https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67418
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70868
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-25
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56355
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2016-07-24 00:00:00 |2021-12-25
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70527
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66872
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2015-07-15 00:00:00 |2021-12-25
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55846
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2016-08-14 00:00:00 |2021-12-25
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63533
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56139
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |ipa
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77893
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103221
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103826
Bug ID: 103826
Summary: Bogus shift-negative-value warning in C++20 mode
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103826
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24928
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
With -fimplicit-constexpr, GCC do the optimization, maybe this will become part
of the C++ standard in the future
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36010
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is still true, you need still need -fno-tree-pre -fno-tree-loop-im to get
the loop to interchanged.
-O2 -fno-tree-pre -fno-tree-loop-im -floop-interchange works while just -O2
-floop-interchange does n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36011
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2008-12-28 06:32:01 |2021-12-25
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103826
--- Comment #2 from Jörn Heusipp ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Note I notice clang warns about:
> int main() {
> return (0x7000') << 4;
> }
It's valid, but clang complains here about shifting bits out of the range o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51982
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2012-01-24 00:00:00 |2021-12-25
Component|middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86693
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86131
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
The cost has been 2 since the day -mcpu=860 was added back in 1996 (r0-10828).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87355
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103827
Bug ID: 103827
Summary: function which takes an argument via (hidden)
reference should assume the argument does not escape
or is only read from
Product: gcc
Vers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87502
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #3)
> (In reply to M Welinder from comment #2)
> > The destruction still stinks: the full destructor is inlined instead of
> > the small-string-only version (i.e., a no-o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84411
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70723
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
With -std=c++17 (which is the default now), the code is optimized as expected.
With -std=c++14, the dynamic initializer comes into play; there are a few other
bugs dealing with that already too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98076
--- Comment #8 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Patch posted at https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-December/057219.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99191
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81986
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103785
--- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu ---
The v3 patch is posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-December/587364.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81986
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99191
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426
Bug 63426 depends on bug 99191, which changed state.
Bug 99191 Summary: sanitizer detects undefined behaviour in libgfortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99191
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103653
康桓瑋 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89543
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.0|---
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103728
--- Comment #3 from Iain Buclaw ---
(In reply to Pierrick Bouvier from comment #2)
> Problem with command line approach is that it implies to patch all our
> scripts, which is *really* boring. At this point, manually adding rt_options
> string i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103828
Bug ID: 103828
Summary: Type generated for CHARACTER(C_CHAR), VALUE arguments
is wrong
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103828
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89543
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
[apinski@xeond2 upstream-gcc-git]$ gdb --args ./gcc/objdir/stage1-gcc/cc1
/home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc-git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Wstringop-overread-6.c
(gdb) p debug_generic_expr(expr)
strlen ((con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31263
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-25
Severity|minor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89543
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> [apinski@xeond2 upstream-gcc-git]$ gdb --args ./gcc/objdir/stage1-gcc/cc1
> /home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc-git/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Wstringop-
> overread-6.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103828
--- Comment #1 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
The condition for being treated as a special CHARACTER case in gfc_sym_type()
is:
if (sym->ts.type == BT_CHARACTER
&& ((sym->attr.function && sym->attr.is_bind_c)
|| (sym->attr.r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89543
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103653
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
>But I think auto(x) should also be well-formed.
it is well formed as a declaration.
auto(x) = 1;
Unless something changed in that part of C++ standard too.
The following does work as expected too:
int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103829
Bug ID: 103829
Summary: [9/10/11/12 Regression] missing shrink wrapping for
simple/obvious code
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103829
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||9.1.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24169
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52572
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18940
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |NEW
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18940
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|53947 |26731
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55157
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2021-06-08 00:00:00 |2021-12-25
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69711
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103823
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Francois-Xavier Coudert from comment #3)
> Any reason not to move the test to the lto testsuite?
Most likely should have been when PR 47334 was filed but since the failure only
showed up on sol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103823
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 52057
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52057&action=edit
Patch to test
Can you try this patch?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47334
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can someone test the patch in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52057 ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52405
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||link-failure
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69394
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41526
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.f.starke at freenet dot
de
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83716
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82360
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uruwi at protonmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88527
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41565
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2017-08-07 00:00:00 |2021-12-25
--- Comment #16 from Andrew P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71867
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88599
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87653
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60944
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77511
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
I tried this under GCC 7.5.0 as provided by Ubuntu (targetting still linux) and
I don't get an ICE. That does not mean it was fixed, just I could not reproduce
it using that compiler version and targeting lin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77511
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 52058
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52058&action=edit
preprocessed source
This is the preprocessed source just in case the dropbox ever does not work any
more.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77511
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|1 |0
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63650
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68484
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||12.0, 7.1.0, 7.2.0, 8.1.0
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68484
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |target
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88918
Bug 88918 depends on bug 68484, which changed state.
Bug 68484 Summary: _mm_storel_epi64((__m128i *)x, m); does nothing if "x" is a
"volatile" ptr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68484
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68484
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> Fixed for GCC 7 by r7-5301 (aka PR 70118).
- *(long long *)__P = ((__v2di)__B)[0];
+ *(__m64_u *)__P = (__m64) ((__v2di)__B)[0];
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41137
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38654
Bug 38654 depends on bug 41137, which changed state.
Bug 41137 Summary: inefficient zeroing of an array
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41137
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41137
--- Comment #22 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note this is even at -O2 for GCC 10 and above.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93297
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97717
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97717
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |middle-end
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97717
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
fillLUTDIV is basically one big function (one BB) which does:
inp[...] = ...;
1019 times
fillLUTNEGEXP does the same thing 33659 times.
I assume these are generated functions. It might be better to have s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97717
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||54896
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54896
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note I think -O3 (and now -O2) is much worse recently due to vector SLP taking
a long time too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67665
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42599
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
We stopped ICEing in GCC 6 it seems but accept the code now.
84 matches
Mail list logo