https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19249
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79393
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski ---
I Noticed both cwg1658 and cwg2336 were voted into dr state.
cwg1658:
[Moved to DR at the February, 2014 meeting.]
cwg2336:
[Accepted as a DR at the February, 2019 meeting.]
Should that mean both apply t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91418
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think there is a defect in this area of the standard and most likely resolved
by the P1787R6 paper.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91418
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
--- Comment #7 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91218
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
I see an ICE with -std=c++17 -fconcepts and -std=c++20 on the trunk but there
are errors before the ICE. I don't know if this because concepts has changed
since 2019 or not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70163
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95977
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96510
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.3
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103603
--- Comment #6 from Kito Cheng ---
Reported testcase is OK and I test that patch on riscv64-elf and riscv64-linux
with full gcc testsuite run, both are no regression.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48920
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
--- Comment #5 from Andr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55809
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
MSVC gives:
(3): error C2995: 'void f(void)': function template has already been
defined
(2): note: see declaration of 'f'
(2): error C3861: 'f': identifier not found
ICC gives:
(11): error: more than one i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103606
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE |[9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103607
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103609
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103615
Bug ID: 103615
Summary: [8/9 Regression] wrong code with "-O3" or "-O1
-ftree-vectorize" on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103615
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103615
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Keywords|needs-bisection
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98782
--- Comment #16 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #15)
> > From that point of view, it doesn't look like the memory and register
> > costs of R are too wrong here. The things being costed are the sto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48920
--- Comment #6 from Johannes Schaub ---
Well then you can replace the class with a nameepace, I think, to remove the
class-scope complication. I think GCC would still incorrectly apply typename
lookup.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103616
Bug ID: 103616
Summary: [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE on ceph with systemtap
macro since r8-5608
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103616
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.5
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103617
Bug ID: 103617
Summary: Debugging gcc: can't use 'pp' command for irange
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103096
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> > Maybe the compiler could notice that there is only one qHash function
> > template, and so realize that the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103618
Bug ID: 103618
Summary: constexpr std::reverse produces strict-overflow
warning
Product: gcc
Version: og11 (devel/omp/gcc-11)
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103619
Bug ID: 103619
Summary: armeb ICE since r12-5833
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103619
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103620
Bug ID: 103620
Summary: 'internal compiler error: in tsubst_copy_and_build, at
cp/pt.c:20479' when calling concept
Product: gcc
Version: og11 (devel/omp/gcc-11)
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63763
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90341
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79241
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2017-01-26 00:00:00 |2021-12-08
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86588
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70420
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103425
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101995
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99399
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Keywords|needs-bisection
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99186
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97984
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #51941|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103620
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||asutton at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92120
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Chung-Lin Tang :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0ab29cf0bb68960c1f87405f14b4fb2109254e2f
commit r12-5835-g0ab29cf0bb68960c1f87405f14b4fb2109254e2f
Author: Chung-Lin Tang
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97819
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98782
--- Comment #17 from Tamar Christina ---
> On “CALL_FREQ grows much quicker than BB_FREQ”: for r104, the
> ALLOCNO_FREQ ought in principle to be fixed for a given loop iteration
> count. It shouldn't grow or shrink based on the value of SPILLED.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97279
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96490
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103619
--- Comment #1 from Hafiz Abid qadeer ---
I guess it is caused by the order of register from arm_dwarf_register_span
being different in case of big endian. I will work on a fix once I can
reproduce it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
--- Comment #12 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #10)
> Sure.
Please find attached the complete patch that enables HF vector modes in Comment
#11. The patch survives bootstrap and regression test and works OK for the
f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95657
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92481
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91907
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103617
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Macleod ---
Created attachment 51949
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51949&action=edit
possible fix
I'm not familiar with enabling the debug routines (perhaps that sad), but does
this patch fix yo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91609
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98782
--- Comment #18 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #17)
> > On “CALL_FREQ grows much quicker than BB_FREQ”: for r104, the
> > ALLOCNO_FREQ ought in principle to be fixed for a given loop iteration
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
--- Comment #13 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #12)
> Hongtao, can you please review the patch and perhaps test it a bit more?
This part is missing from ix86_expand_vector_set_var:
--cut here
@@ -15912,7 +15921,8 @@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103571
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #51948|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90341
--- Comment #6 from Kyle De'Vir ---
I haven't been able to reproduce this for a long time now.
Would new pre-processed files be of any worth?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90341
--- Comment #7 from Kyle De'Vir ---
I haven't been able to reproduce this for a long time now.
Would new pre-processed files be of any worth?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99186
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99399
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99399
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99186
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|diagnostic |
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99186
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And it doesn't matter whether enums are used:
template
struct tuple_impl : tuple_impl
{ };
template
struct tuple_impl
{ };
template
struct tuple : tuple_impl<0, T, U>
{ };
template
void
get(const tuple_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91609
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82613
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jobstz at posteo dot de
--- Comment #5 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95657
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91907
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 91907, which changed state.
Bug 91907 Summary: ['17] Constexpr of member function pointer as template
parameter results in inconsistent diagnostics
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91907
What|R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101603
Bug 101603 depends on bug 91907, which changed state.
Bug 91907 Summary: ['17] Constexpr of member function pointer as template
parameter results in inconsistent diagnostics
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91907
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96490
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96490
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97279
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48920
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100385
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99612
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92012
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91247
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103618
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91075
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91008
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Keywo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90782
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90347
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90107
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89687
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86970
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86473
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85589
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolut
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85576
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85415
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolut
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85576
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Are you sure? That was an i386 backend change...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85576
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> Fixed with r11-3882-g06bec55e80d98419.
Huh? This does not make sense.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86473
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84858
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84984
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84653
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91075
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48649
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48649
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103302
--- Comment #11 from Jim Wilson ---
FYI I have a patch to re-add the movti pattern to riscv.md which should also
fix this and another bug. Kito removed the pattern in 2016 and I was hoping to
get an answer from him about why he removed it. The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58379
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103585
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 51952
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51952&action=edit
Patch to teach modref about global memory
This patch extends modref so we eliminate the dead part of array descr
1 - 100 of 213 matches
Mail list logo