https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109885
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |tree-optimization
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113862
Bug ID: 113862
Summary: error: "others" choice not allowed here
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110754
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:39920447f876128ff7942a9cd931021800865894
commit r14-8910-g39920447f876128ff7942a9cd931021800865894
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113724
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus ---
Created attachment 57377
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57377&action=edit
Fixes the ICE – might paper over a real issue; doesn't fix the run-time issue →
TODO + 'data'-issue in PR comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113863
Bug ID: 113863
Summary: [14 Regression] ICE verify_ssa failed with -O3
-msse4.1 since r14-8768
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107126
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cff174fabd6c980c09aee95db1d9d5c22421761f
commit r14-8915-gcff174fabd6c980c09aee95db1d9d5c22421761f
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97202
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cff174fabd6c980c09aee95db1d9d5c22421761f
commit r14-8915-gcff174fabd6c980c09aee95db1d9d5c22421761f
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113455
--- Comment #7 from newbie-02 ---
> (and GCC doesn't implement the FENV_DEC_ROUND pragma to set a constant
> rounding mode in a particular scope)
here we are leaving my level of knowledge about internals.
Let me formulate from a user / p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97202
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107126
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113855
--- Comment #4 from Iain Sandoe ---
Created attachment 57378
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57378&action=edit
patch under test
This implements the common case for an i386 trampoline (and, in this respect,
matches the expec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113855
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Comment on attachment 57378
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57378
patch under test
s/jumpl/jmpl/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113854
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Anybody who promised concepts will always result in better errors was lying or
misinformed. They have the potential to help, but it takes real effort to make
it happen.
ranges::find_if is constrained to r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113854
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And those are not library internals, they're the public concepts defined in the
standard. You can look them up to see what they mean, but the problem boils
down to what's shown at the end: your predicate c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113854
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
*unintended symptom deep inside a template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113679
--- Comment #13 from Дилян Палаузов ---
For clang being buggy from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113679#c11 I filled
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/81358 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113845
--- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #5)
> I'm wondering if we need to worry about other actual
> arguments. I note
>
> subroutine test_adjustl(x)
> character(*) :: x(100)
>x = adjustl(x)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113734
--- Comment #12 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 57379
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57379&action=edit
test.c
Here's an initial stab at a standalone testcase. I'm going to try reduce it
now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113853
Arthur O'Dwyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arthur.j.odwyer at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112861
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14 regression] Most gdc|Most gdc tests FAIL on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112862
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14 regression] gfortran.dg |gfortran.dg coarray tests
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112863
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14 regression] Many|Many obj-c++ tests FAIL on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112864
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14 regression] Many|Many libphobos tests FAIL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113789
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek ---
The ICE was fixed by r14-8903-g3a3e0f1b46a3ad. But I'm not done here yet.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110651
--- Comment #5 from Iain Sandoe ---
AFAICT, this was fixed on trunk by r14-6721-gd31c54c7da7661 (which seems to
have a reference to the PR so not sure why it did not show up here).
I think we need this on any open branch which we want to work w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112436
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113792
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107700
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107700
--- Comment #2 from John David Anglin ---
Regarding const-issue1440.rs and issue-1432.rs, here are the errors
on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11:
FAIL: rust/compile/const-issue1440.rs (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/gcc/tests
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113847
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113472
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113473
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113864
Bug ID: 113864
Summary: FAIL: rust/debug/chartype.rs scan-assembler 0x10[
\t][^\n\r]* DW_AT_encoding
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113865
Bug ID: 113865
Summary: FAIL: rust/execute/torture/issue-2187.rs -O0 output
pattern test
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113846
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
>From the same flang test suite, the following files seem to crash in the
same routine:
./Lower/HLFIR/structure-constructor.f90
./Lower/HLFIR/convert-mbox-to-value.f90
./Lower/polymorphic-temp.f90
./Lower
gth.f90
from the flang testsuite at
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/tree/main/flang/test
when compiled by recent gfortran, does this:
est $ ~/gcc/results.20240210.asan.ubsan/bin/gfortran -c -w
./Lower/HLFIR/bindc-assumed-length.f90
./Lower/HLFIR/bindc-assumed-length.f90:39:29:
39 |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113866
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-02-10
Ever confirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113867
Bug ID: 113867
Summary: [14 Regression][OpenMP] Wrong code with mapping
pointers in structs
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openmp, wr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113867
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
Created attachment 57382
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57382&action=edit
Fortran testcase, kind of, as pointer + pointee mapping cannot be split
(working)
For completeness, a Fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113724
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus ---
The runtime issue is now PR113867.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111342
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105980
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113868
Bug ID: 113868
Summary: error: expression function must be enclosed in
parentheses.
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113863
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113863
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113869
Bug ID: 113869
Summary: V4HF->V4SF pattern seems to be missing
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113870
Bug ID: 113870
Summary: Add V2HF support
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113870
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||113869
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinsk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113871
Bug ID: 113871
Summary: psrlq is not used for PERM
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
Priority:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113871
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/llvm/llv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113872
Bug ID: 113872
Summary: PERM<{0},a,{3,4,5,6}> is not producing SHL (for
little-endian) and USHR for big-endian
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
K
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113871
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note `PERM<{0},a,{1,2,3,4}>` should be handled too, that means defining
`vec_shl_` patterns too.
52 matches
Mail list logo