_para
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96983
--- Comment #29 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Still showing up on powerpc64.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98055
--- Comment #5 from Paul Smith ---
IMO that response is missing the point. This bug should be reopened and
resolved by removing this attribute from the __builtin_alloca function in GCC.
That's all that's needed: there's no need for more complex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98003
--- Comment #1 from John David Anglin ---
spawn /test/gnu/gcc/objdir/./gcc/xg++ -shared-libgcc
-B/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/./gc
c -nostdinc++ -L/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/src
-L/tes
t/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98003
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-11-30
Assignee|unassign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98070
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92729
--- Comment #27 from abebeos at lazaridis dot com ---
The "contrib/compare_tests" created a wrong delta.
"contrib/dg-cmp-results.sh seems to produce a more concise delta, and it shows
that...
==> ...we are down to essentially 6 issues:
PASS->FA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #16 from Martin Sebor ---
The ICE in pr97133 mentions BIND_EXPR. It's still there, even after unsharing:
$ gcc -O2 -S -flto -shared -fPIC /src/gcc/master/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr88701.c
during IPA pass: modref
/src/gcc/master/gcc/tes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98066
--- Comment #8 from luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Thanks for the quick fix!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98072
Bug ID: 98072
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in cp_parser_omp_var_list_no_open,
at cp/parser.c:34843
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98073
Bug ID: 98073
Summary: error: in can_merge_p, at analyzer/region-model.cc
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97975
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97975
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97417
--- Comment #46 from Levy ---
Looking at gcc/passed.def and gcc/config/riscv-passes.def:
pass_shorten_memrefs is inserted after NEXT_PASS (pass_rtl_store_motion);
NEXT_PASS (pass_rtl_store_motion);
(pass_shorten_memrefs)
NEXT_PASS (pass_cse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98074
Bug ID: 98074
Summary: [9/10 Regression] C Wrong code at O2~Os
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-opt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98075
Bug ID: 98075
Summary: [10/11 Regression] ICE: verify_cgraph_node failed
(error: malloc attribute should be used for a function
that returns a pointer)
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96177
--- Comment #1 from Arseny Solokha ---
I cannot reproduce it anymore w/ gcc-11.0.0-alpha20201129 snapshot
(g:bb67ad5cff58a707aaae645d4f45a913d8511c86).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97575
--- Comment #3 from Arseny Solokha ---
I cannot reproduce it anymore w/ gcc-11.0.0-alpha20201129 snapshot
(g:bb67ad5cff58a707aaae645d4f45a913d8511c86).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94932
--- Comment #3 from Arseny Solokha ---
I cannot reproduce it anymore w/ gcc-11.0.0-alpha20201129 snapshot
(g:bb67ad5cff58a707aaae645d4f45a913d8511c86). gcc 10 and 11 now accept this
code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98076
Bug ID: 98076
Summary: Increase speed of integer I/O
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libfortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98076
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |11.0
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98077
Bug ID: 98077
Summary: C++ 17: Using alias template bug in gcc
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #17 from Richard Biener ---
Well - you're the first to add nontrivial (non-constant) trees to attributes.
In GIMPLE all effects are supposed to be reflected in the IL and thus things
like
variable TYPE_SIZE or TYPE_MIN/MAX_VALUE are
101 - 140 of 140 matches
Mail list logo
